alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN

NO. 03-0 9 -00 332 -CR

Cha r lie C. Whi te , A ppe lla nt

v . The State of Texas, App ellee

F ROM THE DISTRICT CO URT OF TRAVIS COUNTY , 147TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. D-1- DC-09 -20 1777 , HO NORAB LE WI LF ORD F LOW ERS , JUDGE PRESIDI NG

M E M O R

A N D UMO P I N I O N
Charlie C. Whit e is awa iting trial for possession of a controlled substance. White has fi le d a pr o s e no tic e of

a pp eal fr om t

he dis tr ic t c ourt ’s or de r o ve rr uli ngWhit e ’s mot ion

to suppress evide nce.

Th is C o urtd o e s n o th av e j ur i s d i c t i o nt o c o n s i d e r ani n t e r l o c ut o r

y a p p e a l un le ss t h at j u risdiction has bee n expressly g rante d by

law. Ap oli na r v . S

tate , 8 2 0 S. W. 2 d

7 9 2 , 7 94 (T ex . C ri m . Ap p . 1 9 9 1 ). T h er e is n o l aw p erm i tt i n g i n t er l o cu t o ry re v i ew o f ano rd er

o v erru l i n g a motion to s uppress e vidence . I f convic ted, Whit e may challeng e the trial cour t’s order at that time. The a ppeal is dismissed.2 _______________________ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _____________ J an P. Patterson, J ustice Be fore J ustices Patterson, Puryear and Pember

ton Dismissed for Want of J urisdiction Filed: Jul y

24, 2009 Do No t Pu

bli sh
No. 11-417.

#### Staton Holdings, Inc., dba Staton Wholesale, Petitioner v. Federal Communications Commission, et al.

565 U.S. 1061, 132 S. Ct. 778,

181 L. Ed. 2d 487,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8492.

November 28, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied.

Same case below, 433 Fed. Appx. 1.
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4756 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to limit the agri-biodiesel 

credit to oils produced from plants and animals. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 15, 2006 

Mr. BUTTERFIELD (for himself, Mr. JONES of North Carolina, Mr. BISHOP

of Georgia, and Mr. BERRY) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to limit the 

agri-biodiesel credit to oils produced from plants and animals. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. AGRI-BIODIESEL CREDIT LIMITED TO OILS 

4 PRODUCED FROM PLANTS AND ANIMALS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (2) of section 40A(d) 

6 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (defining agri-bio7 diesel) is amended to read as follows: 

8 ‘‘(2) AGRI-BIODIESEL.—The term ‘agri-bio9 diesel’ means biodiesel derived solely from virgin 

10 oils— 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
2 

•HR 4756 IH 

1 ‘‘(A) from esters derived from corn, soy2 beans, sunflower seeds, cottonseeds, canola, 

3 crambe, rapeseeds, safflowers, flaxseeds, rice 

4 bran, and mustard seeds, and 

5 ‘‘(B) from animal fats.’’. 

6 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

7 this section shall apply to biodiesel sold after the date of 

8 the enactment of this Act in taxable years ending after 

9 such date. 

Æ 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED MA RCH 7, 2013

NO. 03

- 10

- 00515

- CR

Charles Brown, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 427TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, RO SE AND GO ODWIN
AFFIRMED

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE PURYEAR

THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the record of the court below, and the same being

considered, because it is the opinion of this Court that there was no error in the trial court’s

judgment: IT IS ORDERED, A DJUDGED AND DECREED by the Court that the judgment

of the trial court is in all things affirmed; and it appearing that the appellant is indigent and

unable to pay costs, that no adjudication as to costs is made; and that this decision be certified

below fo r observance.
(1) Adjusting Price $14.88 CWT

(2) Base Price $14.37 CWT

(3) Change from Base Price per CWT $0.51

(4) Price change per gallon $0.0439

(Line (3) divide by 11.63 gallons/cwt)

(5) Price change per half gallon $0.0219

Price change per quart $0.0110

Price change per pint $0.0055

Price change per 12-oz pg. $0.0041

Price change per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) $0.0034

Price change per half pint $0.0027

(6) Price adjustment per gallon $0.04

Price adjustment per half gallon $0.02

Price adjustment per quart $0.01

Price adjustment per pint $0.01

Price change per 12-oz pg. $0.00

Price adjustment per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) $0.00

Price adjustment per half pint $0.00

NOTE: Numbers in brackets are negative or decreases, all others are positive or increases.

