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

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Transportation

###### Federal Aviation Administration

          - 14 CFR Part 71
          - [Airspace Docket No. 2001-ASW-03] 

# AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

# ACTION:

 Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date.

# SUMMARY:

This document confirms the effective date of a direct final rule which establishes the Class E Airspace at Sugar Land, TX.

# EFFECTIVE DATE:

The direct final rule published at 66 FR 9909 is effective 0901 UTC, May 17, 2001.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Donald J. Day, Airspace Branch, Air Traffic Division, Southwest Region, Federal Aviation Administration, Fort Worth, TX 76193-0520, telephone: 817-222-5593.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The FAA published this direct final rule with a request for comments in the                     **Federal Register**                     on February 13, 2001, (66 FR 9909). The FAA uses the direct final rulemaking procedure for a noncontroversial rule where the FAA believes that there will be no adverse public comment. This direct final rule advised the public that no adverse comments were anticipated, and that unless a written adverse comment, or a written notice of intent to submit such an adverse comment, were received within the comment period, the regulation would become effective on May 17, 2001. No adverse comments were received, and, thus, this action confirms that this direct final rule will be effective on that date.                

Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on April 5, 2001.

Robert N. Stevens,

Acting Manager, Air Traffic Division, Southwest Region.

[FR Doc. 01-10130  Filed 4-23-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>            5
<MULTIPLIER>         1,000

<CAPTION>






                     EXHIBIT 27 - FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE
Article 5

The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Monarch
Services, Inc.'s audited financial statements for the Fiscal Year ended April
30, 2000, and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements and the notes thereto.

<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                     12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                 Apr-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                    May-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                      Apr-30-2000
<CASH>                                                  8,422
<SECURITIES>                                               32
<RECEIVABLES>                                             282
<ALLOWANCES>                                               52
<INVENTORY>                                                 0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                        8,874
<PP&E>                                                    659
<DEPRECIATION>                                            447
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                          9,100
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                   1,811
<BONDS>                                                     0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                       0
<PREFERRED>                                                 0
<COMMON>                                                  527
<OTHER-SE>                                              3,378
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                            9,100
<SALES>                                                 4,001
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                        4,363
<CGS>                                                   2,776
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                           3,558
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                            0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                          0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                           805
<INCOME-TAX>                                              301
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                       504
<DISCONTINUED>                                           (230)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                             0
<CHANGES>                                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                                              274
<EPS-BASIC>                                             .17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                             .17


</TABLE>
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

PATRICIO AL EJANDRO CASTANED A

,

Appellant

,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

,

State

. §

§

§

§

§

§

§

'

' No. 08

- 1 4

- 00192

- CR

Appeal from the

41 st Judicial District Court

of El Paso County , Texas

(TC# 20100D04935 )

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the Appellant ’s fourth motion for extension of time to file the brief

until Janu ary 7

, 201 5

. NO FURTHER MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE THE

APPELLANT ’S BRIEF WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that the Hon. Charle s L. Roberts , the Appellant ’s Attorney, prepare

the Appellant ’s brief and forward the same to this Court on or before January 7 , 201 5

.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 5 th day of January , 201 5

.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure, CJ, Rodriguez and Hughes, JJ

.
**Exhibit
24**
 
 **POWER
OF ATTORNEY**
  KNOW ALL
PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS that each person whose signature appears below
constitutes and appoints Thomas F. Karam and David J. Kvapil, or any of them,
acting individually or together, as such person's true and lawful
attorney(s)-in-fact and agent(s), with full power of substitution and
revocation, to act in any capacity for such person and in such person's name,
place and stead in any and all capacities, to sign the Transition Report on Form
10-K for the six-month period ended December 31, 2004 of Southern Union Company,
a Delaware corporation, and any amendments thereto, and to file the same with
all exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection therewith, with the
Securities and Exchange Commission and the New York Stock Exchange.
 
