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 Labor

###### Employee Benefits Security Administration

Pursuant to the authority contained in Section 512 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. 1142, the Working Group assigned by the Advisory Council on Employee Welfare and Pension Benefit Plans to study the issue of communications to retirement plan participants will hold an open public meeting on September 23, 2005.

The session will take place in Room S 4215 B-C, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. The purpose of the open meeting, which will run from 8:30 a.m. to approximately 4 p.m., with a one hour break for lunch, is for Working Group members to hear testimony from invited witnesses. The Working Group will inquire whether plan participants understand their rights and benefits under retirement plans and if existing required communication tools are accomplishing the original goal of full disclosure.

                    Organizations or members of the public wishing to submit a written statement pertaining to the topic may do so by submitting 25 copies on or before September 14, 2055 to Larry Good, Executive Secretary, ERISA Advisory Council, U.S. Department of Labor, Suite N-5623, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. Statements also may be submitted electronically to                     *good.larry@dol.gov.*                     Statements received on or before September 14, 2005 will be included in the record of the meeting. Individuals or representatives of organizations wishing to address the Working Group should forward their requests to the Executive Secretary or telephone (202) 693-8668. Oral presentations will be limited to 20 minutes, time permitting, but an extended statement may be submitted for the record. Individuals with disabilities who need special accommodations should contact Larry Good by September 14 at the address indicated.                

Signed at Washington, DC, this 25th day of August, 2005.

Ann L. Combs,

Assistant Secretary, Employee Benefits Security Administration.

[FR Doc. 05-17311  Filed 8-30-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-29-M
II 

Calendar No. 907 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 344 

To permit the televising of Supreme Court proceedings. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 22, 2007 

Mr. SPECTER (for himself, Mr. GRASSLEY, Mr. DURBIN, Mr. SCHUMER, Mr. 

FEINGOLD, and Mr. CORNYN) introduced the following bill; which was 

read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

JULY 29 (legislative day, JULY 28), 2008 

Reported by Mr. LEAHY, without amendment 

A BILL 

To permit the televising of Supreme Court proceedings. 

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

3 SECTION 1. AMENDMENT TO TITLE 28. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 45 of title 28, United 

5 States Code, is amended by inserting at the end the fol6 lowing: 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
2 

S 344 RS

1 ‘‘§ 678. Televising Supreme Court proceedings 

2 ‘‘The Supreme Court shall permit television coverage 

3 of all open sessions of the Court unless the Court decides, 

4 by a vote of the majority of justices, that allowing such 

5 coverage in a particular case would constitute a violation 

6 of the due process rights of 1 or more of the parties before 

7 the Court.’’. 

8 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The chapter analysis 

9 for chapter 45 of title 28, United States Code, is amended 

10 by inserting at the end the following: 

‘‘678. Televising Supreme Court proceedings.’’. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS

wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
Calendar No. 907 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 344 

A BILL 

To permit the televising of Supreme Court 

proceedings. 

JULY 29 (legislative day, JULY 28), 2008 

Reported without amendment 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                         3,485
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  9,407
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         470,037
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (54,317)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 452,016
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          47,537
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    353,403
<COMMON>                                       2
<OTHER-SE>                                     51,074
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   452,016
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               15,915
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  7,506
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             1,096
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                7,536
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            7,536
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   7,536
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  .32
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .32
        


</TABLE>
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

March 27, 2015

No. 04

- 15

- 00157

- CV

IN RE Angie Leigh STRICKLAND

Original Mandamus Proceeding 1

ORDER

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa , Justice

On March 20, 2015, relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus and a motion seeking a

stay of the trial court’s order. This court is of the opinion that a serious question concerning the

mandamus relief sou ght requires further consideration. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 52.8(b). The

respondent and the real party in interest may file a response to the petition for writ of

mandamus in this court no later than April 2, 2015

. Any such response must conform to

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.4.

Relator’s request for a stay is GRANTED IN PART. The trial court’s oral ruling on

January 15, 2015, allowing grandparent access to the children the subject of the underlying suit

by the children’s maternal grandmother is TEM PORARILY STAYED pending further order of

this court. Those portions of the trial court’s order appointing a family counselor and requiring

the family to participate in counseling remain in effect.

Relator’s separate motion for temporary relief, filed Mar ch 27, 2015, is DENIED AS

MOOT.

It is so ORDERED on March 27, 2015

.

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO: _____________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 14

- 557

- CCL , styled In the Inte rest of F.S. and E.B., Children , pending in

the County Court at Law

, Kendall County, Texas, the Honorable Michael Peden presiding.
STATE v. Donald A. MILLER.

No. 340P06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

November 16, 2006.

Anne M. Middleton, Assistant Attorney General, G. Dewey Hudson, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 21st day of June 2006 by Defendant for "Petition for Discretionary Review":

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference this the 16th day of November 2006."
STATE v. JEFFERY

No. COA06-919.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed March 20, 2007.

Certification Date April 9, 2007.

Appeal from Scotland (03CRS1606, 03CRS1607, 03CRS1608, 03CRS1609, 03CRS1610, 03CRS1611).

