alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 107 (Friday, June 3, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 33753]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-11937]


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

COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR SEVERELY DISABLED


Procurement List; Proposed Deletions

AGENCY: Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely 
Disabled.

ACTION: Proposed deletion from the Procurement List.

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

SUMMARY: The Committee is proposing to delete a service(s) from the 
Procurement List that was furnished by nonprofit agencies employing 
persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before: July 3, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely 
Disabled, 1401 S Clark Street, Suite 715, Arlington, Virginia 22202-
4149.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information or to submit 
comments contact: Michael R. Jurkowski, Telephone: (703) 785-6404, or 
email <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#5d1e1009181b38390f383a1d1c3f3431342924123338733a322b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d59698819093b0b187b0b29594b7bcb9bca1ac9abbb0fbb2baa3">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice is published pursuant to 41 
U.S.C. 8503 (a)(2) and 41 CFR 51-2.3. Its purpose is to provide 
interested persons an opportunity to submit comments on the proposed 
actions.

Deletions

    The following service is proposed for deletion from the Procurement 
List:

Service(s)

Service Type: Janitorial/Custodial Service
Mandatory for: U.S. Army Reserve, New Kensington Memorial USARC/BMA 
106, 2450 Leechburg Road, New Kensington, PA
Designated Source of Supply: Beaver County Association for the 
Blind, Beaver Falls, PA
Contracting Activity: DEPT OF THE ARMY, W6QK ACC-PICA

Michael R. Jurkowski,
Acting Director, Business Operations.
[FR Doc. 2022-11937 Filed 6-2-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6353-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Court of Appeals 

First District of Texas 

BILL OF COSTS

No. 01-14-00478-CV

Madhuri Bondyopadhyay and Probir K. Bondyopadhyay 

v.

Bank of New York Mellon fka Bank fo New York, as Trustee for the Certificationholders of the 

CWABS, Inc. Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2007-SEA2

NO. 2013-17412 IN THE 157TH DISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY

TYPE OF FEE CHARGES PAID/DUE STATUS PAID BY

MT FEE

MT FEE

CLK RECORD

STATEWIDE EFILING

FILING

$10.00

$10.00

$120.00

$20.00

$175.00

10/02/2014

07/28/2014

07/28/2014

07/01/2014

07/01/2014

NOT PAID

PAID

PAID

PAID

PAID

ANT

ANT

ANT

ANT

ANT

The costs incurred on appeal to the First Court of Appeals Houston, Texas are 

$335.00.

Court costs in this case have been taxed in this Court’s judgment

I, Christopher A. Prine, Clerk of the Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas, do hereby 

certify that this is a true statement of the costs of appeal in this case.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, witness my 

hand and the seal of the Court of Appeals for the 

First District of Texas, this February 6, 2015.
Exhibit 10.69

 

FIRST AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

 

Pursuant to Section 7(c) of the Employment Agreement (the “Agreement”) dated February 17, 2010, by and between Clean Energy Fuels Corp., Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”) and Barclay F. Corbus, an individual (the “Executive”) (collectively, the “Parties”), the Parties hereby adopt the following amendment to the Agreement, to be effective as of the date specified below. Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined shall have the meaning ascribed to such terms in the Agreement.  All other terms and conditions of the Agreement that are not modified below shall continue to remain in full force and effect.

 

The first sentence of Section 2 of the Agreement is restated in its entirety to read as follows:

 

“Employer agrees to employ Employee and Employee agrees to serve Employer, in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, for a term commencing on the Effective Date and ending on December 31, 2015 (the “Term”).”

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this amendment to the Agreement to be duly executed, to be effective as of February 17, 2012.

 

	
 
    	
“EMPLOYER”
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
CLEAN ENERGY FUELS CORP.,
    
	
 
    	
a Delaware corporation
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
By:
    	
/s/ Andrew J. Littlefair
    
	
 
    	
Name:
    	
Andrew J. Littlefair
    
	
 
    	
Title:
    	
Chief Executive Officer
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
“EMPLOYEE”
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
/s/ Barclay F. Corbus
    
	
 
    	
Barclay F. Corbus
July 20, 2017

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

GEOFFREY S. LANCASTER, Appellant

NO. 14-17-00246-CV V.

DANIEL VERDIN, INDIVIDUALLY AND D/B/A VERDE DESIGN + BUILD, 

Appellee

________________________________

Today the Court heard appellant's motion to dismiss the appeal from the 

judgment signed by the court below on February 28, 2017. Having considered the 

motion and found it meritorious, we order the appeal DISMISSED.

