alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 90 (Friday, May 9, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26612-26613]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-09892]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2014-0214; Airspace Docket No. 14-AGL-10]

Amendment of Class D and E Airspace; Grand Forks, ND

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Technical amendment; correction.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This action amends a typographical error in the effective date 
of a final rule technical amendment correction published in the Federal 
Register of February 6, 2014, that amends Class D and E airspace in the 
Grand Forks, ND, area. The effective date year is corrected from 
February 6, 2013, to February 6, 2014.

DATES: Effective date: 0901 UTC, May 9, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Enander, Central Service Center, 
Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest 
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone 817-321-
7716.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On February 6, 2014, a final rule technical amendment correction 
was published in the Federal Register amending Class D and Class E 
airspace in Grand Forks, ND (79 FR 7055, Docket No. FAA-2013-0950). The 
document became effective upon publication. Subsequent to publication, 
the FAA found the document showing the effective date as being one year 
prior to publication; February 6, 2013, instead of February 6, 2014.
    Since this is an administrative change and does not affect the 
boundaries, altitudes, or operating requirements of the airspace, I 
find that notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) is 
impracticable and contrary to the public interest. Also, as immediate 
corrective action is necessary to show the correct effective date to 
avoid confusion in the publication of the

[[Page 26613]]

amendment to FAA Order 7400.9X, Airspace Designations and Reporting 
Points, dated August 7, 2013, and effective September 15, 2013, the FAA 
finds good cause, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d), for making this 
amendment effective in less than 30 days.

Final Rule Correction

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, in the 
Federal Register of February 6, 2014 (79 FR 7055), the date, under the 
DATES heading on page 7056, column 1, lines 9 and 10, is corrected to 
read:

DATES: Effective Date: 0901 UTC, February 6, 2014.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on April 2, 2014.
Kent M. Wheeler
Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2014-09892 Filed 5-8-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 42 (Tuesday, March 4, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 9771]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-5208]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------


DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Notice of a Meeting of the National Bioethics Advisory Commission 
(NBAC), Genetics Subcommittee

ACTION: Correction Notice for Previously Published Notice (Published on 
February 26, 1997, page 8743, 2nd Column).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

    The date is corrected to read: Date: Wednesday, March 5, 1997, 7:00 
a.m. to 1:00 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Henrietta Hyatt-Knorr, National 
Bioethics Advisory Commission, MSC-7508, 6100 Executive Boulevard, 
Suite 3C01, Rockville, Maryland 20892-7508, telephone 301-402-4242, fax 
number 301-480-6900.

    Dated: February 26, 1997.
Henrietta Hyatt-Knorr,
Acting Deputy Director, National Bioethics Advisory Commission.
[FR Doc. 97-5208 Filed 3-3-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-17-M
No. 11-1430.

#### Blakely *v.*Los Angeles Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals et al.

Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.
<PAGE>

                       [LETTERHEAD - RYDER SCOTT COMPANY]



                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.8


                      Consent of Ryder Scott Company, L.P.

     As independent oil and gas consultants, Ryder Scott Company, L.P. hereby
consents to the incorporation by reference in this Amendment No. 1 to
Registration Statement on Form S-4, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on or about March 25, 2003, of information from our reserve reports
for 3TEC Energy Corporation as of December 31, 2002, December 31, 2001 and
December 31, 2000. We further consent to references to our firm under the
subsection Experts and in the Agreement and Plan of Merger dated February 2,
2003 in regards to reserve reporting as of December 31, 2002.



                                         /s/ Ryder Scott Company, L.P.
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        RYDER SCOTT COMPANY, L.P.




Houston, Texas
March 25, 2003
# C_2022284EN.01001801.xml

| 25.7.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 284/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.7.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 284/18

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal da Relação de Lisboa (Portugal) lodged on 20 April 2022 — Fonds de Garantie des Victimes des Actes de Terrorisme et d’Autres Infractions (FGTI) v Victoria Seguros S.A.

(Case C-264/22)

(2022/C 284/20)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal da Relação de Lisboa

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Fonds de Garantie des Victimes des Actes de Terrorisme et d’Autres Infractions (FGTI)

Respondent: Victoria Seguros S.A.

Question referred

Is the law applicable to the limitation rules for the right to claim compensation that of the place of the accident (Portuguese law), in accordance with Articles 4(l) and 15(h) of Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2007 (Rome II) or, if the injured party’s place is taken by subrogation, is the ‘law of the third person’ subrogee (French law) applicable in accordance with Article 19 of that Regulation?

---

(1)  Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2007 on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations (Rome II) (OJ 2007 L 199, p. 40).

---
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 42 (Tuesday, March 4, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 9816]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-5288]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Special Emphasis Panel in Physics; Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting.

