alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EAVS Jurisdictions: 2022 EAVS Data Brief: Colorado 64 

 Voter Registration 

Active Reg. Voters as of Nov. 8, 20221 

3,839,814 

Reg. Forms Received2* 

3,042,434 

Total Confirmation Notices Sent3* 

651,897 

Voters Removed from Reg. Rolls4* 

394,628 

Source of Registration Applications5 



Motor Vehicle Dept. 71.4% 

Online 15.4% 

Mail, Email, Fax 8.2% 

Other 3.8% 

In Person 1.3% 

Voting and Turnout 

Voters Participating By Mode6 

Election Technology 

Percentage of Jurisdictions Using...10 

7 Turnout 

59.0% 

In-Person 

Election Day

93,149 

3.7% 

In-Person

Early 

27,022 

1.1% 

Mail 

2,406,246 

94.7% 

Other 

13,480 

0.5% 

Total Voting Locations8: 370 

Total Poll Workers9: 5,367 

100.0% 

Ballot 

Marking 

Devices 

100.0% 

Electronic

Poll 

Books 

98.4% 

Scanners 

1.6% 

Hand 

Counting 

0.0% 

DREs w/o 

VVPAT 

0.0% 

DREs with 

VVPAT 

 Mail Ballots 

• 3,890,522 mail ballots transmitted11 

• 62.5% of transmitted mail ballots returned by voters12 

• 99.0% of returned mail ballots counted13 

• 1.0% of returned mail ballots rejected14 

• Conducted all-mail election statewide15 

• Allowed drop boxes16 

• Allowed ballot curing17 

 Election Audits18 

-- Access audit 

-- Ballot design audit 

-- Ballot reconciliation 

audit 

-- Compliance/ 

procedural audit 

-- Eligibility audit 

-- Legal audit 

✔ Logic and accuracy 

testing 

✔ Post-election 

tabulation audit 

-- Other 

Notes 

EAVS data and reports may be downloaded at www.eac.gov 

/research-and-data/datasets-codebooks-and-surveys. 

Responses of “Does not apply,” “Data not available,” and “Valid 

skip” are shown as zeroes or dashes. Percentages may not sum 

to 100% because of missing data or rounding. 

* Close of registration for 2020 

general election to close of 

registration for 2022 general 

election. 

1 A1b of EAVS. 

2 A3a of EAVS. 

3 A8a of EAVS. 

4 A9a of EAVS. 

5 Mail, Email, Fax is A4a/A3a. 

In Person is A4b/A3a. Online is 

A4c/A3a. Motor Vehicle Dept. is 

A4d/A3a. Other is the sum of 

A4e–A4l/A3a. May not sum to 

100% because of missing data. 

6 In-Person Election Day is F1b. 

Mail is F1d+F1g. In-Person Early 

is F1f. Other is F1c+F1e+F1h. 

7 F1a of EAVS divided by citizen 

voting age population (CVAP). 

8 D2a of EAVS. 

9 D7a of EAVS. 

10 F3a–f, F5a–F9a of EAVS; 

number of jurisdictions that 

responded “Yes” divided by

number of jurisdictions in 

state/territory. 

11 C1a of EAVS. 

12 C1b/C1a of EAVS. 

13 C8a/C1b of EAVS. 

14 C9a/C1b of EAVS. 

15 Q17 and Q17a of Policy 

Survey. 

16 Q19 of Policy Survey. 

17 Q20 of Policy Survey. 

18 Q36 of Policy Survey. See 

survey questionnaire for full 

definitions of each type of 

audit.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                           51552
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      175
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 51727
<PP&E>                                         1535260
<DEPRECIATION>                                  411053
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1203865
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           501286
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      567579
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1203865
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                109531
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 54949
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               32605
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  21977
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              21977
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     21977
<EPS-BASIC>                                       5.55
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     5.55


</TABLE>
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________ No. 96-50149 Summary Calendar

__________________ TYRONE FARRIS, Petitioner-Appellant,
versus STATE OF OKLAHOMA, Respondent-Appellee.

--------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. W-96-CV-37

---------------------- May 31, 1996 Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Tyrone Farris appeals a district court judgment dismissing his petition for a writ of habeas corpus construed as being pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 by the district court. He has filed a motion for a certificate of probable cause (CPC) pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 22(b).No. 96-50149 -2- Because Farris' petition does not contest the legality of his conviction or the validity of his initial sentence, his motion for a CPC to appeal the dismissal of his § 2241 petition is DENIED AS UNNECESSARY. Farris addresses the merits of his alleged constitutional claim arising out of his transfer, but he does not address the basis of the district court's dismissal for failure to exhaust state remedies. Failure to identify any error in the district court's analysis is the same as if the appellant had not appealed that judgment. Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner , 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). Accordingly, Farris' application for a certificate of probable cause is DENIED AS UNNECESSARY, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
# Variables