Case Reported Without Published Opinion. Dismissed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL DATA EXTRACTED FROM THE COMPANY'S
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AT AND FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996 INCLUDED IN THE
COMPANY'S FORM 10-K/A ANNUAL REPORT FOR SUCH PERIOD AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          10,735
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   38,341
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,019
<INVENTORY>                                     20,139
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                68,354
<PP&E>                                          46,689
<DEPRECIATION>                                  12,116
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 141,137
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           80,939
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           184
<OTHER-SE>                                      48,506
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   141,137
<SALES>                                        192,985
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               192,985
<CGS>                                          176,353
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  207,700<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,651
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (15,570)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,738
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (17,034)<F2>
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (17,034)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.19)<F3>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.19)
<FN>
<F1>Total costs includes a one-time charge of $12.9 million for purchased research
and development immediately charged off to income after the merger with DNA
Plant Technology Corporation.
<F2>Net of loss relating to minority interests.
<F3>Based on 14.286 million shares outstanding during the period which considers
the effect of the merger with DNA Plant Technology Corporation.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
```

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 163 (Wednesday, August 24, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 49687]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-16867]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release Nos. 34-52293; IA-2417; File No. S7-25-99]
RIN 3235-AH78

Certain Broker-Dealers Deemed Not To Be Investment Advisers

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Notice of OMB approval of collections of information.

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert L. Tuleya, Senior Counsel, 
(202) 551-6787, [email protected], Office of Investment Adviser 
Regulation, Division of Investment Management, U.S. Securities and 
Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-0506.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In conjunction with Investment Advisers Act 
of 1940 rule 202(a)(11)-1,\1\ the Securities and Exchange Commission 
submitted certain existing collections of information to the Office of 
Management and Budget (``OMB'') in accordance with 44 U.S.C. 3507(d) 
and 5 CFR 1320.11. OMB has approved changes to these collection of 
information requirements which are described in Certain Broker-Dealers 
Deemed Not To Be Investment Advisers.\2\ The titles of the affected 
collections of information are: ``Form ADV'' (OMB Control No. 3235-
0049); ``Form ADV-NR'' (OMB Control No. 3235-0240); ``Form ADV-W and 
Rule 203-2'' (OMB Control No. 3235-0313); ``Rule 203-3 and Form ADV-H'' 
(OMB Control No. 3235-0538); ``Rule 204-2'' (OMB Control No. 3235-
0278); ``Rule 204-3'' (OMB Control No. 3235-0047); ``Rule 204A-1'' (OMB 
Control No. 3235-0596); ``Rule 206(4)-3'' (OMB Control No. 3235-0242); 
``Rule 206(4)-4'' (OMB Control No. 3235-0345); ``Rule 206(4)-6'' (OMB 
Control No. 3235-0571); and ``Rule 206(4)-7'' (OMB Control No. 3235-
0585).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 17 CFR 275.202(a)(11)-1.
    \2\ Investment Advisers Act Rel. No. 2376 (Apr. 12, 2005) [70 FR 
20424 (Apr. 19, 2005)].

    Dated: August 18, 2005.
Margaret H. McFarland,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 05-16867 Filed 8-23-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P
```
STATE v. LUCK.

COA06-316.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed November 7, 2006.

Certification Date November 27, 2006.

Appeal from the Moore (05CRS50536, 05CRS52036, 05CRS52424, 04CRS55336).

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
STATE v. Russell Antoine COOPER.

No. 490P07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 8, 2007.

Anthony M. Brannon, Raleigh, for Cooper.

C. Colon Willoughby, Jr., District Attorney for State.

Prior report: ___ N.C.App. ___, 649 S.E.2d 664.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 8th day of October 2007 by Attorney General for Temporary Stay:

> "Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference this the 8th day of October 2007."
STATE v. VANG.

No. COA05-824.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed August 15, 2006.

Certification Date September 5, 2006.

Appeal from Mecklenburg (02CRS231911, 02CRS231913).

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
STATE v. SLEDGE.

No. COA07-189.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed October 2, 2007.

Certification Date October 22, 2007.

Appeal from Greene (06CRS50577).

Case Reported Without Published Opinion. No error.
STATE v. Ryan Gabriel GARCELL.

No. 465A06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

July 19, 2007.

Ann Marie Gomez, Assistant Appellate Defender, for Garcell

William Hart, Senior Deputy Attorney General, Robert C. Montgomery, Special Deputy Attorney General, Jeff Hunt, District Attorney, Charlie C. Walker, Asheville, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 19th day of July 2007 by Defendant to Bypass the N.C. Court of Appeals:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference this the 19th day of July 2007."
IN RE E.L.W.

No. COA06-1468.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed July 3, 2007.

Certification Date July 23, 2007.

Appeal from the Yancey (03J55, 03J56).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
THE STATE OF TEXAS

M A N D A T E

TO THE 437TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF BEXAR COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before our Court of Appeals for the Fourth District of Texas on October 14, 2015, the cause upon appeal to

revise or reverse your judgment between

Freddie Lee Scott, Appellant(s)

V.