    Name: Special Emphasis Panel in Physics (1208).
    Date and Time: March 21, 1997 from 8:00AM to 9:00PM.
    Place: Room 1020, NSF 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22230.
    Type of Meeting: Closed.
    Contact Person: Dr. David Berley, Program Manager for LIGO, Room 
1015, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 
22230. Telephone: (703) 306-1892.
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice and recommendations 
concerning proposals submitted to NSF for financial support.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate Gravitational Physics proposals 
regarding LIGO as part of the selection progress for awards.
    Reason for Closing: The project plans being reviewed include 
information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including 
technical information; information on personnel and proprietary data 
for present and future subcontracts. These matters are exempt under 
5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and (6) of the Government in the Sunshine Act.

    Dated: February 27, 1997.
Linda Allen-Benton,
Deputy Director, Division of Human Resources Management, Acting 
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 97-5288 Filed 3-3-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
#### UNITED STATES of America Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jakheeno STEWART Defendant-Appellant

No. 17-2304

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: March 9, 2018

Filed: March 14, 2018

Hunter Bridges, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Eastern District of Arkansas, 'Little Rock, AR, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Jakheeno Stewart, Pro Se

Before GRUENDER, BOWMAN, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Jakheeno Stewart appeals from the sentence imposed by the District Court1 after he pleaded guilty to a gun charge. His counsel has moved to withdraw and has submitted a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), questioning the reasonableness of Stewart’s sentence.

After review, we conclude that the district court did not impose an unreasonable sentence. There was no indication that it overlooked a relevant 18 U.S.C. § 3553 factor or committed a clear error of judgment in weighing relevant factors. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007) (standard of review). We have independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), and we find no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. We affirm the sentence and grant counsel leave to withdraw.

1

. The Honorable James M. Moody, Jr., United . States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
# C_2022237EN.01003802.xml

| 20.6.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 237/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.6.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 237/38

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Düsseldorf (Germany) lodged on 1 April 2022 — flightright GmbH v Eurowings GmbH

(Case C-228/22)

(2022/C 237/49)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Amtsgericht Düsseldorf

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: flightright GmbH

Defendant: Eurowings GmbH

Questions referred

| 1. | Is there always an extraordinary circumstance within the meaning of Article 5(3) of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 (1) (the Air Passenger Rights Regulation) in the case where the flight cancellation or the delay equivalent to a cancellation is attributable to a change to the slot allocation made by the competent air traffic control authority? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is there always an extraordinary circumstance within the meaning of Article 5(3) of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 (1) (the Air Passenger Rights Regulation) in the case where the flight cancellation or the delay equivalent to a cancellation is attributable to a change to the slot allocation made by the competent air traffic control authority?

| 2. | If the answer to Question 1 is in the negative, is it sufficient, for a finding that there is an extraordinary circumstance under Article 5(3) of the Air Passenger Rights Regulation, that the change of slot allocation was attributable to a weather-related reduction in flight capacity, but the weather situation did not bring air traffic as a whole largely to a standstill? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the answer to Question 1 is in the negative, is it sufficient, for a finding that there is an extraordinary circumstance under Article 5(3) of the Air Passenger Rights Regulation, that the change of slot allocation was attributable to a weather-related reduction in flight capacity, but the weather situation did not bring air traffic as a whole largely to a standstill?

---

(1)  Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91 (OJ 2004 L 46, p. 1).

---
<PAGE>

                                                                     Exhibit 12a

                     PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY
               COMPUTATION OF RATIOS OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                   For the Years Ended
                                                                      December 31,
                                                    ------------------------------------------------
                                                      2005      2004       2003      2002      2001
                                                    ------------------------------------------------
<S>                                                 <C>       <C>        <C>       <C>       <C>
Earnings as Defined in Regulation S-K (A):

Pre-tax Income from Continuing Operations           $   583   $   592    $   376   $   320   $   324
Fixed Charges                                           342       362        390       408       461
                                                    ------------------------------------------------
Earnings                                            $   925   $   954    $   766   $   728   $   785
                                                    ================================================

Fixed Charges as Defined in Regulation S-K (B)

Interest Expense                                    $   342   $   362    $   390   $   406   $   458
Interest Factor in Rentals                                -         -          -         2         3
                                                    ------------------------------------------------
Total Fixed Charges                                 $   342   $   362    $   390   $   408   $   461
                                                    ================================================

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges                     2.70      2.64       1.96      1.78      1.70
                                                    ================================================
</TABLE>

(A)   The term "earnings" shall be defined as pretax income from continuing
      operations. Add to pretax income the amount of fixed charges adjusted to
      exclude the amount of any interest capitalized during the period.

(B)   Fixed Charges represent (a) interest, whether expensed or capitalized, (b)
      amortization of debt discount, premium and expense and (c) an estimate of
      interest implicit in rentals.
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    Exhibit 23.1
                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Registration Statement of
Sterling Chemicals Holdings, Inc. ("Holdings") on Form S-3 of our report dated
December 6, 1996, appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Sterling
Chemicals Holdings, Inc. for the year ended September 30, 1996 and to the
reference to us under the heading "Experts" in the Prospectus, which is part of
this Registration Statement.



DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Houston, Texas
July 8, 1997
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         826,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,548,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   195,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,179,000
<PP&E>                                     306,064,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              39,716,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             278,199,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       58,161,000
<BONDS>                                    130,891,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        90,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  87,993,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               278,199,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            11,332,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             7,112,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           3,654,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   606,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

      CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


	Pursuant  to  18  U.S.C.   1350,  the  undersigned  officer
of  Harold's Stores, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby  certifies
that  the  Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q  for  the
quarter  ended April 29, 2006 (the "Report") fully  complies
with  the  requirements  of  Section  13(a)  or  15(d),   as
applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and  that
the information contained in the Report fairly presents,  in
all  material respects, the financial condition and  results
of operations of the Company.

Date:  June 13, 2006          /s/ Leonard Snyder
                              Leonard Snyder
                              Chief Executive Officer
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-87,085-02

EX PARTE RUTHEN JAMES WEEMS, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 2015-229-C2B IN THE 54 DISTRICT COURT TH

FROM MCLENNAN COUNTY

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Applicant was convicted of one count of aggravated assault and one count of unlawful

possession of a firearm and sentenced to life and ten years’ imprisonment respectively. The Tenth

Court of Appeals affirmed his convictions. Weems v. State, No. 10-17-00404-CR (Tex.

App.—Waco April 10, 2019)(not designated for publication). 

The Court received this writ application on October 22, 2019. On November 6, 2019,

this Court denied it without written order. However, it has now come to the Court’s attention

that the mandate in Applicant’s direct appeal had not yet issued in his direct appeal when he

filed the application in the trial court, and this application was not final for purposes of article
2

11.07. TEX. CODE CRIM. PRO. Art. 11.07; Ex parte Johnson, 12 S.W.3d 472 (Tex. Crim. App.

2000). Therefore, this application should have been dismissed as untimely filed.

Accordingly, the Court withdraws its prior ruling which denied this application without

written order and enters this order dismissing the application.

Applicant’s writ application is dismissed.

Filed: April 29, 2020

Do not publish
# C_2023071EN.01002602.xml

| 27.2.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 71/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.2.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 71/26

---

Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2022 — Simba Toys v EUIPO — Master Gift Import (BIMBA TOYS)

(Case T-129/22) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark BIMBA TOYS - Earlier international word and figurative marks Simba - Earlier trade name Simba Toys GmbH & Co. KG - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Comparison of the goods - Article 8(4) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Proximity of the economic sectors)

(2023/C 71/34)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Simba Toys GmbH & Co. KG (Fürth, Germany) (represented by: O. Ruhl, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: T. Frydendahl, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Master Gift Import, SLU (Ronda, Spain)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 20 December 2021 (Case R 629/2021-4).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Simba Toys GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Simba Toys GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 171, 25.4.2022.

---
```

[Federal Register: September 28, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 187)]
[Notices]               
[Page 59697-59698]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr28se10-56]                         

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMISSION OF FINE ARTS

 
Notice of Meeting

    The next meeting of the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts is scheduled 
for 21 October 2010, at 10 a.m. in the Commission offices at the 
National Building Museum, Suite 312, Judiciary Square, 401 F Street, 
NW., Washington, DC 20001-2728. Items of discussion may include 
buildings, parks and memorials.
    Draft agendas and additional information regarding the Commission 
are available on our Web site: http://www.cfa.gov. Inquiries regarding 
the agenda and requests to submit written or oral statements should be 
addressed to Thomas Luebke, Secretary, U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, at 
the above address; by e-mailing staff@cfa.gov; or by calling 202-504-
2200. Individuals requiring sign language interpretation for the 
hearing impaired should contact

[[Page 59698]]

the Secretary at least 10 days before the meeting date.

    Dated 24 September 2010 in Washington DC.
Thomas Luebke, AIA,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-24200 Filed 9-27-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6330-01-M
```
#### IN RE: Jon W. CHAFFEE, Debtor. B. Casey Yim, Appellant, v. Jon W. Chaffee, Appellee.

No. 17-60036

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted February 13, 2018 *

Filed February 23, 2018

B. Casey Yim, Pro Se

Jon W. Chaffee, Pro Se

Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

B. Casey Yim appeals pro se from the judgment of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (“BAP”) affirming the bankruptcy court’s judgment in favor of debtor Jon Chaffee in an adversary proceeding regarding the discharge of Yim’s claim. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). We review de novo BAP decisions, and apply the same standard of review that the BAP applied to the bankruptcy court’s ruling. *Anastas v. Am. Sav. Bank (In re Anastas),*94 F.3d 1280, 1283 (9th Cir. 1996). We affirm.

The bankruptcy court did not clearly err in finding that Yim failed to demonstrate that his claim satisfied the elements for non-dischargeability under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A). *See id.*(factual determinations of whether elements of § 523(a)(2)(A) are satisfied are 'reviewed for clear error); *Ghomeshi v. Sabban (In re Sabban),*600 F.3d 1219, 1222 (9th Cir. 2010) (creditor has burden to show by a preponderance of the evidence that § 523(a)(2)(A) elements are met).

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening briefs, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on appeal. *See Padgett v. Wright,*587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.