alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Motion Granted; Order filed December 17, 2013. 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-11-00570-CV

____________

IN THE MATTER OF R.A.

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3

Fort Bend County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 07-CJV-013620

O R D E R

This appeal was abated for the court to reconsider its previous ruling 

requiring non-public registration as a sex offender, which was signed June 22, 

2011. A hearing was held on March 5, 2013. After the hearing, the trial court 

signed a new order denying reconsideration and ordering non-public registration as 

a sex offender. On October 25, 2013, a supplemental clerk’s record was filed 

containing the trial court’s April 9, 2013, order. This court ordered the parties to 

file supplemental briefing addressing the new order. On December 5, 2013, 

appellant filed a motion in this court requesting that we order the Fort Bend 

County District Clerk to file a supplemental record containing the documents set 
2

out in Appellant’s Request for Second Supplemental Clerk’s Record filed with the 

district clerk on or about December 5, 2013. See Tex. R. App. P. 34.5(c). 

We GRANT appellant’s request and order the Fort Bend County District

Clerk to file a supplemental clerk’s record on or before January 10, 2014, 

containing the following:

1. All pleadings filed by the State in the trial court since June 18, 2012, and 

any and all exhibits offered and/or introduced at any hearing but not included in 

reporter’s record;

2. All pleadings filed by the Respondent in the trial court since June 18, 

2012, any and all exhibits offered and/or introduced at any hearing but not 

included in reporter's record;

3. All Orders of the Court entered since June 18, 2012 exclusive of the Order 

of April 7, 2013 already included and filed in the First Supplemental Clerk’s

Record;

4. All expert or other reports filed with the trial court since June 18, 2012;

5. An undated letter to Judge Lowery from Appellant’s Attorney Michael 

DeGuerin with Appellant’s graduation picture on the front page and containing six

(6) attachments, the sixth attachment being a letter to Judge Lowery from Harvey 

Rosenstock, M.D. dated June 27, 2012, which was filed on or about 06/28/2012;

6. The State’s Motion for an Independent Evaluation filed on or about 

06/29/2012;

7. Court Order Appointing Dr. Gollaher on State’s Motion for Independent 

evaluation filed on or after June 29, 2012;

8. Appellant’s Objections to Dr. Gollaher’s Report and Continued 

Registration filed on or about March 5, 2013; and

9. Appellant’s Request for Second Supplemental Clerk’s Record filed on or 

about 12/05/2013.

If any omitted item is not part of the case file, the district clerk is 

directed to file a supplemental clerk’s record containing a certified statement 

that the omitted item is not a part of the case file.

PER CURIAM
No. 12-5395.

#### Arafat *v.*State Farm Insurance Co. et al.

Sup. Ct. Fla. Certiorari denied.
EPA Registration Jacket 83588‐1      

Vol.3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72

*Commercial/financial information may be entitled to confidential treatment*
73
74
75
76
77
78
79

*Commercial/financial information may be entitled to confidential treatment*
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

ODIN MARTINEZ-GOMEZ,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 12-10277

D.C. No. 4:11-cr-03351-RCC

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Raner C. Collins, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted June 18, 2013** 

Before: TALLMAN, M. SMITH, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

Odin Martinez-Gomez appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 41-month sentence for reentry after

deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386

U.S. 738 (1967), counsel for Martinez-Gomez has filed a brief stating that there are

FILED

JUN 21 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 12-10277

no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record . No

pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S.

75, 80 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 58 (Wednesday, March 26, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14476-14477]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-7640]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-409]


Lacrosse Boiling Water Reactor; Intent To Relocate Local Public 
Document Room

    Notice is hereby by given that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 
(NRC) will be relocating the local public document room (LPDR) for 
records pertaining to Dairyland Power Cooperative's LaCrosse Boiling 
Water Reactor located in Genoa, Wisconsin. The LaCrosse LPDR is 
currently located at the LaCrosse Public Library, 800 Main Street, 
LaCrosse, Wisconsin. The document collection is available in microfiche 
form, with paper copy indices. Library staff informed the NRC that they 
are no longer able to maintain the document collection and request that 
it be moved. This notice invites public comment on possible LPDR 
locations in the Genoa, Wisconsin, area.
    Among the factors the NRC will consider in selecting a new location 
for the LPDR are the following:
    (1) Whether the institution is an established document repository 
located near the nuclear facility with a history of impartially serving 
the public;
    (2) The physical facilities available, including shelf space, 
storage space, patron workspace, copying equipment and computer access;

