alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
OFFICIAL NOTICE FROM COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS P.O. BOX 12308, CAPITOL STATION, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711 

### OFFICIAL BUSINESS 

### STATE OF TEXASA PENALTY FOR

- ~ 

## 12/15/2014 PRIVATE USE '£:" 

# GOELLER, GE^Mey. Tr. Ct^Vo^O^M^kf^0FROM%°_§275V^01 On this cMWHQtaffcation for 11 CV^WnLof Habeas Corpus has been received 'Qourt. '' >, 1 Abel Acosta, Clerk
GERALD C. GOELLFR Q ^S^/" ^EEEmay PITNEY BOWES 

## 02 1M $ 00.26s 0004279596 DEC 1 8 2014 .MAILED FROM i

UTF
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                       3,363,300
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   57,306
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                           8,866
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (4,444)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,480,987
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           72,341
<BONDS>                                      4,154,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         6,855
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,048,125
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,480,987
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                21,118
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  604,137
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             137,887
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (720,906)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (720,906)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 74,035
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (646,871)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.10
        

</TABLE>
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed April 23 ,

2024.

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 24

- 00171

- CV

YUN ATKINSON , Appellant

V.
EQY INVEST OWNERII, LTD, LLP , Appellee

On Appeal from the 152nd District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2019

- 31350

MEMORANDUM OPINION This is an appeal from a judgment signed February 15, 2024. On March 28, 2024, appellant filed a motion to dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1. The motion is granted.
We dismiss the appeal

. PER CURIAM

Panel c onsists of Justices Jewell, Bourliot , and Poissant.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Nico LeGrand, Appellant.

Submitted January 8, 2007;

decided January 11, 2007

*836Motion by Innocence Project, Inc. for leave to appear amicus curiae on the appeal herein granted only to the extent that the proposed brief is. accepted as filed. Two copies of the brief may be served and 24 copies filed within seven days.
# C_2021258EN.01000301.xml

| 2.7.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 258/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.7.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 258/3

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10352 — CNP/UniCredit/Aviva Life/Aviva S.p.A.)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 258/03)

On 28 June 2021, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32021M10352. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32021M10352. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
# C_2021099EN.01000201.xml

| 23.3.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 99/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.3.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 99/2

---

Notice for the attention of persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/1999, as amended by Council Decision (CFSP) 2021/481 and in Council Regulation (EU) 2020/1998, as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/478 concerning restrictive measures against serious human rights violations and abuses

(2021/C 99/02)

The following information is brought to the attention of the persons that appear in the Annex to Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/1999 (1), as amended by Council Decision (CFSP) 2021/481 (2), and in Annex I to Council Regulation (EU) 2020/1998 (3) as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/478 (4), concerning restrictive measures against serious human rights violations and abuses.

The Council of the European Union has decided that those persons should be included on the list of persons subject to restrictive measures provided for in Decision (CFSP) 2020/1999 and Regulation (EU) 2020/1998. The grounds for designations 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 in the websites in Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2020/1998, in order to obtain an authorisation to use frozen funds for basic needs or specific payments (cf. Article 4 of the Regulation).

The persons concerned may submit a request to the Council before 31 October 2021, 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 |
| RELEX.1.C |
| Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175 |
| 1048 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

Council of the European Union

General Secretariat

RELEX.1.C

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 periodic review, pursuant to Article 10 of Decision (CFSP) 2020/1999, of the list of designated persons and entities.

---

(1)  OJ L 410 I, 7.12.2020, p. 13.

(2)  OJ L 99 I, 22.3.2021, p. 25.

(3)  OJ L 410 I, 7.12.2020, p. 1.

(4)  OJ L 99 I, 22.3.2021, p. 1.