We further order that all costs incurred by reason of this appeal be paid by 

appellant, Geoffrey S. Lancaster.

We further order that mandate be issued immediately.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
Jeffrey Lance HILL, Sr., Petitioner, v. Leandra G. JOHNSON, et al.

No. 19-994.

Supreme Court of the United States.

April 6, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
**Exhibit 21**

** **

**Subsidiariesof****J.B.POINDEXTER & CO., INC.**

 

All subsidiaries are owned100%, either directly or indirectly, by J.B. Poindexter & Co., Inc.

 

(1)               EFP Corporation, a Delaware corporation,which also operates under the name Engineered Foam Plastics.

 

(2)               Lowy Group, Inc., a Delaware corporation.

 

(3)               Magnetic Instruments Corp., a Delawarecorporation, which  also operates underthe name MIC Group;  in addition,Magnetic Instruments Corp. has the following subsidiaries:

 

(a)        SWKHoldings, Inc. a Texas corporation; and

 

(b)        UniversalBrixius, Inc., a Wisconsin corporation.

 

(4)               Morgan Trailer Mfg. Co., a New Jerseycorporation, which also operates under the name Morgan Corporation;  in addition, Morgan Trailer Mfg. Co. has the following subsidiaries:

 

(a)                        Morgan Trailer Financial Corporation, a Nevada corporation; and

 

(b)                       Morgan Trailer Financial Management, L.P., a Texas Limited partnership.

 

(5)               Truck Accessories Group, Inc., a Delawarecorporation, f/k/a Leer, Inc., f/k/a Leer Holdings Inc., which also operatesunder the following names:

 

(a)                        TAG;

 

(b)                       20th Century Fiberglass;

 

(c)                        Century Fiberglass;

 

(d)                       Century;

 

(e)                        Leer;

 

(f)       Leer Corporate;

 

(g)                       Leer East;

 

(h)                       Leer Midwest;

 

(i)        LeerRetail;

 

(j)                         Leer Southeast;

 

(k)                        Leer Specialty Products;

 

(l)                         Leer Truck Accessory Centers;

 

(m)                     Leer West;

 

(n)                       Mid West Truck Accessories; and

 

(o)                       Pace Edwards; and

 

in addition, Raider Industries, Inc., a Saskatchewan, Canadacorporation, is a subsidiary of Truck Accessories Group, Inc. and operatesunder the following names:

 

(a)                        Lo Rider;

 

(b)                       Raider; and

 

(c)                        Raider US

 

in addition, Commercial Babcock Inc**.**, an Ontario,Canada corporation, is a subsidiary of Raider Industries, Inc., and operates asa division of Morgan Trailer Mfg. Co.

 

(6)               Morgan Olson Corporation, f/k/a MS Truck BodyCorp., a Delaware corporation.

 

(7)               Federal Coach LLC, a Delaware limitedliability company.

 

(8)               Eagle Specialty Vehicles, Inc., an Ohiocorporation.

 

(9)               State Wide Aluminum, Inc., an Indiana corporation.

 

----
Exhibit 32.2


                                  CERTIFICATION


            Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


The  undersigned  officers  hereby  certifies  that, to his  knowledge,  (1) the
quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Productivity Technologies Corp. for the quarter
ended  December  31,  2004 as to which this  Certification  is an exhibit  fully
complies  with the  requirements  of  Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the  Securities
Exchange  Act of 1934 (15  U.S.C.  78m(a)  or  78o(d))  and (2) the  information
contained  in  such  Report  fairly  presents,  in all  material  respects,  the
financial  condition  and results of  operations  of  Productivity  Technologies
Corp..


Date: February 18, 2005


/s/ Jesse A. Levine
-------------------
Jesse A. Levine,
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, October 20, 2015. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, October 20, 2015 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A16I0036. COOPER TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY v. RENEE KOCH, et al..
Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of this order. The Clerk of State Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record transmitted to the Court of Appeals.
LC NUMBERS: 14EV000478
Sean M. DONAHUE, Petitioner, v. Eugene SCALIA, Secretary of Labor, et al.

No. 19-7573.

Supreme Court of the United States.

April 6, 2020

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied, and the petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
NO. 07-04-0448-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL D

APRIL 12, 2005

______________________________

RONALD H. MARR, JR., 

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, 

Appellee

_________________________________

FROM THE 137TH DISTRICT COURT OF LUBBOCK COUNTY;

NO. 2003-403,784; HON. CECIL G. PURYEAR, PRESIDING

_______________________________

Before QUINN, REAVIS and CAMPBELL, JJ.