[[Page 14477]]

    (3) The willingness and ability of the library staff to maintain 
the LPDR collection and assist the public in locating records;
    (4) The nature and extent of related research resources, such as 
government documents;
    (5) The public accessibility of the library, including handicap 
accessibility, parking, ground transportation, and hours of operation, 
particularly evening and weekend hours;
    (6) The proximity of the library to existing user groups of the 
collection, if known.
    Comment period expires April 25, 1997. Comments received after this 
date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance of 
consideration cannot be given except as to comments filed on or before 
this date.
    Written comments may be submitted to Mr. David Meyer, Chief, 
Regulatory Publications Branch, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555. Copies of comments 
received may be examined at the NRC Public Document Room, Gelman 
Building, 2120 L Street NW, Washington, DC.
    Questions concerning the NRC's LPDR Program should be addressed to 
Ms. Jona L. Souder, LPDR Program Manager, Freedom of Information/Local 
Public Document Room Branch, Office of Information Resources 
Management, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, 
telephone number 301-415-7170, or toll-free 1-800-638-8081.

    Dated at Rockville, Md., this 20th day of March, 1997.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Russell A. Powell,
Chief, Freedom of Information/Local Public Document Room Branch, Office 
of Information Resources Management.
[FR Doc. 97-7640 Filed 3-25-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 43 (Wednesday, March 5, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 10086]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-5483]


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

NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION


Sunshine Act Meeting; Notice of Change in Time and Date of 
Meetings

    The National Credit Union Administration Board determined that its 
business requires the previously announced (Federal Register, 62 FR 
9213, February 28, 1997) open meeting schedule scheduled for 10:00 
a.m., Thursday, March 6, 1997 and the closed meeting scheduled for 
11:30 a.m., Thursday, march 6, 1997, to be rescheduled.

TIME AND DATE: 8:10 a.m., Friday, March 7, 1997.

PLACE: Board Room, 7th Floor, Room 7047, 1775 Duke Street, Alexandria, 
VA 22314-3428.

STATUS: Open.

BOARD BRIEFING: 1. Insurance Fund Report.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    1. Approval of Minutes of Previous Open Meeting.
    2. Requests from Federal Credit Unions to Convert to a Community 
Charter.
    3. Charter Application from the Proposed First Combined Community 
Federal Credit Union.
    4. Request from a Corporate Federal Credit Union for a Field of 
Membership amendment.
    5. Final Rule: Part 704, NCUA's Rules and Regulations, Corporate 
Credit Unions.
    6. Proposed Rule: Request for Comments on Federal Credit Union 
Bylaws.
    7. Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Request for Comments on 
Interpretive Rulings and Policy Statements (IRPS).
    8. Proposed Rule: Amendments to Section 701.26(b), 701.27, and 
740.3(c), and addition of part 712, NCUA's Rules and Regulations, 
Credit Union Service Contracts, Credit Union Service Organizations, and 
Advertising.

RECESS: 10:00 a.m.

TIME AND DATE: 10:15 a.m., Friday, March 7, 1997.

PLACE: Board Room, 7th Floor, Room 7047, 1775 Duke Street, Alexandria, 
VA 22314-3428.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    1. Approval of Minutes of Previous Closed Meeting.
    2. Administrative Actions under Section 206 of the Federal Credit 
Union Act. Closed pursuant to exemptions (5), (7), (8), (9)(A)(ii), and 
(9)(B).
    3. Personnel Action(s). Closed pursuant to exemptions (2) and (6).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Becky Baker, Secretary of the Board, 
Telephone (703)-518-6304.
Becky Baker,
Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 97-5483 Filed 2-28-97; 4:54 pm]
BILLING CODE 7535-01-M
# t16p01p1
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D17-2217

_____________________________

MICHAEL ANTHONY PADGETT,

Former Husband,

Appellant,

v.