The State of Texas, Appellee(s)

No. 04-15-00045-CR and Tr. Ct. No. 2009CR6965

was determined, and therein our Court of Appeals made its order in these words:

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s

judgment is AFFIRMED. Appellate counsel’s motion to withdraw is

GRANTED. Any other pending motions for relief are DENIED.

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals for the Fourth

District of Texas, in this behalf and in all things have the order duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

Witness the Hon. Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice of the Court of Appeals for the Fourth District of Texas,

with the seal of the Court affixed and the City of San Antonio on December 15, 2015.

KEITH E. HOTTLE, CLERK

Cynthia A. Martinez

Deputy Clerk, Ext. 53853
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 19 (Monday, January 31, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 4801-4802]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-1712]


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

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

38 CFR Part 36

RIN 2900-AK76


Loan Guaranty: Prepurchase Counseling Requirements

AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs.

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) published a proposed 
rule in the Federal Register on October 11, 2001 (66 FR 51893) to amend 
its loan guaranty regulations that set forth underwriting standards for 
VA guaranteed loans. We had proposed to require first-time homebuyers 
to complete homeownership counseling and to add a compensating factor 
for certain veterans who do not fully meet VA's underwriting standards. 
However, the proposed rule and comments have been superseded by 
recently-adopted requirements established by the Department of Defense 
mandating such counseling for all enlistees and by VA's decision to 
provide a link to the Government National Mortgage

[[Page 4802]]

Association (Ginnie Mae's) Homeownership Information Center, which 
provides a wide array of information for homebuyers pertaining to the 
homebuying process, mortgage affordability, loan calculators, credit 
counseling, etc. Accordingly, this document hereby withdraws the 
proposed rule.

DATES: The proposed rule is withdrawn as of January 31, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: R.D. Finneran, Assistant Director for 
Loan Policy and Valuation (262), Loan Guaranty Service, Veterans 
Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont 
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20420 (202) 273-7368.

    Approved: December 17, 2004.
Anthony J. Principi,
Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
[FR Doc. 05-1712 Filed 1-28-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-P
**Exhibit 23.1**

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements onForm S-3 (File Nos. 333-120092, 333-115667, and 333-111540) and on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-118178, 333-111393, 333-109006 and 333-149724) of American Electric Technologies, Inc. (formerly American Access Technologies, Inc.) of our report datedMarch 28, 2008 with respect to our audit of the consolidated financial statements of American Electric Technologies, Inc. as of and for the year ended December 31, 2007, which appears in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. 

/s/  Ham, Langston & Brezina, LLP 

Houston, Texas

March 28, 2008
STATE of North Carolina v. Gerardo SOLACHE.

No. 420P06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 11, 2006.

Gerardo Solache, pro se.

Robert Montgomery, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State.

*AMENDED ORDER*

Upon consideration of the application filed by Defendant on the 9th day of August 2006 in this matter for Writ of Habeas Corpus, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court, Wilson County:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 11th day of August 2006."
Johnnie L. HARRINGTON v. Joseph B. HALL.

No. 441P92-3.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 16, 2007.

Johnnie L. Harrington, Pro Se.

Derrick C. Mertz, Assistant Attorney General, for State/Hall.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the application filed by Petitioner on the 15th day of October 2007 in this matter for Writ of Habeas Corpus, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court, Lee County:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 16th day of October 2007."
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3094 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3094

 To amend the National Trails System Act to provide for a study of the 
 Long Path Trail, a system of trails and potential trails running from 
  Fort Lee, New Jersey, to the Adirondacks in New York, to determine 
 whether to add the trail to the National Trails System, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              June 5, 2008

   Mr. Lautenberg (for himself, Mr. Menendez, Mrs. Clinton, and Mr. 
   Schumer) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the National Trails System Act to provide for a study of the 
 Long Path Trail, a system of trails and potential trails running from 
  Fort Lee, New Jersey, to the Adirondacks in New York, to determine 
 whether to add the trail to the National Trails System, 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. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Long Path Trail Study Act of 2008''.

SEC. 2. DESIGNATION OF LONG PATH TRAIL FOR STUDY FOR POTENTIAL ADDITION 
              TO THE NATIONAL TRAILS SYSTEM.

    (a) Designation.--Section 5(c) of the National Trails System Act 
(16 U.S.C. 1244(c)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(44) Long Path Trail.--The Long Path Trail, a system of 350 miles 
of trails and potential trails running from Fort Lee, New Jersey, to 
the Adirondack Mountains in the State of New York.''.
    (b) Expedited Report to Congress.--Notwithstanding the fourth 
sentence of section 5(b) of the National Trails System Act (16 U.S.C. 
1244(b)), the Secretary of the Interior shall, not later than 2 years 
after the date of enactment of this Act, submit to Congress the study 
required under paragraph (44) of section 5(c) of the National Trails 
System Act (16 U.S.C. 1244(c)) (as added by subsection (a)).
                                 <all>
```
STATE of North Carolina v. Librado BUSTOS.

No. 609P06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 3, 2007.

Librado Bustos, Pro Se.

Robert Montgomery, Special Deputy Attorney General, G. Dewey Hudson, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 20th day of November 2006 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 3rd day of May 2007."