Ronald H. Marr, Jr. (appellant) appeals his conviction for failing to register as a sex

offender. His sole issue involves whether he was denied due process because he was not

given the chance to challenge whether the sex crime for which he was convicted in

Oklahoma was substantially similar to a crime recognized in Texas. We affirm.

At trial, appellant testified that “the whole thing of this case was not challenging that

I had to register, it was just my understanding that I had thought I was finished” once his

parole ended. This is of import because we cannot find where in the record that appellant
2

raised before the trial court the due process argument asserted here. And, because the

argument was not raised below, it was waived. See Saldano v. State, 70 S.W.3d 873, 886-

87 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002) (stating that even constitutional complaints may be waived by

failure to timely assert them in the trial court); Latham v. State, No. 14-01-00562-CR, 2002

Tex. App. LEXIS 6592 (Tex. App.–Houston [14th Dist.] Sept. 5, 2002, no pet.) (not

designated for publication) (holding that the appellant waived his due process claim

involving the sex offender registration statute because it was not raised at trial).

Accordingly, we overrule the issue and affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Brian Quinn

 Justice

Do not publish.
`DTCC Repo-US Treasury <30 YR - NYSE LIFFE - NYPC                     Code-045L2T
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 02/12/13          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF $5,000,000)                            OPEN INTEREST:       48,476
COMMITMENTS
   4,165    6,976    2,412   40,839   38,077   47,416   47,465    1,060    1,011

CHANGES FROM 02/05/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      6,678)
     628      796       61    6,479    6,509    7,168    7,366     -490     -688

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
     8.6     14.4      5.0     84.2     78.5     97.8     97.9      2.2      2.1

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       42)
       4        6        7       22       27       30       37`

---

Updated February 15, 2013
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-23-00995-CR

Linda Ann STEPHENS,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 144th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2022CR0905

Honorable Michael E. Mery, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Irene Rios, Justice

Beth Watkins, Justice

Delivered and Filed: January 17, 2024

DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

Pursuant to a plea bargain, appellant was placed on deferred adjudication community 

supervision in February 2022. On September 20, 2023, the trial court signed an “Order Amending 

Conditions of Community Supervision.” On October 11, 2023, appellant filed a pro se notice of 

appeal, appearing to appeal the trial court’s order amending the conditions of community 

supervision. Because this court does not have jurisdiction to consider an appeal from an order 

altering or modifying the conditions of community supervision, we ordered appellant to show 

cause by December 21, 2023 why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. See
04-23-00995-CR

- 2 -

Davis v. State, 195 S.W.3d 708, 710-11 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006); Basaldua v. State, 558 S.W.2d 

2, 5 (Tex. Crim. App. 1977); Quaglia v. State, 906 S.W.2d 112, 113 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 

1995, no pet.). We admonished appellant if she failed to respond by that date, this appeal would

be dismissed. Appellant did not file a response.

Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. 

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH
<PAGE>

Exhibit 21


                  Subsidiaries of ACT Teleconferencing, Inc.

                                 Name                    Jurisdiction of
                                 ----                     Incorporation
                                                          -------------

ACT Teleconferencing Services, Inc., formerly ACT        Minnesota, USA
Capital, Inc.

ACT VideoConferencing, Inc.,                             Minnesota, USA
formerly NBS, Inc.

ACT Research, Inc.                                       Colorado, USA

ACT Teleconferencing Canada Inc.                            Canada

ACT Teleconferencing Limited                             United Kingdom
(60% owned)

ACT Business Solutions Limited, formerly Multimedia      United Kingdom
and Teleconferencing Services Limited (96.7% owned)

ACT Teleconferencing France SA                               France

ACT Teleconferencing GmbH                                    Germany

ACT Teleconferencing BV                                    Netherlands

ACT Teleconferencing Belgium SA                              Belgium

ACT Teleconferencing (Pty) Limited                          Australia

ACT Teleconferencing Hong Kong Limited                      Hong Kong
<TABLE> <S> <C>

  
<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
       THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM 
       STARBASE CORPORATION'S CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AT AND FOR THE 
       THREE MONTH PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
       BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                    1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                               1,296
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                          208
<ALLOWANCES>                                           (51)
<INVENTORY>                                             21
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     1,823
<PP&E>                                               1,289
<DEPRECIATION>                                        (742)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                         547
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                  761
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                               150
<OTHER-SE>                                           1,509
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         2,465
<SALES>                                                268
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                       338
<CGS>                                                   32
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                           32
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     1,662
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         9     
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                      (2)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     (1,332)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 (1,332)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                        (1,332)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         (.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         (.11)
        


</TABLE>
NHY/Research

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SAMUEL CISNEROS; MARGARITA

LOPEZ ALDANA,

 Petitioners,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 06-71367

Agency Nos. A075-702-791

 A075-702-792

ORDER

Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.