# Value Labels
ç 0 Sr 4 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION IX PRO 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 941 05-3901 

## OCT 062011 Mr. Rob Bamford, Chief Bureau ofAir Quality Planning Nevada Division ofEnvironmental Protection 901 South Stewart Street, Suite 4001 Carson City, Nevada 89701-5249 Dear 1mford: In response to yourrequest, dated August 19, 2011, the U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency, Region IX, (EPA) hereby grants to the Nevada Division ofEnvironmental Protection (NDEP) formal delegation ofthe following Code ofFederal Regulations, Title 40, Part 63 (40 CFR Part 63) National Emission Standards for Hazardous AirPollutants (NESHAP) recently promulgated in the Federal Register:

• The amendments to Subpart LLL as setforth in 75 FR 54970 (September 9, 2010) • The amendments to Subpart ZZZZ as set forth in 75 FR 51570 (August 20, 2010) and 76 FR 12863 (March 9, 2011) • Subpart DDDDD as set forth in 76 FR 15608 (March 21, 2011) • Subpart BBBBBB as set forth in 73 FR 1916 (January 10, 2008), and amendments through 76 FR4156 (January 24, 2011) • Subpart CCCCCC as set forth in 73 FR 1916 (January 10, 2008), and amendments through 76 FR4156 (January 24, 2011) • Subpart HHHHHH as set forth in 73 FR 1738 (January 9, 2008) • Subpart JJJJJJ as set forth in 76 FR 15554 (March 21, 2011) • Subpart VVVVVV as set forth in 76 FR 13514 (March 14, 2011) • Subpart WWWWWW as set forth in 73 FR 37728 (July 1, 2008) • Subpart XXXXXX as set forth in 73 FR42978 (July 23, 2008) • Subpart ZZZZZZ as set forth in 74 FR 30366 (June 25, 2009) • Subpart AAAAAAA as set forth in 74 FR 63236 (December2, 2009) • Subpart BBBBBBB as setforth in 74 FR 69194 (December 30, 2009) • Subpart CCCCCCC as set forth in 75 FR 10184 (March 5, 2010) • Subpart EEEEEEE as set forth in 76 FR 9450 (February 17, 2011) Regarding any other40 CFRPart 63 standardpreviously delegated to NDEP, this letteris also delegating any amendments made to those standards as ofJuly 1, 2010. In this letter, we are responding only to your request fordelegation of40 CFRPart 63 NESHAP. You will receive a separate letter addressing delegation of40 CFRPart 60 Standards ofPerformance forNew Stationary Sources. These delegations are being granted in accordance withthe September 3, 1997, Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) betweenNDEP and EPAregarding the delegation ofNESHAP. As set forth in the MOA, these delegations are effective upon the date ofthis letter and EPA will publish a future Federal Register notice to codify these delegations into the Code ofFederal Regulations.

Printed on Ree(led PaperWe appreciateNDEP’ s efforts to implementthe federal airtoxics program andhope to continue working with you to reduce emissions ofairtoxics inNevada. Ifyouhave any questions aboutthis delegation, please call me at (415) 947-8715 orhave your staffcontact Mae Wang at (415) 947-4124. Sincerely,

cc: Colleen Cripps, Administrator, NDEP Larry Kennedy, Chief, Bureau ofAir Pollution Control, NDEP Adele Malone, Bureau ofAir Quality Planning, NDEP Director, AirDivision
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
third quarter 1998 Report on Form 10-Q for LabOne, Inc. and is qualified
in its entirety by reference to such financials.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000816151
<NAME> LABONE, INC.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                      21,175,673
<SECURITIES>                                   500,209
<RECEIVABLES>                               19,482,318
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,886,098
<INVENTORY>                                  1,537,379
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            51,456,069
<PP&E>                                      58,778,165
<DEPRECIATION>                              34,762,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              80,582,732
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       11,128,737
<BONDS>                                     18,050,758
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       150,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  50,922,061
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                80,582,732
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            74,929,877
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               41,319,906
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              71,005
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             11,161,004
<INCOME-TAX>                                 4,417,930
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          6,743,074
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 6,743,074
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.51
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.51
        

</TABLE>
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1
 Certification of
Chief Executive Officer & Chief Financial Officer
of VCA Antech, Inc.
   (i)
    
    the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and(ii)
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer.
  /s/ Robert L. AntinRobert L. AntinChief Executive Officer/s/ Tomas W. FullerTomas W. FullerChief Financial Officer
 33
~ 

Viaveld ' 

March 12, 2015 

Regina Hoffman 

1001 81unt Parkway 

Charles City, IA 50616 

Cell: 641-330-9776 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Management System 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Re:Amendment to Exemptio n 11170 issuedpursuant_to .Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act and . _ _ __._.. - _ 14 C.F.,R. Part 11_in Regufato ry Docket No. FAA-2014-0824, 

Dear Madam or Sir, 

Viafeld, a cooperative ("Viafield"), was issued an Exemption numbered 11170 (hereinafter the 

Exemption) for the purpose of conducting precision agriculture operations. Viafield herby requests 

an amendment to the Exemption to allow an additional model of unmanned aircraft system (UAS) 

that fuliy complies with the conditions of the Exemption. 

