alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|                                                                                              
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                              
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                      
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                                
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                                
|View History:                                                                                 
|                                                                                              
|Price of Cameron, LA Liquefied Natural Gas Exports to Mexico (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                              
|                                                                                              
|Price of Cameron, LA Liquefied Natural Gas Exports to Mexico (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                              

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2020's                                                                                                                            | --     | --     | 11.01  |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 104 (Monday, June 1, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29735-29736]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-14375]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[Report No. 2279]


Petitions For Reconsideration and Clarification of Action in 
Rulemaking Proceeding

May 22, 1998.
    Petitions for reconsideration and clarification have been filed in 
the Commission's rulemaking proceedings listed in this Public Notice 
and published pursuant to 47 CFR Section 1.429(e). The full text of 
these documents are available for viewing and copying in Room 239, 1919 
M Street, NW., Washington, DC or may be purchased from the Commission's 
copy contractor, ITS, Inc., (202) 857-3800. Oppositions to these 
petitions must be filed June 16, 1998. See Section 1.4(b)(1) of the 
Commission's rule (47 CFR 1.4(b)(1)). Replies to an opposition must be 
filed within 10 days after the time for filing oppositions has expired.
    Subject: Amendment of Section 73.202(b), Table of Allotments, FM 
Broadcast Stations, (Banks, Redmond, Sunriver and Corvallis, Oregon) 
(MM Docket No. 96-7, RM-8732, RM-8845).
    Amendment of Section 73.202(b), Table of Allotments, FM Broadcast 
Stations, The Dallas and Corvallis, Oregon) (MM Docket No. 96-12, RM-
8741).
    Madgekal Broadcasting, Inc. Station KFLY(FM), Corvallis, Oregon.
    For Construction Permit to Modify Licensed Facilities (One-Step 
Upgrade).

[[Page 29736]]

    Number of Petitions Filed: 1.

Federal Communications Commission.
Magalie Roman Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-14375 Filed 5-29-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-M
Regu latory Eva lu ation



# ~~?~ Docket No.



## FAA- **cilcJt-5"-~** 

# ;J Dir ecto rate Id entifier:



## ~ c;:?o/5



## z:- **~A"..J...)** A de/the 1rork hours. par ts cost. and n 1 1111her ( ? f U.S. registeredproducts to the! whle heloll'. When 1 ·ou are .finished. click 011 the "l })(/ate Fields
.. hwton to alllolllllti c a!zrj(/1 in th e tolo!s. 

### Update Fields
. , Es t i m ated Costs: Action Co s t s per Product (e
. g. , aircraft, en g ine , (e.g ., Inspection, propeller , app li ance) W o rk-h o urs Labor Parts Cos t Tota l Costs Numb e r of Tota l Cost replacement) (inc lu de cost (labo r + 

### u.s . fo r U.S. Fleet Do not includ e oncondition costs here access , t es tin g, ( @ $85 /h parts) R egistere d and close-up) our) Pr od u c t s Replacement I 

### 11.00 

### 86

The kn own numb er of products in comp li a nce: :\umber 

### T ota l Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $8 , 256 

### Costs covered un de r warra n ty (if known)

**\\'amml~** O n -Co n d i t io n Costs:



## ~ Ac tion Work-hours Labor co s t Parts Cost Cost per Product (e.g. , In spection , (include access , ( @ $85 / hour) testin g, and close- replacement) up ) In s pection

7Special con s iderations for Eco n o mic Analy s i s (Use thisfield to explain anythin g in th e Es timated Costs table that was ass um ed or might not be obv ious. This field ca n also be us ed to exp l ain warranty cos t s): Exec utiv e Ord e r 1 2866: 

### Cou l d th e 

### AD be cons id ered a "s ignifica n t r

eg ula to r y act i on " ? YES* 0 NO I2Sl *Explanation: DOT Re g ulat ory Policies an d Proce dure s : 

### Is the 

### AD s i g nificant?



## ~ YES* 0 NO I2Sl *Exp lan ation: R eg ulat ory F l ex ibility Act: 

### Will the 

### AD have a significa nt eco nomic impact on a substan tia l number of sma ll entitie s? Exp l a i

n for eithe r a Ye s o r No answe r . 