Samuel Cisneros and Margarita Lopez Aldana, spouses and natives and

citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of an order of the Board of

Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings

to apply for adjustment of status. 

Cisneros and Lopez Aldana are the beneficiaries of I-130 visa petitions filed

by their U.S. citizen daughter. It appears from the U.S. Citizenship and

Immigration Services website that the I-130 visa petitions have been granted and

visas are immediately available to both petitioners. We therefore refer the matter

to mediation by the court’s mediation office.

FILED

DEC 16 2009

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
NHY/Research 2 06-71367

We have determined that the appointment of pro bono counsel in this matter

would benefit the mediation process. The Clerk shall enter an order appointing pro

bono counsel to represent Cisneros and Aldana for purposes of this mediation only.

If Cisneros or Aldana objects to the court’s appointment of counsel in this

mediation, he or she shall file a written objection within 14 days after the filing

date of this order.
Thomas CURETON, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-5052.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 3, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
HOTZE HEALTH WELLNESS CENTER INTERNATIONAL ONE, LLC, et al., Petitioners, v. ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER, INC.

No. 19-1005.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 23, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

MARSHALL DIVISION 

BARCO, INC. and BARCO NV, 

 Plaintiffs, 

v. 

YEALINK (USA) NETWORK 

TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD., and 

YEALINK NETWORK 

TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD. 

 Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 2:23-cv-521 

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 

CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 

 Pursuant to Rule 7.1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff Barco, Inc., and 

Barco NV hereby state that Barco, Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Barco NV. Barco NV has 

no parent company and no publicly held corporation owns 10% or more of Barco NV. 

Dated: November 14, 2023 /s/ Melissa R. Smith 

Melissa R. Smith (Texas Bar No. 24001351) 

GILLAM & SMITH, LLP 

303 South Washington Avenue 

Marshall, Texas 75670 

Telephone: +1 903 934 8450 

Facsimile: +1 903 934 9257 

melissa@gillamsmithlaw.com 

Christopher Centurelli (pro hac vice forthcoming) 

christopher.centurelli@klgates.com 

Anna E. L’Hommedieu (pro hac vice forthcoming) 

Anna.lhommedieu@klgates.com 

Joshua N. Andrews (pro hac vice forthcoming) 

Joshua.Andrews@klgates.com 

K&L GATES LLP 

1 Congress Street, Suite 2900 

Boston, MA 02114-2023

Case 2:23-cv-00521-JRG-RSP Document 2 Filed 11/14/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 188
1 

Telephone: (617) 261-3100 

Erik J. Halverson (pro hac vice forthcoming) 

erik.halverson@klgates.com 

K&L GATES LLP 

Four Embarcadero Ctr, 

Suite 1200 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone: (415) 882-8238 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

Barco, Inc. and Barco N.V.

Case 2:23-cv-00521-JRG-RSP Document 2 Filed 11/14/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 189
Opinion issued September 23, 2021

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-21-00398-CV

———————————

IN RE WEINGARTEN REALTY INVESTORS, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Weingarten Realty Investors filed a petition for writ of mandamus challenging 

the trial court’s July 5, 2021 order granting in part the motion to compel filed by real 

parties in interest, Landry’s Seafood Inn & Oyster Bar-Galveston, Inc. (“La Griglia”) 

and Morton’s of Chicago/Houston, Inc. (“Morton’s”).1 Weingarten also sought 

emergency relief.

1 The underlying case is Landry’s Seafood Inn & Oyster Bar-Galveston, Inc. and 

Morton’s of Chicago/Houston, Inc. v. Weingarten Realty Investors and WRI/Post 
2

The Court granted the motion in part, staying the trial court’s order, and 

requested a response. Real parties in interest, Landry’s Seafood Inn & Oyster BarGalveston, Inc. Landry’s LLC, Morton’s of Chicago/Houston, Inc., and Morton’s of 

Chicago, Inc., filed a response, and Weingarten filed a reply to the response.

We deny the petition. See TEX.R. APP. P. 52.8(a). The stay of the trial court’s 

July 5, 2021 order is now lifted.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Goodman, Hightower, and Rivas-Molloy.

Oak, Inc., cause number 2020-34588, pending in the 151st District Court of Harris

County, Texas, the Honorable Mike Engelhart presiding.