RETHA ANN PADGETT, Former 

Wife,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Baker County.

Stanley H. Griffis, III, Judge.

May 2, 2019

PER CURIAM.

Michael Padgett (the former husband) appeals the trial 

court’s denial of his petition to modify his alimony obligation to 

Retha Padgett (the former wife), arguing that the evidence does 

not support the trial court’s finding that he was capable of 

earning additional income. We cannot determine whether the 

trial court’s finding was supported by the evidence due to the lack 

of transcript in the record on appeal, and must affirm. See

Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 

(Fla. 1979) (“Without a record of the trial proceedings, the 

appellate court can not properly resolve the underlying factual 
2

issues so as to conclude that the trial court’s judgment is not 

supported by the evidence or by an alternative theory.”). 

AFFIRMED.

B.L. THOMAS, C.J., and KELSEY and WINOKUR, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________

Joseph L. Mannikko of Mannikko & Baris, Macclenny, for 

Appellant.

No appearance for Appellee.
No. 12-5444.

#### Hall *v.*Louisiana.

Sup. Ct. La. Certiorari denied.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 21


                     SIGNIFICANT SUBSIDIARIES OF REGISTRANT

The following list indicates each subsidiary of the Company; all are
wholly-owned by the Company, except for the Hollis & Eastern Railroad Company,
of which the Company owns 99.3% of the Common Stock. Republic Paperboard Company
of West Virginia is a subsidiary of Republic Paperboard Company. Republic
Paperboard Company of West Virginia does business under the name Halltown
Paperboard Company. Each other subsidiary does business under its corporate
name. The Consolidated financial statements filed herewith include the accounts
of each of such subsidiaries.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                Subsidiaries                              State of Incorporation
                ------------                              ----------------------
<S>                                                       <C>
Republic Gypsum Company                                          Oklahoma
Republic Paperboard Company                                      Kansas
Republic Paperboard Company of West Virginia                     West Virginia
Hollis & Eastern Railroad Company                                Oklahoma
</TABLE>
1

Troutman, Jake (FAA)

From: Troutman, Jake (FAA)

Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 10:49 AM

To: 'Robyn@Key-AerialGraphics.com'

Cc: May, Rick (FAA)

Subject: Request for Additional Information - Key AerialGraphics

Dear Robyn Key:

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket No. FAA‐2015‐

0899).  This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to process your petition.

•             Provide a copy of the Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual (MPTOM) which is required by Order

8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 8, Section 1.  If you wish for us to proceed without this manual and remove closed set filming

from your proposed operation please inform of us of your intention by the requested response date listed below.

Please submit the additional information (non proprietary) to your docket at www.regulations.gov and submit any

proprietary information to the FAA Headquarters or electronically via email to 333exemptions@faa.gov.  If you want us

to process your request any further, we must receive the information described above by 9/1/15.  If we do not receive

the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267‐9521.

Sincerely,

Jake J Troutman

Program Analyst | Rulemaking

FAA Office of Aviation Safety

Airmen and Airspace Rules Division

202‐267‐9521
# C_2023329EN.01000302.xml

| 18.9.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 329/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.9.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 329/3

---

Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 19 July 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD) — Portugal) — EDP — Energias de Portugal, SA v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

(Case C-416/22, (1) EDP (Taxation on the marketing of securities))

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Answer which may be clearly deduced from existing case-law - Directive 2008/7/EC - Article 5(2) - Indirect taxes on the raising of capital - Stamp duty on services relating to the placement on the market of bonds, public offers for subscription of shares and offers to repurchase bonds)

(2023/C 329/04)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: EDP — Energias de Portugal, SA

Defendant: Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

Operative part of the order

Article 5(2) of Council Directive 2008/7/EC of 12 February 2008 concerning indirect taxes on the raising of capital

must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which provides for the levying of stamp duty on the remuneration which a capital company pays to a number of banking institutions to which it has entrusted financial intermediation services for the purposes of, first, the publication of offers to repurchase or purchase bonds resulting in the definitive extinguishment of the debt which those bonds represent, second, the placement on the market and subscription of new bonds and, third, the subscription of new shares with a view to increasing its share capital, irrespective of whether the companies issuing the securities in question are under a legal obligation to make use of the services of a third party or have chosen to do so of their own accord.