Viafield wishes to operate the Max Flight copter-type (quadcopter) UAV, rnanufactured by Crop 

Copter in Illinois, under the same terms and conditions contained in the Exemption. Submitted as 

confidential documents are the Crop Copter Manual, Volume 1, Crop Copter Pre-Flight Checklist, 

and Max Flight specifications (Viafield requests the FAA treat these documents as proprietary 

under 14 C.F.R. 11.35(b) and not include them in the public docket). AII operations of the 

additional UAS will be in full compliance with the terms of the Exemption. 

Viafield believes that the addition of the Max Flight is within the public's interest as it would offer 

additional opportunities in precision agriculture while reducing the risk to persons and property 

inherent in the use of manned aircraft. It would also facilitate economic growth and agricultural 

sustainability by helping to maximize crop yields. 

As this is an amendment to an existing exemption asking only for the addition of a supplementary 

unmanned aerial system, Viafield respectfully submits that good cause exists so that notice does 

not need to be published in the Federal Register for the requested amendment. 

Please contact the undersigned if you have any questions concerning this request for an 

amendment to the Exemption. 

Yours sincerely, 

Zt r--~ i- , ~ 

 Appler Regina Hoffman 

Viafield Chief Executive Officer Viafield Agronomy Account 

Relationship Manager
No. 11-1533.

#### Yakubu *v.*Holder, Attorney General.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
,,- ,?



## TI3E.A ORNEY GENERAL

OF TEXAS

Honorable George K Cox State Health Offlarr Aurtln, Texan
Dear Elrl OpinionNo, O-2697 Ret In~uranar

of tm mobile laborrtorlrr.
We ham your lrtter of Aupmt 6, 1940, In vhiah you rrqurat opinion of thil Deprrtmrnt aa to whethrr there im any my in whibh your Dapwtment may inruro trmPmobilr laboratorlea, **and thr**  aontrntr thereof, an drraribd by you.

pa Opinion No. O-201, addrrnmrd to you on February 14, 1969, with refrrenar to thr authority of thr @tat. Health I)rpartmont to Inoura agrIn& fire, State propwty in the rrrprati~r offlaerof the Deparbnent,

you were adviaad that in the light of SenateConaurrrnt Resolution

No. 3, panned In the Ssoond CalledSeraionof the 37th Legislature,

"Your diatriot

dlreotore

have no authorlty

to pay inBuranoe

prsmiuraa

frm your looal oontingent funds." This Department

has written severalother opinions on the question

of thepurohase of insurance by Stats Departments. These are: No. O-1762,No, O-164, No, o-2130,and No. o-1100, copiesof whioh are attaohsd

heretofor your perusal, and whioh we believeooverall phases of your problem.

In view of the opinionexpressed to you in Opinion

No. O-201, and sinoe it may be assmed that there is no substantial differenoe

in the application

of the rule betweendepartmental propertylooated

in district

offices

and that located in mobile laboratories,vs deem it unneoessary

to review

herein excerptsfrom these formeropinions.
In accordance

with past opinions of this De~rtment, you are respectfully

advisedthat it is our opinion that the Stats Department of Health

may not insursthesemobile laboratories. Very truly yours ATTORNEYGEUERAL

OF TEXAS APPROVED AUG 9, 1940 /s/ Grover Sellers By /s/Walter R. Koch FIRST ASSISTANT ATTORNEX

GESEFIAL l%lter R. Koch WRK:AW1egW Approved Assistmt

OpinionCommittee By B W B Chairman
The State of TexasAppellee/s



# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antoni o, Texas** 

June 4, 2015

N o. 04

- 14

- 00894

- CR

Adam Paul EANNARINO

, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013CR8490

Honorable Maria Teresa Herr, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

The Appellant ’ s Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief is hereby GRANTED. The

Appellant ’ s brief is due June 4, 2015.