 Dated:
March 15, 2005
  
 GEORGE
      L. LINDEMANN
    ADAM
      M. LINDEMANNGeorge
      L. Lindemann
    Adam
      M. LindemannJOHN
      E. BRENNAN
    DAVID
      BRODSKYJohn
      E. Brennan
    David
      BrodskyTHOMAS
      F. KARAM
    GEORGE
      ROUNTREE, IIIThomas
      F. Karam
    George
      Rountree, IIIFRANK
      W. DENIUS
    RONALD
      W. SIMMSFrank
      W. Denius
    Ronald
      W. SimmsKURT
      A. GITTER, M.D.
    HERBERT
      H. JACOBIKurt
      A. Gitter, M.D.
    Herbert
      H. JacobiTHOMAS
      N. McCARTER, IIIThomas
      N. McCarter, III
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6470 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 6470

For the relief of the peoples of Bikini, Enewetak, Rongelap, and Utrik, 
and of other affected citizens of the Republic of the Marshall Islands.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            December 1, 2010

  Mr. Faleomavaega (for himself, Mr. Ackerman, Ms. Bordallo, and Mr. 
   Sablan) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
For the relief of the peoples of Bikini, Enewetak, Rongelap, and Utrik, 
and of other affected citizens of the Republic of the Marshall Islands.

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

SECTION 1. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS.