---

(1)  
  OJ C 389, 10.10.2022.

---
In The Matter Of: 

SERVED: February 11,2016 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC . ' 

' 

Docket No. F AA-2015-2439 

CLEAR DAY AVIATION, INC. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. 2013EA390075 

Respondent 

SECOND ORDER CONTINUING 

THE RULE 16 LITIGATION SCHEDULING CONFERENCE 

On January 11, 2016 an Order Setting a New Deadline to File the Rule 26(f) Jointly 

Proposed Discovery Plan and Continuing the Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling Conference was 

filed. 

On February 3, 2016, the parties. file a Joint Proposed Scheduling/Discovery Plan. 

On January 10, 2016, the parties appeared by telephone for the Rul~ 16 Litigation 

Scheduling Conference. At that time, the parties requested additional time to engage in private 

settlement negotiations. 

Pursuant to 14 C.P.R.§ 13.205(a)(l) and (8), and having reviewed the case file, all 

pleadings and motions, all relevant caselaw, statutes, regulations, rules, and authority, and being 

fully advised; 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: I 

I 

1. The parties' joint oral Motion to postpone the Rule 116 Litigation Scheduling Conference 

a second time is granted. 

2. The Litigation Scheduling Conference set for February 10,2016 is continued to Monday, 

March 7, 2016, at 2:00p.m. Eastern time. To access the Court's conference line, the 

parties shall call 202-493-2343. 
3. For clarifications of this Order or questions with regard to the procedures to be followed 

in this case, please contact Mrs. Rachael Brown, Judicial Staff Assistant, at the Office of 

Hearings (202-366-2132). 

Attachment: Service List 

Page 2 of2 
Docket No. FAA-2015-2439 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST-BY U.S. MAIL 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1 0001 

Mr. Zachary M. Berman 

Complainant's Counsel 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Office of Regional.Counsel 

1 Aviation Plaza 

Jamaica, NY 11434 

TEL: 718-553-3258 

FAJ<: 718-995-5699 

Mr. H. Bruce Brandon 

Respondent's Counsel 

3439 South Aviation Drive 

Burlington, NC 27215 

TEL: 336-358-6300 

FAX: 336-286-7050 

Judge J.E. Sullivan 

U.S. Administrative Law Judge 

Office ofHearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

ONE COPY 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-6941 

F AJ<: 202-366-7536 

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-6536

SAMSON JAMARCO COLEMAN,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

BRAD PERRITT,

 Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, 

at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, Chief District Judge. (3:17-cv-00688-FDW)

Submitted: October 18, 2018 Decided: October 23, 2018

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, KEENAN, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Samson Jamarco Coleman, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Samson Jamarco Coleman seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 

28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because 

the notice of appeal was not timely filed.

Parties are accorded 30 days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or 

order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the 

appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. 

App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional 

requirement.” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on December 21, 2017. 

Coleman mailed the notice of appeal 135 days later, on May 5, 2018. Because Coleman

failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal 

period, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and 

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument 

would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Francis D. Gerace, President and Chief Executive Officer of Multi-Color Corporation (the Company), certify pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:



|(1) | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended December 31, 2008 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(2) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       |  |     |  |                                      
|---------------------- |  | --- |  | -------------------------------------
|Date: February 9, 2009 |  |     |  |                                      
|                       |  |    
|                       |  | By: |  | /s/ Francis D. Gerace                
|                       |  |     |  | Francis D. Gerace                    
|                       |  |     |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN RE:

REAPPOINTMENT TO THE DOMESTIC
RELATIONS PROCEDURAL RULES
COMMITTEE :

:

:

:

: No. 680

CIVIL PROCEDURAL RULES DOCKET

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 6 th day of April , 2018, Elisabeth Bennington, Esquire, Allegheny

County, is hereby reappointed as a member of the Domestic Relations Procedural

Rules Comm ittee for a term expiring July 1, 2021.