---
CIVILIAN

Complainant, upon receipt of  Report of Investigation,  may select one option;

Option #3

Proceed to 

District Court 

provided  

180 calendar 

days have 

elapsed since 

filing formal 

complaint

Option #3

Proceed to 

District Court 

provided  

180 calendar 

days have 

elapsed since 

filing formal 

complaint

Option #2

Within 30 

calendar 

days, 

request a 

hearing and 

decision 

from EEOC

Option #2

Within 30 

calendar 

days, 

request a 

hearing and 

decision 

from EEOC

Civil Rights Service Provider

has 30 calendar days to inquire,

resolve, or issue a notice of right 

to file (NRTF) a formal complaint

Civil Rights Service Provider

has 30 calendar days to inquire,

resolve, or issue a notice of right 

to file (NRTF) a formal complaint

Option #1

Within 

30 calendar 

days, request 

final agency 

decision by 

DHS with 

appeal rights 

to EEOC

Option #1

Within 

30 calendar 

days, request 

final agency 

decision by 

DHS with 

appeal rights 

to EEOC

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

is offered throughout the EEO/EO 

complaint process. Timeline can be 

extended both

at the informal (for 60 calendar days) 

and the formal (for 

90 calendar days)

stages

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

is offered throughout the EEO/EO 

complaint process. Timeline can be 

extended both

at the informal (for 60 calendar days) 

and the formal (for 

90 calendar days)

stages

Command has 15

attempt r

Upon filing a for

Coast Gu

180 calendar da

formal inve

Commandant (or 

Final Agenc

(FA

within 60 cal

of Report of I

Commandant (or 

Final Agenc

(FA

within 60 cal

of Report of I

Complainant has 3

from receipt of FA

with 

Complainant contacts

Civil Rights Service Provider

within 

45 calendar days

of the action giving 

rise to the complaint

Complainant contacts

Civil Rights Service Provider

within 

45 calendar days

of the action giving 

rise to the complaint Civil Rights Se

has 30 calendar

resolve, or issue a

file (NRTF) a fo

Civil Rights Se

has 30 calendar

resolve, or issue a

file (NRTF) a fo

Complainant ha

days to file a fo

Complainant has 15 calendar 

days to file a formal complaint

Upon filing a formal Complaint

Coast Guard has

180 calendar days to complete 

formal investigation

EEO/EO DISCRIMINATION COMPLAINT PROCESS
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

TINITED STATES COAST GUARI)

UNITED STATES OF AMERJCA

ress of Administrarive La\r Judge Docketing Cenler:

ALJ Docketing Center

U.S. Custom House

40 South Gay Street, Room 414

Baltimore, MD 212024022

Email: alidcxketcenter:n uscs.mil

Phone: (410) 962-5100

Toll Free: (866) 612-7 524 !6IA-SKCGI

Fax: (410) 962-1746

Toll Free Fax 877 243-3453 CGE.FILE

Add

COMPLAINANT:

T]NITED STATES COAST GUARI)

RESPONDENT: Ija Rashard Watson DOCKET NI,\4BER ]O].].OO,IS

WITHDRAWAL FRONI DOCKET CG ENFORCEMENT ACTI\'Iry NUMBER

76175-11

The Coast Guard initiated an administrative proceeding by filing a Complaint on February I l,

2023, seeking Revocation of Respondent's Merchant Mariner Credential.

On February 24, 2023, the Coast Guard filed a Notice of Withdrawal from docket as:

The Respondent signed a Voluntary Sunender Agreement under 46 CFR$ 5.203.

This matter is removed from the docket and closed without prejudice effective this date.

Done and Dated March 1,2023 at

Baltimore, MD

l-au4brW. 74k rLauren M. Meus

Hearing Docket Clerk

U.S. Coast Guard

By Direction of the Chief Administrative Law

Judge
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> US DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-29-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-29-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                      39,549,654
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                 15,366,745
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            57,217,993
<PP&E>                                      46,815,346
<DEPRECIATION>                              15,093,868
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              89,022,457
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       19,654,654
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    40,667,571
<OTHER-SE>                                  26,609,960
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                89,022,457
<SALES>                                    168,948,553
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           168,948,553
<CGS>                                      103,998,031
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              103,998,031
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            44,748,988
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              32,086
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             21,134,274
<INCOME-TAX>                                 7,633,600
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         13,500,674
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                13,500,674
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.46
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.38


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2307 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2307

 To validate final patent number 27-2005-0081, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 13, 2015

  Mr. Hardy introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To validate final patent number 27-2005-0081, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. FINAL PATENT AND LAND RECONFIGURATION IN CLARK COUNTY AND 
              LINCOLN COUNTY, NEVADA.