    The Secretary of the Treasury shall pay, out of any monies in the 
Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to the peoples of Bikini, 
Enewetak, Rongelap, and Utrik, and to other affected citizens of the 
Marshall Islands, respectively, or to their respectively designated 
representatives, the sum of $___________, for the benefit of and 
distribution to the people of Bikini, the people of Enewetak, the 
people of Rongelap, the people of Utrik, respectively, and all other 
citizens of the Marshall Islands affected as a result of the United 
States atmospheric nuclear weapons testing program conducted in the 
Marshall Islands between June 30, 1946, and August 18, 1958. The 
payment of such sum shall be in full satisfaction of all claims against 
the United States of the peoples of Bikini, Enewetak, Rongelap, and 
Utrik, and all claims of other citizens of the Republic of the Marshall 
Islands, based on, arising out of, or in any way related to such 
atmospheric nuclear weapons testing program.
                                 <all>
```
HYNES & HOWES INSURANCE COUNSELORS, INC.
                          Notes to Financial Statements
                           September 30, 1997 and 1996



Note 4.  Other Current Assets: (continued)

         (B)  Sale of Tanglefoot Apartments:


              On March 1, 1993, Tanglefoot Apartment Complex was sold on
              contract to R. Dale Wiege.  The  sale price was $1,620,000 with a
              down payment of $30,000 and the balance of $1,590,000 is to be
              paid by monthly payments commencing April 1, 1993 until March 1,
              2013 when the entire remaining balance shall be due and payable in
              full.  The monthly payment of principal and interest is to be
              $13,953.  Interest is at the rate of 10% per annum commencing
              March 1, 1993.  The contract balance at September 30, 1996 was
              $1,557,240.

              On February 5, 1997, the entire contract balance in the amount of
              $1,552,984 was paid in full.  The proceeds from this payoff were
              used to pay the mortgage payable on the apartments (See Note 7)
              and to purchase thirteen (13) real estate contracts receivable
              (See Note 4C).


         (C)  Real Estate Contracts Receivable:

              During the year ended September 30, 1995, the Company purchased
              from Walnut Management four (4) real estate contracts receivable.
              The total purchase price was $129,103.  The balances on these
              contracts at September 30, 1996 were $127,675.

              During the year ended September 30, 1995, the Company purchased
              from Walnut Management thirteen (13) real estate contracts
              receivable.  The total purchase price was $526,413.  Also during
              the year ended September 30, 1997, four (4) of the above
              properties being sold on real estate contract were repossessed.
              Three (3) of these repossessed properties were resold on contract.
              One (1) resale resulted in a loss of $8,568.  One (1) repossessed
              property with a contract balance of $31,848 was transferred to
              Real Estate on Hand.  A sale of this property is pending at
              September 30, 1997.  (See Note 1).

              At September 30, 1997, there are sixteen (16) contracts receivable
              with a combined balance $621,241.  The monthly payments of
              principal and interest is $6,829.  Interest rates on these
              contracts varies from 11% to 16% per annum.

              Management is of the opinion that an allowance for
              uncollectibility is not necessary due to the collateral value of
              the houses.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Joseph Reed, Appellant.

Appeal from the judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Jay Gold, J.), rendered on or about November 18, 1986, convicting defendant, after trial by jury, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree and sentencing him to a term of three years to life, is held in abeyance, the order of the same court, entered on or about February 11, 1987, denying defendant’s motion to vacate the judgment pursuant to CPL 440.10, modified, on the law, and the matter remanded for a hearing as to whether defendant’s attorney failed to pursue plea-bargaining negotiations or convey to defendant the results thereof and whether counsel failed to investigate the defense that five witnesses, arrested with defendant, would have exonerated him.

Defendant moved to vacate the judgment against him, alleging that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel at trial. Among the contentions advanced were that, due to a payment dispute, counsel neglected to investigate whether five persons arrested with defendant, whose names and addresses were available in police records, would have exonerated him of any involvement in the possession of narcotics. It was also alleged that trial counsel refused to engage in plea bargaining, rejecting plea offers in. the absence of consultation with, and knowledge of, defendant.

A defendant’s right to effective representation includes the assistance of an attorney who has undertaken an adequate investigation of both the law and the facts *(People v Gega,*69 AD2d 772). In addition, the failure to convey accurate information regarding plea negotiations is a factor which will support a finding of ineffective assistance of counsel *(People v Dell,*60 AD2d 18). However, the trial court denied defendant’s coram nobis motion without conducting a hearing into the alleged omissions by his attorney. On this appeal, the People agree that a hearing is required on these issues. We therefore remand for a hearing at which testimony can be received from counsel regarding the basis for his actions at trial. Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Rosenberger, Ellerin and Rubin, JJ.
1

07
- 04 08
- cv C l aude v. P ei kes 1 U N IT E D S T A T E S C O U R T O F A P P E A LS 2 3 F O R T H E S E C O N D C IR C U IT 4 5

____________________________________ 6 7 August Term, 2007 8 9 (Argued: J uly

17, 2008 Dec ided: J uly 25, 2008) 10 11 Docke t No. 07-0408-c v 12 13

____________________________________ 14 15 PHENOL CL AUDE, 16 17 Plaintif f-Appellant , 18 19 – v. – 20 21 RONAL D D. PEI KES, COUNTRYWI DE HOME L OANS, I NC., 22 23 De fe nd an ts- Ap pe lle es. 24 25

____________________________________ 26 27 Be fore : NEWMAN, CAL AB RESI , and PARKER, Circ uit J ud ge s. 28 29

____________________________________ 30 31 Appea l from a Judgment of the United States District Court for the D istrict of 32 Connecticut (Ne vas, J. ) a pp ro vin gthe ma g ist

rate jud g e ’s re c omm e nd atio n th at Pla int if f’ s c la ims 33 be dismissed. 34 AFF I RMED.
35

_

________________________ 362 1 PHENOL CL AUDE, H ampton, Conn., pr o s e . 2 3 MI CHAEL A. GEORGETT I , Har

tford, Conn., for