Monthly EPA Calculation for Class I Milk (Clause 52.216-9032 Alt. I)

Based on California Dept. of Food and Agriculture Announcement of Minimum Prices

 Effective Date: July 3, 2016
# CI2016418EN.01000101.xml

| 14.11.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CI 418/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.11.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CI 418/1

---

Notice for the attention of the persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP and in Council Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria

(2016/C 418 I/01)

The following information is brought to the attention of the persons designated in Annex I to Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP (1), as implemented by Council Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2016/1985 (2), and in Annex II to Council Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 (3), as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1984 (4), concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria.

1

2

3

4

The Council of the European Union has decided that the persons that appear in the abovementioned Annexes should be included in the list of persons and entities in Annex I to Decision 2013/255/CFSP and Annex II to Regulation (EU) No 36/2012. The grounds for designation of those persons appear in the relevant entries in those Annexes.

The attention of the persons concerned is drawn to the possibility of making an application to the competent authorities of the relevant Member State(s) as indicated on the websites in Annex IIa to Regulation (EU) No 36/2012, in order to obtain an authorisation to use frozen funds for basic needs or specific payments (cf. Article 16 of the Regulation).

The persons concerned may submit a request to the Council before 1 March 2017, together with supporting documentation that the decision to include them on the abovementioned list should be reconsidered to the following address:

| Council of the European Union |
| --- |
| General Secretariat |
| DG C 1C |
| Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175 |
| 1048 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |
| Email: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu |

Council of the European Union

General Secretariat

DG C 1C

Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175

1048 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

Email: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu

Any observations received will be taken into account for the purpose of the Council's next review, pursuant to Article 34 of Decision 2013/255/CFSP and Article 32(4) of Regulation (EU) No 36/2012, of the list of designated persons and entities.

The attention of the persons concerned is also drawn to the possibility of challenging the Council's decision before the General Court of the European Union, in accordance with the conditions laid down in Article 275, second paragraph, and Article 263, fourth and sixth paragraphs, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

---

(1)  OJ L 147, 1.6.2013, p. 14.

1

(2)  OJ L 305 I, 14.11.2016, p. 4.

2

(3)  OJ L 16, 19.1.2012, p. 1.

3

(4)  OJ L 305 I, 14.11.2016, p. 1.

4

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                       6,046,465
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                             2,450,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 16,174,526
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                       9,281,741
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                         9,667,334
<LOANS>                                     78,603,624
<ALLOWANCE>                                    762,236
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             120,941,654
<DEPOSITS>                                 104,608,684
<SHORT-TERM>                                 3,100,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          1,291,643
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     2,097,916
<OTHER-SE>                                   9,843,411
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             120,941,654
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              6,683,278
<INTEREST-INVEST>                            1,930,551
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               103,169
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             8,716,998
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           3,502,234
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           3,754,564
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        4,962,434
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  173,668
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                              19,697
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              4,473,050
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,434,327
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   1,434,327
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,007,392
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.48
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.45
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    5.23
<LOANS-NON>                                     50,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                    14,000
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                 64,000
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               656,256
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                   82,046
<RECOVERIES>                                    14,358
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              762,236
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           572,000
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                        190,236
        

</TABLE>
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

___________________

NO. 09-13-00333-CR

___________________

MARKESHIA MARSHALL, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

__________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 292155

__________________________________________________________________

ORDER

The clerk’s record and reporter’s records were due to be filed in the Court of 

Appeals on August 22, 2013, but have not been filed. The trial court clerk has 

notified the court that she has not received payment for the record. Appellant has 

filed an affidavit of indigency and requested appointment of counsel, but has not 

filed a brief. The Court finds that it is necessary to determine whether the appellant 

is indigent and, therefore, entitled to appointed counsel and a free record on appeal.