    (a) In General.--Patent number 27-2005-0081 and the associated land 
reconfiguration issued by the Bureau of Land Management on February 18, 
2005, as depicted on the map prepared by the Bureau of Land Management 
entitled ``Lincoln County Land Patent'' and dated December 4, 2014, is 
affirmed and validated as having been issued pursuant to, and in 
compliance with, the Nevada-Florida Land Exchange Authorization Act of 
1988 (Public Law 100-275; 102 Stat. 52), the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), and the Federal Land 
Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) for the 
benefit of the desert tortoise, other species, and the habitat of the 
desert tortoise and other species to increase the likelihood of the 
recovery of the desert tortoise and other species.
    (b) Issuance of Lincoln County Patent.--
            (1) In general.--The Director of the Bureau of Land 
        Management may issue a patent for 7,548 acres of land in 
        Lincoln County, Nevada, that is--
                    (A) depicted on the map described in subsection 
                (a); and
                    (B) described in the legal description of the 
                proposed lease and fee land on file in the Ely District 
                Office of the Bureau of Land Management.
            (2) Applicable law.--A patent issued under paragraph (1) 
        shall be considered to have been issued pursuant to, and in 
        compliance with, the Nevada-Florida Land Exchange Authorization 
        Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-275; 102 Stat. 52).
    (c) Ratification of Reconfiguration.--The process used by the 
United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the Bureau of Land 
Management in reconfiguring the land described in subsection (a), as 
depicted on Exhibit 1-4 of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for 
the Planned Development Project MSHCP, Lincoln County, NV (FWS-R8-ES-
2008-N0136) and the reconfiguration provided for in Special Condition 
10 of Army Corps of Engineers Permit No. 200125042 are ratified.
                                 <all>
```
Listen

# Advisory Committees Reports

The findings and recommendations contained in these reports are the views of a majority of the members of the advisory committees that produced them and do not necessarily represent the views of the Commission, its individual members, nor the policies of the United States government.

Seizing Property: Civil Asset Forfeiture in South Carolina
November 29, 2022

Interim Memorandum on Access to Voting in Tennessee
November 15, 2022

Civil Asset Forfeiture and its Impact on Communities of Color in Georgia
November 9, 2022

Interim Memorandum on Mental Health Care within the Texas Juvenile Justice System
October 17, 2022

Water Affordability in Maryland
July 27, 2022

Civil Rights and Fair Housing in Illinois
June 29, 2022

Massachusetts Advisory Committee Interim Memo on Civil Asset Forfeiture
June 6, 2022

Memo on Civil Asset Forfeiture in South Carolina
May 2, 2022

Zoning Practices in Connecticut
April 11, 2022

Racial Discrimination and Eviction Policies and Enforcement in New York
March 10, 2022

-    First  
-    Previous  
-  1 
-  2 
-  3 
-  4 
-  5 
-   ...  
-   Next  
-   Last  

-  All Reports 
-  Annual Statutory Enforcement 
-  Briefing Reports 
-  Advisory Committees Reports 
-  Budget and Performance 
-  FOIA Reports 
-  Data Inventory Program 
-  Civil Rights Complaints 
-  Historical Publications 
-  Archives
<!--/* //NOSONAR */--><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<!--/* //NOSONAR */--><html  lang="en-US">
<head id="Head"><meta id="MetaDescription" name="DESCRIPTION" /><meta id="MetaKeywords" name="KEYWORDS" /><meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width,initial-scale=1" /><title>
	Alaska (D17)
</title><link id="css3605" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/DesktopModules/ArticleCS/module.css" /><link id="css4619" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/desktopmodules/ArticleCS/styles/DOD2/style.css" /></head>
<body>
    <main>
    <div>
    <div class="aprint factsheet">
    <div class="header">

        <img height="100" class="print-logo" alt="Site Logo" src="/Portals/0/Images/Official USCG Emblem.png?ver=0BEUcC5lxfanFqthfDyaOg%3d%3d" />

        <h1 class="title">Alaska (D17)</h1>
        <h3 class="date">
            Updated: June 27, 2018
        </h3>
    </div>
    
<div id="adetail-slick-gallery" class="gallery">
    
    <div class="item">
        
        <div class="image">
            