_________________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 4th day of June, 2015

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8381 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 8381

   To prohibit employers from asking the age or date of birth of an 
 individual before the completion and submission of an application for 
                     employment by such individual.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 24, 2020

Ms. Garcia of Texas (for herself, Ms. Wild, and Mrs. Hayes) introduced 
 the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education 
                               and Labor

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To prohibit employers from asking the age or date of birth of an 
 individual before the completion and submission of an application for 
                     employment by such individual.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Protect Older Job Applicants Act'' 
or the ``POJA Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION AGAINST ASKING THE AGE OR DATE OF BIRTH BEFORE THE 
              COMPLETION AND SUBMISSION OF THE APPLICATION FOR 
              EMPLOYMENT.

    Section 4(a) of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 
(29 U.S.C. 623(a)) is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (2) by striking the ``or'' at the end,
            (2) in paragraph (3) by striking the period at the end and 
        inserting ``; or'', and
            (3) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(4) to ask the age or date of birth of an individual 
        before the completion and submission of an application for 
        employment by such individual.''.

SEC. 3. PROHIBITION AGAINST LIMITING, SEGREGATING, OR CLASSIFYING 
              APPLICANTS FOR EMPLOYMENT.

    Section 4(a)(2) of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 
(29 U.S.C. 623(a)(2)) is amended--
            (1) by inserting ``or applicants for employment'' after 
        ``employees'', and
            (2) by inserting ``or as an applicant for employment'' 
        after ``employee''.

SEC. 4. DAMAGES FOR REQUESTING THE AGE OR DATE OF BIRTH AT THE TIME OF 
              APPLICATION.

    Section 7 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (29 
U.S.C. 626) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (b) by inserting ``, except where a 
        remedy is provided in subsection (g)'' after ``of this 
        section'', and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
    ``(g) The amount owing to an applicant for employment for a 
violation of paragraph (2) or (4) of section 4(a) shall be $5,000 in 
lieu of any other amounts owing under this Act for such violation.''.

SEC. 5. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendments made by this Act shall take effect 1 year after the 
date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 13.2

Certification of Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Videocon
d2h Limited (the Company) hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that:



| | (i) | the accompanying annual report on Form 20-F of the Company for the year ended March 31, 2017 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable,
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | ---- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: July 31, 2017



By:

/s/ Avanti Kumar KanthaliyaName:

Avanti Kumar KanthaliyaTitle:

Chief Financial Officer


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, and is not being filed either as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure statement, and is not to be incorporated by reference into the Report or any other filing of the Company, whether made before or after the
date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing. The foregoing certification shall not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or otherwise subject
to the liabilities of Section 18 or Sections 11 and 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.
U.S. Election Assistance Commission Standards Board Annual Meeting

Thursday, June 17, 2021

1:30 p.m. – 4:30 p.m. EST

Livestreamed on YouTube

AGENDA

Call to Order

• Reynaldo Valenzuela, Chairman, EAC Standards Board 

Welcoming Remarks 

• Donald Palmer, U.S. Election Assistance Commission, Chairman

• Ben Hovland, U.S. Election Assistance Commission, Designated Federal Officer of the EAC 

Standards Board

• Ben Hovland, DFO - Membership Guidelines and Policies 

All Members of EAC Standards Board Sworn-In

• Ben Hovland, DFO - Oath of Office of all EAC Standards Board members

Determination of Quorum/Roll Call 

• Barbara Goeckner, Secretary, EAC Standards Board 

Introductory Business

• Approval of Minutes of the July 31, 2020 EAC Standards Board Meeting 

• Approval of Agenda

• Appointment of Election Certification Committee 

Executive Board Election

• EAC to hold the election of the Executive Board of the EAC Standards Board

General EAC Update

• Mona Harrington, U.S. Election Assistance Commission, Executive Director 

o 2020 Accomplishments

o Grants

o EAVS

o Budget

o VVSG

o Testing & Certification to include E-poll book program plans

o 2021 Priorities

Bylaws Committee 
2

Proxy Committee

VVSG 2.0 Discussion by EAC

• Lifecycle policy conversation draft for VVSG 2.0

Other EAC Updates to Include:

• VVSG program manual enhancements discussion: Patent concerns regarding transparency and 

any other parts worthy of discussion - component testing, manufacturer definition etc.

• National Poll Worker Recruitment Day discussion

• Other topics, if any

Federal Partner Updates

• NIST Executive Order Discussion regarding RFI

• Cybersecurity Briefing - CISA

Results of Executive Board Election and INFO on Election of Officers of the Executive Board

• Announcement of the results of the Election

• Information on the Election of Officers of the Executive Board

New Members of Executive Board Sworn-In

• Ben Hovland, DFO - Oath of Office of Executive Board members

Closing Remarks and Adjournment

• Reynaldo Valenzuela, Chairman, EAC Standards Board

Adjournment