De fe nd an t4 AppelleeRonald D. Peike s 5 6 Z eichne r Ellman & Kra use L L P, Gree nwich, Conn., for De fe nd an t7 AppelleeCountrywide Home Loans
. 8

_____________________________________ 9 10 PER

CU RIAM : 11 Pla int if

f- Ap pe lla nt C la ud e Phe no l a

pp e a ls pro se from a D istrict Court order a dopting the 12 rec ommendation of the mag istrate judg e and dismissing his cla ims ag ainst Defe ndant-Appe llees 13 on

the g ro un ds that hi s c la ims are tim e -b arr e d a nd he nc e su bje c t to dis mis sa l un de r F e de ra l Ru le 14 of Civil P roce dure 12( b)(6) . We affir m the decision of the D istrict Court for essentially the 15 rea sons give n by

the mag istrate judg e. 16 Appellant ar g ues that the District Court did not meet its statutory duty to reviewthe 17 mag istrate’s r ecommenda tion de novo . There is, however , nothing to sug g est that the district 18 c ourt

did any thi ngle ss. In s imi lar c a se s, the Ei g hth and the Te nth

Cir c uit s h ave pe rs ua siv e ly 19 argued that we should “presume that the district court ha s made a de novo re vie w unle ss 20 aff

irmative evide nce indica

tes otherwise .” Ho sn a v . G ro os e , 80 F.3d 298, 306 ( 8th Cir. 1996); 21 se e als o B ra tc he r v . B ra y -D oy leIn de

p. Sc h. Di

st. , 8 F .3 d 7 22 , 7 24 (1 0th Cir . 1 99 3) (s tatin gthat a 22 district court is presumed to ha ve conduc ted a de novo revie w of a mag istrate judg e’s r eport a nd 23 re c omm e nd atio n “ a bs e nt s ome c le ar i nd ic atio n o the rw ise ” ). F or su bs tanti a lly

the re a so ns g ive n in 24 those opinions, we adopt the same rule he re. 25 We h ave c on sid e re d a ll o f A pp e lla nt’ s a rgume nts and

fo un d th e m me ri tle ss. Ac c or din g ly the judg ment of the District Court is AFF I RMED.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 11.1


                 COMPUTATION OF PRO FORMA NET INCOME PER SHARE

<TABLE>
<S>                                                                <C>
Weighted average common shares                                     1,331,976

Conversion of Preferred Stock to Common Stock                      2,667,002

Options issued within one year of the initial filing date 
  of the S-1 Registration Statement using the treasury 
  stock method                                                        75,682(1) 

All other options outstanding using the treasury stock method        176,524(2)
                                                                   ---------
    Total weighted average shares outstanding                      4,251,184

    Net income                                                       656,945
                                                                   ---------
Pro forma net income per share                                     $     .15
                                                                   =========
</TABLE>

------------
<TABLE>
<S>                                            <C>
(1)  Options issued in one year window:         138,750(a)

       Exercise price                            x$5.00
                                               --------
       Gross proceeds                          $ 693,750
        
       Repurchase price                         +$11.00
                                               --------
       Shares repurchased                        63,068(b)
                                               ========
       Net shares (a)-(b)                        75,682
                                               ========

(2)  All other options:                         236,512

       Weighted average exercise price           x 2.79
                                               --------
       Gross proceeds                          $659,868

       Repurchase price                        $     11
                                               --------       
       Shares repurchased                        59,988(b)
                                               ========
       Net shares (a)-(b)                       176,524
                                               ========
</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Form 10-K
financial statements filed for the period ending December 31, 1996 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           7,089
<SECURITIES>                                    33,440
<RECEIVABLES>                                   29,367
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      1,462
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                80,030
<PP&E>                                          40,033
<DEPRECIATION>                                  29,017
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 178,244
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           22,034
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           716
<OTHER-SE>                                     153,480
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   178,244
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               100,248
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   74,434
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                31,511
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 285
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (2,175)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    (3,437)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (5,612)
<DISCONTINUED>                                   4,246
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1,366)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.21)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.21)
        

</TABLE>
PACIFIC SECURITY FINANCIAL, INC.
                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                 CERTIFICATIONS
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-EXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Annual Report of Pacific Security Financial, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended July 31, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, David L.
Guthrie, President, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant
to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

         (1)  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 result of
              operations of the Company.


Dated: October 27, 2003



/s/ Donald J. Migliuri
------------------------------
Donald J. Migliuri, Treasurer
June 27, 2013

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

ERRON KEITH NOLLEY, Appellant

NO. 14-12-00394-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

____________________

This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below, and 

having inspected the record, this Court holds there was no error in the judgment 

requiring reversal, but there was error in the judgment as entered, which is capable 

of reformation by this Court. Therefore, the judgment is REFORMED, to read as 

provided in this Court’s opinion.

The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED as REFORMED, and further 

orders this decision certified below for observance.