It is, therefore, ORDERED that the appeal is ABATED and the cause is 

REMANDED to the trial court for a hearing to determine whether the appellant 
2

desires to prosecute her appeal and whether appellant is indigent. The trial court 

shall determine whether the appellant has been deprived of a record because of 

ineffective assistance of counsel or for any other reason. For this purpose the trial 

judge shall conduct such hearings as may be necessary, make appropriate findings 

and recommendations, and prepare a record of the proceedings. If the appellant is 

indigent, the judge shall take such measures as may be necessary to assure 

effective representation of counsel, which may include the appointment of counsel

or ordering all or part of the records to be prepared without charge to the appellant.

The record of the hearing, including any orders and findings of the trial court 

judge, shall be sent to the appellate court for filing in the above-referenced appeal. 

The transcript of the court reporter’s notes from the hearing and the findings and 

recommendations of the trial court judge are to be filed on or before September 30, 

2013.

ORDER ENTERED August 29, 2013.

PER CURIAM

Before McKeithen, C.J., Gaultney and Kreger, JJ.
Opinion issued August 31, 2018

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-18-00653-CV

NO. 01-18-00725-CV

———————————

IN RE BOBBY B. DASH, Relator

Original Proceedings on Petitions for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, Bobby B. Dash, proceeding pro se, filed two related mandamus 

petitions, with the first one seeking to compel the respondent district judge to amend 

his orders denying relator’s motions for summary judgment and motion for 

protective order on discovery in the underlying trial court proceeding.

1

 This Court

 

1 The underlying proceeding is Bobby B. Dash v. Parc Lake Estates Homeowners 

Association, Inc., and Carl Edward Bovermann, John Mgbere, Tracy Hermann, 

Cause No. 2017-16096, in the 152nd District Court, Harris County, the Honorable 
2

assigned this first petition to appellate cause number 01-18-00653-CV and requested 

and received a response.

Then relator filed a second pro se mandamus petition seeking to compel the 

respondent district judge to allow an appeal or to grant a final judgment and he also 

requests an opinion on Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 166a(e) to determine whether 

the denial of his summary judgment motions is appealable. This Court assigned this

second petition to 01-18-00725-CV, but no response has been requested.

We deny both mandamus petitions. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a), (d).

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Keyes and Bland.

 

Robert K. Schaffer presiding. This Court previously dismissed for want of 

jurisdiction as moot relator’s similar mandamus petition. See In re Bobby B. Dash, 

No. 01-18-00350-CV, 2018 WL 3580944, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 

July 26, 2018, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (mem. op.) (dismissing petition 

seeking to compel the respondent to rule on relator’s pending motions).
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 8 (Tuesday, January 13, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1698-1699]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-417]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Center for Research Resources; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Center for Research Resources 
Special Emphasis Panel; SEPA SEP.
    Date: February 10, 2009.
    Time: 1 p.m. to 2 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, One Democracy Plaza, 6701 
Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Lee Warren Slice, PhD, Scientific Review 
Officer, Office of Review, National Center for Research Resources, 
Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-0965.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, 
Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research; 93.371, Biomedical 
Technology; 93.389, Research Infrastructure, 93.306, 93.333, 
National Institutes of Health, HHS)


[[Page 1699]]


    Dated: January 6, 2009.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
 [FR Doc. E9-417 Filed 1-12-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4742 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 6, 2006 

Received 

AN ACT 

To amend title 35, United States Code, to allow the Director 

of the Patent and Trademark Office to waive statutory 

provisions governing patents and trademarks in certain 

emergencies. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
2 

HR 4742 RDS

1 SECTION 1. WAIVER OF PATENT AND TRADEMARK RE2 QUIREMENTS IN CERTAIN EMERGENCIES. 

3 Section 2 of title 35, United States Code, is amended 

4 by adding at the end the following new subsection: 

5 ‘‘(e) WAIVER OF REQUIREMENTS IN CERTAIN EMER6 GENCIES.—The Director may waive statutory provisions 

7 governing the filing, processing, renewal, and maintenance 

8 of patents, trademark registrations, and applications 

9 therefor to the extent the Director deems necessary in 

10 order to protect the rights and privileges of applicants and 

11 other persons affected by an emergency or a major dis12 aster, as those terms are defined in section 102 of the 

13 Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assist14 ance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122). A decision not to exercise, or 

15 a failure to exercise, the waiver authority provided by this 

16 subsection shall not be subject to judicial review.’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives December 5, 

2006. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
Memorandum

To: Docket ATBCB 2010-0004, Transportation Vehicles

From: Melissa Anderson

Re: Ex Parte Communication with Dallas Smith Corp. 