## @ YES 0 NO I2Sl Explanation: Intras tate Aviation in Ala s ka : 

### Thi s AD 

### cou l d affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. I s 

### it a pprop riate to include s pecific req uirements for



### ~ airc r aft operated in A l aska where aviatio n might be the only mode of transpo r tat i o n ? YES* 0 NO I2Sl *Explanation:



### 8
2016-1149.

#### Disciplinary Counsel v. Doumbas.

On respondent’s motion to purge contempt. Motion granted.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LEANDRO LEONEL GONZALEZ, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

C. VALENCIA, Correctional Sergeant; 

GOYTIA, Correctional Officer, 

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 20-16808 

D.C. No. 2:19-cv-00338-KJM-DB 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Kimberly J. Mueller, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted August 17, 2022**

Before: S.R. THOMAS, PAEZ, and LEE, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Leonardo Leonel Gonzalez appeals pro se from the 

district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging sexual 

assault by prison officials. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We 

review de novo the district court’s dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Resnick v. 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

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

FILED

AUG 25 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
 2 20-16808 

Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000). We affirm. 

The district court properly dismissed Gonzalez’s action because Gonzalez 

failed to allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim. See Bearchild v. Cobban, 

947 F.3d 1130, 1144-45 (9th Cir. 2020) (setting forth the elements for a claim of 

sexual assault by a correctional officer); Jordan v. Gardner, 986 F.2d 1521, 1525, 

1526 (9th Cir. 1993) (en banc) (the Eighth Amendment prohibits “only the 

unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain”; “momentary discomfort caused by the 

search procedures” does not meet the “constitutional standard for a finding of 

pain” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); see also Hebbe v. Pliler, 

627 F.3d 338, 341-42 (9th Cir. 2010) (although pro se pleadings are construed 

liberally, a plaintiff must allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim). 

AFFIRMED.
#### Stopyra v. Peco Energy Co.; Bank of America, N.A., In re

10/14/2015

310, 311 MAL (2015)

Denied

Pa.Super., 120 A.3d 1061
No. 12-8895.

#### Hernandez *v.*Holder, Attorney General, et al.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
No. 12-8304.

#### Henderson *v.*United States.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-15-00016-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF S.S., A CHILD

On Appeal from the 76th District Court

Titus County, Texas

Trial Court No. 37,692

Before Morriss, C.J., Moseley and Burgess, JJ.
2

O R D E R

Appellant Father appeals from the termination of his parental rights to S.S. The clerk’s 

record in this accelerated appeal was filed February 27, 2015, and the reporter’s record was filed 

March 31, 2015, making Father’s brief due April 20, 2015. Having received neither Father’s brief 

nor a motion to extend the deadline for filing that brief, our clerk’s office contacted counsel via 

email and voicemail, advising that Father’s brief was late and that a motion for extension of time 

in which to file such brief had not been filed. Counsel did not respond to these messages, has not 

filed a brief, and has not filed a motion for extension of time in which to file a brief. 

This is an appeal from the termination of Father’s parental rights to S.S., which, by statute, 

is accelerated. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 109.002(a) (West 2014). Further, under Rule 6.2(a) 

of the Texas Rules of Judicial Administration, we are required, “so far as reasonably possible, [to] 

ensure that the appeal is brought to final disposition” within 180 days of the date the notice of 

appeal was filed. See TEX. R. JUD. ADMIN. 6.2, reprinted in TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. tit. 2, subtit. 

F app. (West 2013). After weighing these considerations, we feel compelled to order the brief 

filed. 

By this order, we set the final deadline for filing appellant’s brief as May 11, 2015, which 

gives counsel twenty-one days from the original due date to complete the brief. Should appellant 

fail to file a brief on or before May 11, 2015, this appeal may be dismissed for want of prosecution. 

See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

BY THE COURT

Date: April 28, 2015
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE QUARTER ENDING SEPTEMBER 30,
1995 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                         1732
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                       1000
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                             580
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                             0
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                     371
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    3683
<COMMON>                                            46
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                          793
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                                119
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                     953
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               25
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                              1236
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                 167
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                      134
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                    1168
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                     3683
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                         1935
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                                47
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                           0
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                         488
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                            198
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                   0
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                     699
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            90
<NET-INCOME>                                        72
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          1
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                       71
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                             0
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                            0
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                             116
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.57
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.57
        

</TABLE>
#### Alex M., an Infant, by His Natural Guardian and Father, Gennaro M., et al., Plaintiffs, v City of New York, Defendant. The Law Office of Fred Lichtmacher, P.C., Nonparty Appellant; Irom Wittels Freund Berne & Serra, P.C., Nonparty Respondent.

[48 NYS3d 598]

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Mitchell J. Danziger, J.), entered on or about December 2, 2015, which granted nonparty respondent’s (Irom) motion to confirm a referee’s report, dated September 14, 2015, recommending an apportionment of fees between outgoing and incoming counsel, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from order, dated March 19, 2015, but apparently never entered, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as taken from a nonappealable paper.