            <img src="https://media.defense.gov/2018/Jun/27/2001936336/1920/1080/0/180627-G-OY189-717.PNG"
                 class="aimage img-responsive"
                 alt="District 17: Alaska"
                 itemprop="image" />
        </div>
        
        
        
        
        
        <div class="slide-info-hidden">
            <div class="slide-info-inner">
            
            <div class="image-title">District 17</div>
            <div class="image-caption">District 17: Alaska</div>
        </div>
    </div>
    </div>

    
</div>
<div class="slide-info"></div>





    Seventh District Command Center Number: <span>(907) 463-2000 - For maritime emergency use only </span><br />
</div>

    </div>
    </main>
</body>
</html>
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS Appeal of

-- Sparta Inc. Under Contract No. HQ0006-06-F-0002 

### et al. APPEARANCES FORTHE APPELLANT:

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: ) ) ) ASBCA No. 59937 ) ) Kevin J. Slattum, Esq. Mary E. Buxton, Esq.

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP Los Angeles, CA E. Michael Chiaparas, Esq.

DCMA ChiefTrial Attorney Carol L. Matsunaga, Esq.

Senior Trial Attorney Defense Contract ManagementAgency Carson, CA ORDER OF DISMISSAL The dispute has been settled. The appeal is dismiss_ed with prejudice. Dated: 24 November 2015

Administrative Judge Acting Chairman Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals I certify that the foregoing is a true copy ofthe Order ofDismissal ofthe Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals in ASBCA No. 59937, Appeal ofSparta Inc., rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. Dated:
JEFFREY D. GARDIN Recorder, Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals
#### Metropolitan Switch Board Manufacturing Company, Inc., Appellant, v B & G Electrical Contractors, Division of B & G Industries, Inc., Respondent.

[946 NYS2d 178]

In an action to recover in quantum meruit, the plaintiff ap*726peals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Baisley, Jr., J.), entered October 4, 2011, which, upon a decision of the same court dated September 26, 2011, made after a nonjury trial, is in favor of the defendant and against it on the defendant’s counterclaim alleging breach of contract in the principal sum of $99,370.92.

Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the law, by reducing the award from the principal sum of $99,370.92 to the principal sum of $4,370.92; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for the entry of an appropriate amended judgment.

In reviewing a determination made after a nonjury trial, the power of this Court is as broad as that of the trial court, and this Court may render the judgment it finds “warranted by the facts,” bearing in mind that in a close case, the trial judge had the advantage of seeing the witnesses and hearing the testimony *(Northern Westchester Professional Park Assoc. v Town of Bedford,*60 NY2d 492, 499 [1983]).

The Supreme Court properly found that the plaintiff failed to establish a claim in quantum meruit. The plaintiff could not recover in quantum meruit in light of the existence of an enforceable contract governing the subject matter *(see Clark-Fitzpatrick, Inc. v Long Is. R.R. Co.,*70 NY2d 382, 388-389 [1987]; *cf. A. Montilli Plumbing & Heating Corp. v Valentino,*90 AD3d 961, 962 [2011]; *Wehrum v Illmensee,*74 AD3d 796, 797 [2010]).

The Supreme Court properly determined that the defendant was entitled to recover damages from the plaintiff on its counterclaim alleging breach of contract. The defendant showed, by a preponderance of the credible evidence, that the plaintiff breached its contract with the defendant *(see Tri-Mar Contrs. v Itco Drywall,*74 AD2d 601, 602 [1980]). Consequently, the defendant is entitled to be made whole and should recover the cost of completing the work that was the subject of the contract and correcting the defects in the plaintiffs work *(see Kaufman v Le Curt Constr. Corp.,*196 AD2d 577, 578 [1993]; *Tri-Mar Contrs. v Itco Drywall,*74 AD2d at 602-603). At the same time, the plaintiff may set *off,*against the defendant’s recovery, the unpaid balance of what was due to it under the contract *(see Tri-Mar Contrs. v Itco Drywall,*74 AD2d at 603). Here, we determine that the defendant was entitled to recover the principal sum of $4,370.92, representing the difference between the contract price and the defendant’s total cost, and we modify the judgment accordingly *(id.).*

*727The plaintiffs remaining contentions are without merit. Dillon, J.P., Dickerson, Hall and Sgroi, JJ., concur.