Date: November 9, 2012

On November 9, 2012, representatives of the Access Board met with Mr. Garrett Smith, Dallas Smith Corp., 

Greencastle, IN and others as noted on the attached Attendee List, at the Washington Metropolitan 

Transportation Authority facilities, at 600 5th St. NW, Washington, DC for a vehicle review and discussion. Mr. 

Smith provided two vehicles for demonstration; a Chevrolet/GM 4500 cutaway chassis (14,200 GVWR) and a Ford 

F550 (19,500 GVWR) bare chassis which detailed some of the manufacturing processes when converting a chassis 

to a low floor vehicle.

The purpose of the meeting was to demonstrate the structural elements of these particular buses and how they 

affect the installation of ramps and the available floor space in the bus. The meeting began at approximately 9:00 

am ET with introductions and an explanation of the vehicles. Members of the group were allowed to access the 

fully constructed bus using the 1:6 ramp that had been installed. Observations were made regarding the 

movement of both manual and power wheelchair users entering, exiting and maneuvering within the bus.

The meeting was then moved into a meeting room in the building. Discussion followed regarding the structural 

constraints of the vehicles displayed and the ramp and floor elements as shown. Mr. Smith provided handouts, 

which are also attached, that show vehicle dimensions and drawings. Major areas of discussion were as follows:

1. The proposed maximum 1:6 ramp slope on buses (Proposed 36 CFR Parts 1192, T303.8) and the various 

methods of implementation and results seen by manufacturers, operators and users.

2. Availability of floor space for maneuvering in the vestibule of the bus and the elements that might affect 

it, such as floor slope, ramp location, fare box and driver position

3. The slope and flatness of the floor within the vestibule and detection of the slope change by persons who 

are visually impaired.

At the conclusion of the meeting, staff thanked Mr. Smith and others in attendance and noted that the meeting 

notes along with the meeting materials would be posted to the Docket.
People in Attendance

George Altevogt, Rohrer Bus Sales

Darren Back, Dallas Smith Corp.

Peter Stimbra, Parker Hannifin/Dallas Smith Corp.

Joel Badskey, Morryde International

Garry Ladner, Dallas Smith Corp.

David Knight, US Department of Justice

Steve Asztalos, Dallas Smith Corp

Jamie Lipka Campion Bus, Inc.

Corinna Sigsbury, WMATA

Carol Peredo Lopez, WMATA

Garrett Smith, Dallas Smith Corp.

Jamie Lipka, Champion Bus

David Capozzi, US Access Board

Marsha Mazz, US Access Board

Scott Windley, US Access Board

Melissa Anderson, US Access Board
109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4674

AN ACT

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 110 North Chestnut Street in Olathe, Kansas, 

as the ‘‘Governor John Anderson, Jr. Post Office Building’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2

•HR 4674 EH 

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

2 The facility of the United States Postal Service lo3 cated at 110 North Chestnut Street in Olathe, Kansas, 

4 shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Governor John An5 derson, Jr. Post Office Building’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

7 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

8 paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

9 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference 

10 to the ‘‘Governor John Anderson, Jr. Post Office Build11 ing’’.

Passed the House of Representatives May 2, 2006. 

Attest:

Clerk. 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4674

AN ACT

To designate the facility of the United States Postderson, Jr. Post Office Building’’. in Olathe, Kansas, as the ‘‘Governor John An- al Service located at 110 North Chestnut Street
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 19

- 10061 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v. FREDDIE STEVE SALGADO, also known as Freedy Salagado , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:17

- CR

- 112

- 3

Before STEWART, DENNIS, and HO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
The attorney appointed to represent Freddie Steve Salgado has moved
for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Salgado h a s not filed a respon se. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED January 9, 2020

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 19-10061 Document: 00515265621 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/09/2020No. 19

- 10061

2 appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the
APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2. Case: 19-10061 Document: 00515265621 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/09/2020