The referee’s findings are supported by the record *(see Lai Ling Cheng v Modansky Leasing Co.,*73 NY2d 454, 458 [1989]; *Board of Mgrs. of Boro Park Vil.-Phase I Condominium v Boro Park Townhouse Assoc.,*284 AD2d 237, 238 [1st Dept 2001]). He considered the relevant factors *(Lai Ling Cheng,*73 NY2d at 458; *Board of Mgrs.,*284 AD2d at 237). As the trier of fact, he was in the best position to determine the issues referred to him *(Namer v 152-54-56 W. 15th St. Realty Corp.,*108 AD2d 705 [1st Dept 1985]).

The appeal from the March order should be dismissed, because the order was never entered *(see Jemzura v Jemzura,*24 AD2d 809 [3d Dept 1965]). Furthermore, nonparty appellant does not object to the reference directed by the order, but rather to the fact that, in a transcript that was not entered, the court ruled that Irom was not discharged for cause. That ruling is not appealable *(Matter of Juan Alejandro R.,*221 *534AD2d 183 [1st Dept 1995]; *see also Clemons v Schindler El. Corp.,*87 AD3d 452 [1st Dept 2011]).

Concur — Tom, J.P., Acosta, Kapnick, Kahn and Gesmer, JJ.
# DSCR Restoration Advisory Board holds quarterly meeting

/ Published April 11, 2019
RICHMOND, VA, 
Community members attended the Defense Logistics Agency Installation Management Richmond’s Environmental Cleanup Program quarterly Restoration Advisory Board meeting April 8 at the Bensley Community Center in Chesterfield County, Virginia.

DLA established a RAB for Defense Supply Center Richmond in January 2002 to provide a forum for the community to be involved in DSCR’s environmental cleanup program.

About a dozen people attended the meeting.

David Hufford, environmental engineer with DLA Installation Management Richmond’s Environmental Office, opened the meeting by giving an update to several ongoing projects, including DSCR groundwater sampling; as well as updates on environmental cleanup efforts at various locations on the installation. He also touched on the five-year review that’s ongoing, as well as an update on the pending Community Involvement Plan.

As an advisory board, the RAB makes suggestions, recommendations, and comments on issues concerning investigations and remediation activities. It is made up of local citizens, DLA representatives, business groups and personnel from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineering, the Environmental Protection Agency, Virginia’s Department of Environmental Quality and Chesterfield County. The RAB is co-chaired by a DSCR representative and a community representative. 

The next RAB meeting is scheduled for July 8.
Exhibit 10.1

            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM



      We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (File No. 333-12014 and File No. 333-123321) pertaining
to the 1996 Stock Option Plan and the 2003 Israeli Share Option Plan,
respectively, of MER Telemanagement Solutions Ltd. of our report dated February
7, 2005 with respect to the consolidated financial statements of MER
Telemanagement Solutions Ltd. included in this Annual Report on Form 20-F/A for
the year ended December 31, 2004.



                                            /s/ Kost Forer Gabbay and Kasierer
                                            ----------------------------------
Tel-Aviv, Israel                            KOST FORER GABBAY & KASIERER
October 3, 2005                             A Member of Ernst & Young Global
|                                                                               
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                               
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                       
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                 
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                 
|View History:                                                                  
|                                                                               
|Corpus Christi, TX Liquefied Natural Gas Exports to Spain  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                               
|                                                                               
|Corpus Christi, TX Liquefied Natural Gas Exports to Spain  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                               

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2  | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2010's                                                                                                                            |        |        |         |        |        |        |        | 0      | 0      | 42,075
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 58,924 | 69,783 | 137,459 | 87,222 |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECDTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

          I, Timothy A. Dawson, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Mississippi Chemical Corporation (the "Company"), hereby certify that the accompanying report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2004, dated as of May 19, 2004, and filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Report") by the Company fully complies with the requirements of that section.

          I further certify that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material aspects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|                                                                                               
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                               
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                       
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                                 
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                                 
|View History:                                                                                  
|                                                                                               
|No chart available.                                                                            
|No chart available.                                                                            
|                                                                                               
|                                                                                               
|Price of Freeport, TX Liquefied Natural Gas Exports to Kuwait (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                               

|Year                                                                                                                              | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---
|2021                                                                                                                              |     |     |     |     |     | W   |     |     | W   |     |     |    
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
No. 12-8716.

#### Medley *v.*United States.

Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.
No. 12-8161.

#### D’Antuono *v.*New York.

App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 4th Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied.