alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 174 (Thursday, September 9, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 54916]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-22630]


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

NATIONAL COUNCIL ON DISABILITY


Sunshine Act Meetings

DATE AND TIME: September 13, 2010, 12 p.m.-2 p.m. Eastern.

PLACE: Chairman Jonathan Young is calling a teleconference meeting of 
the National Council on Disability.

STATUS: Parts of this meeting will be open to the public. The rest of 
the meeting will be closed to the public.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The agenda for this meeting is two-fold: (1) 
To discuss end-of-year final budget matters; and (2) to provide the 
Chairman an opportunity to discuss temporary personal circumstances and 
leadership considerations in light thereof. The first item on the 
agenda will be open to the public. The second portion of the agenda 
will be held in closed executive session pursuant to paragraphs 
(c)(2),(6), and (9) of the Sunshine Act, and in accordance with a 
determination made by the NCD Chairman.
    Less than one week notice is being given pursuant to and in 
accordance with paragraph (e)(1) of the Sunshine Act based on a 
majority vote of the Council taken pursuant to electronic mail voting 
beginning on September 3. The timing of this meeting was prompted by 
the congruence of time-sensitive end-of-year budget issues and 
unforeseen temporary personal circumstances of the NCD Chairman, which 
prevent meeting any later than September 13. As much notice as possible 
has been provided given that the temporary personal circumstances 
requiring short notice did not emerge until September 1.

ACCOMMODATIONS: Those needing reasonable accommodations should notify 
NCD immediately.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Mark Quigley, Director of 
Communications, NCD, 1331 F Street, NW., Suite 850, Washington, DC 
20004; 202-272-2004, 202-272-2074 (TTY).

    Dated: September 7, 2010.
Joan M. Durocher,
Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 2010-22630 Filed 9-7-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6820-MA-P
Exhibit 31.1





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a)


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF


THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Steven J. Hislop, certify that:


1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Chuy’s Holdings, Inc.; and


2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.








Date: April 22, 2019


/s/ Steven J. HislopSteven J. HislopPresident and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)
[No. 44016-1-I.

Division One.

May 8, 2000.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Raymond Walter Hickman, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Snohomish County, No. 98-1-00460-1, Charles S. French, J., entered January 14, 1999. *Affirmed*by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Steven P.
Wyandt, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of
Nitches, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the three months ended November 30, 2006, fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and
results of operations of Nitches, Inc.

|Date:
      January 22, 2007     
|---------------------------------
|                                 
|/s/ Steven P. Wyandt             
|                                 
|Steven P. Wyandt                 
|Chief
      Executive Officer and
|Chief
      Financial Officer    

18

---
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR
. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR
. R. 47.5.4. 

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-20989 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee

v. JOSE MARMOLEJO-SANCHEZ, alsoknown asJesus Rodriguez, alsoknown as Jesus Rodriguez-Marmolejo, also known as Ismael Rodriguez-Marmolejo Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:06-CR-309-ALL
Before REAVLEY, BARKSDALE, and GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Jose Marmolejo-Sanchez (Marmolejo) appeals his guilty-plea conviction and 24-month sentence for being illegally present in the United States following deportation. He argues that his sentence is unreasonable as a matter of law because this court’s use of a presumption of reasonableness for sentences imposed within the properly calculated guidelines range eff ectively reinstates the mandatory guidelines regime struck down in U nited States v. Booker, 543 United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D December 12, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III ClerkNo. 06-20989

2 U.S. 220 (2005). This argument is foreclosed. See Rita v. United States, 127 S. Ct. 2456, 2465 (2007). In light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), Marmolejo challenges the constitutionality of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)’s treatment of prior felony and aggravated felony convictions as sentencing factors rather than elements of the offense that must be found by a jury. This court has held that this issue is “fully foreclosed from further debate.” U nited States v. Pineda-Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir. 2007), petition for cert. filed (Aug. 28, 2007) (No. 07-6202). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
News United States Air Force
 Air Force Youth Programs accepting applications for summer Virtual Aviation CampPublished April 8, 2021
                        
                        By Armando Perez
                        
                        
                        Air Force Installation and Mission Support Center Public Affairs Public Affairs
                **JOINT BASE SAN ANTONIO-LACKLAND, Texas (AFNS) --**
                Applications are open for this year’s**Air Force Youth Programs**’ Virtual Teen Aviation Camp. Applications are due no later than April 14.The virtual camp, held in partnership with**Air Force Aero Clubs**, is June 14-25 and offers an introduction to the field of aviation and opportunities for careers and leadership roles within the Air Force and **Space Force**.Designed by Air Force Youth Programs and managed by the**Air Force Services Center**, the camp helps upcoming high school students determine if a career in aviation or attendance at the **U.S. Air Force Academy** are paths they would like to pursue. Offering a variety of experiences and challenges for participants, camp attendees will learn the basic principles of general aviation and explore various career possibilities, as well as getting a peek into Air Force Aero Clubs.A combination of web-based presentations and discussion groups, along with self-paced course materials provide camp participants with the knowledge to complete the private pilot exam and begin their journey toward earning a private pilot license. This course is a combination of online learning, virtual sessions with highly qualified flight instructors and videos developed by the Aero Clubs. The program also includes an interactive, online learning platform through Jeppesen.
While applicants for the traditional Teen Aviation Camp, normally hosted at the academy, vie for 36 positions in the camp, today’s virtual format can expand to 170 participants, allowing youth programs to deliver the opportunity to more teens and serve a variety of time zones.
Applicants must currently be in high school and not previously attended the virtual or in-person teen aviation camps. Eligible applicants include dependents of: Air Force active-duty military; Air Force Reserve; Air National Guard; Department of Defense civilian employees assigned to or working on an Air Force installation or Air Force-led joint base; and on a space-available basis, Air Force retirees.
The**PDF application** must be submitted by a parent or guardian no later than April 14 APRI through the AF Camps workflow box at **AFSVC.SVPY.Camps@us.af.mil.**For more information on youth programs and camps offered, visit the Department of the Air Force Child and Youth Programs**website**.AFWN 



USAF 



AF 



Air Force 



AFMC 



Air Force Materiel Command 



AFIMSC 



Air Force Installation and Mission Support Center 



air force youth programs 



AFSVC 



Virtual Aviation Camp 



applications 



Air Force Aero Clubs 



One Air Force
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 69 (Thursday, April 27, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Page S5856]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

           ADJOURNMENT UNTIL MONDAY, MAY 1, 1995, AT 11 A.M.

  Mr. KYL. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come 
before the Senate, I now ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand in 
adjournment under the previous order.
  There being no objection, the Senate, at 8:14 p.m., adjourned until 
Monday, May 1, 1995, at 11 a.m.

                          ____________________
```
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED**

 

**PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEYACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Annual Report ofThunder Energies Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019 as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Dr. Ruggero M. Santilli, Chief Executive Officer and ChiefFinancial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, to the best of my knowledge, that:

 

(1) The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2) The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company for the dates and periodscovered by the Report.

 

This certificate is being made for theexclusive purpose of compliance by the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company with the requirementsof Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and may not be disclosed, distributed or used by any person or for any reasonother than as specifically required by law.

 

 

/s/ Dr. Ruggero M. Santilli                

Dr.Ruggero M. Santilli

ChiefExecutive Officer and Chief Financial Officer

 

May 15, 2020
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

CESARIO URIAS, CESARIO V. URIAS, 

JOEL URIAS AND SONIA URIAS, 

 

 Appellants.

v.

OWL SPRINGS NORTH, LLC, OWL 

SPRINGS HOLDINGS, LLC, AND 

BARBARA PREWIT, 

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-21-00063-CV

Appeal from the

143rd District Court

of Reeves County, Texas 

(TC# 19-11-23264-CVR)

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the Appellants’ third motion for extension of time within which to 

file the brief until December 11, 2021. NO FURTHER MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME 

TO FILE THE APPELLANTS’ BRIEF WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ordered that the Hon. Eduardo N. Lerma, the Appellants’ attorney, prepare the 

Appellants’ Brief and forward the same to this Court on or before December 11, 2021.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 9

th day of November, 2021.

PER CURIAM

Before Rodriguez, C.J., Palafox and Alley, JJ.
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________

No. 98-2675NE

_____________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, * Appeal from the United States 

* District Court for the District

v. * of Nebraska.

*

Juvenile B.E.L.V.D., * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

_____________

 Submitted: December 15, 1998

Filed: December 28, 1998

_____________

Before FAGG, HEANEY, and WOLLMAN, Circuit Judges.

_____________

PER CURIAM.

Juvenile B.E.L.V.D. appeals the district court's decision transferring the juvenile

for prosecution as an adult. Having reviewed the record and the parties' submissions,

we conclude that an extensive discussion is not warranted. Contrary to Juvenile

B.E.L.V.D.'s view, the district court carefully considered the discretionary transfer

factors and correctly held that it would be in the interests of justice to transfer the

juvenile for prosecution as an adult. Having considered Juvenile B.E.L.V.D.'s

arguments, we see no error by the district court. We thus affirm the judgment of the

district court without further discussion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. Additionally, if Juvenile

B.E.L.V.D. is prosecuted as an adult and convicted, we suggest the district court and
-2-

the bureau of prisons consider a placement in Chamberlain Academy in South Dakota

or in a facility that offers programs similar to those offered at Chamberlain.

WOLLMAN, Circuit Judge, concurs in the result and concurs in the judgment.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
News United States Air Force
 Follow-on options available to Airmen who volunteer for extended deploymentPublished May 25, 2017
                        
                        By Kat Bailey
                        
                        
                        Air Force Personnel Center Public Affairs
                **JOINT BASE SAN ANTONIO-RANDOLPH, Texas  --**
                JOINT BASE SAN ANTONIO-RANDOLPH, Texas (AFNS) -- Airmen, both officers and enlisted, who volunteer for an extended 365-day deployment can apply for one of two assignment options: either an advanced assignment or a two-year deferment from a permanent change of station, if eligible.
“If an Airman signs the notification stating their intent to accept the deployment, they can provide preferences for an advanced assignment, provided they meet the time-on-station requirements, or apply for a return to home station with a two-year PCS deferment,” said Jeff Gatcomb, the 365 Deployment policy program manager at the Air Force Personnel Center.
To qualify for an advanced assignment, Airmen must have at least 24 months TOS as of their projected redeployment date and have at least 36 months TOS before the PCS departure.
Airmen are eligible for short tour credit as long as they complete at least 300 consecutive days on the extended deployment. Officers may also be eligible for joint duty assignment credit if they are working in a joint environment, Gatcomb explained.
Officers who believe their duties qualify for joint credit have a year from their return to formally apply for credit.
To volunteer for an extended deployment, enlisted Airmen should review EQUAL Plus, where positions are normally advertised for at least 10 days. Officers should contact their functional assignment team.
Stay informed on the most current information by visiting the deployment page on myPers or visitthe 365-Day Extended Deploymentspage on the AEF Online website.
For more information about Air Force personnel programs, go to myPers. Individuals who do not have a myPers account can request one byfollowing these instructions.365 



extended 



joint credit 



Airmen 



officer assignments 



officers 



USAF 



Airman 



deployment 



mission 



follow-on 



PCS 



AFPC 



TOS 



time-on-station 



move 



FM 



force management
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                          5
<LEGEND>
    This schedule  contains  summary  financial  information  extracted from the
    Partnership's  audited  financial  statements for the quarter 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>                                  2,298
<SECURITIES>                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                              22
<ALLOWANCES>                                0
<INVENTORY>                                 0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                        5,868
<PP&E>                                 96,086
<DEPRECIATION>                         28,730
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                         73,867
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                  91,352
<BONDS>                                 9,125
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       0
<PREFERRED>                                 0
<COMMON>                                    0
<OTHER-SE>                           (30,164)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>           73,867
<SALES>                                     0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        2,840
<CGS>                                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                           1,821
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           39
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      1,143
<INCOME-PRETAX>                         (163)
<INCOME-TAX>                                0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                     (163)
<DISCONTINUED>                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             0
<CHANGES>                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                            (163)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                          (3.72)
<EPS-DILUTED>                          (3.72)
        

</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

LAKESHA MCGRUDER,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 9 EM 2024

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 4 th day of June , 2024, the “Petition for King’s Bench Jurisdiction

, ”

advanced by Mark Marvin, is DISMISSED.
| 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for the period covered by the Report. |
|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date: April 1, 2013 | By:    | /s/ Joseph R. Wright                                 |
|---------------------|--------|------------------------------------------------------|
|                |   |  Joseph R. Wright                               |
|                |   | Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer) |
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. JAMES MICHAEL ROSE.

Dec. 4, 1979.

Motion for leave to appeal is granted and the matter is summarily remanded to the Appellate Division for a full hearing on the merits; and it is further

ORDERED that either party may seek leave of the Appellate

Division to expand the record; and it is further

ORDERED that jurisdiction is not retained.
#### Joseph Samble *versus*The Mechanics’ Fire Insurance *Company.*

April Term, 1829.

In an action upon a policy of insurance against fire, if the defendants admit that they are liable for the loss, and the controversy between the parties relates solely to items of injury, and the amount of loss sustained by the assured, the court will refer the matter to referees, to adjust the amount.

In mixed questions of law and fact, where long accounts are involved, it is the practice of the court to hear the cause until the questions of law are disposed of, and then refer the accounts to referees. If the referees named are objected to by eitherparty, the court will draw them from the jury box. ;

*Mr.*P. *A. Cowdry,*on the part of the *defendants*in this cause, moved, that the matters in controversy between the parties be referred to referees, to adjust the amount of the plaintiff’s claimr The defendants (he said) admitted the making of the policy, and their liability for the loss, and their defence related to the *amount*of the plaintiff’s claim, and not to the principles upon which it was founded. The preliminary proofs showed a great number of items said to have been injured or destroyed; and Mr. Cowdry contended, that the accounts relating to the injury, should be referred to referees for adjustment.

*Mr. J. Anthon, contra,*for the plaintiff,

resisted the motion upon the ground, that questions of law might arise, which could not be disposed of by the referees.

*Per Curiam.*

The defendants admit all the principles upon which the plaintiff’s claim rests, and confine their defence exclusively to the items of injury, and the amount of the loss. There cannot, therefore, be any questions of law involved in the controversy, and the duty of the referees will be confined entirely to the questions of fact presented by the account of loss. As the injury sustained by the plaintiff extends to a great variety of items, the amount and extent of his loss can be much more conveniently ascertained by referees than by a jury.

*561Where there are mixed questions of law and fact presented by long accounts, our practice is to hear the cause until the questions of law are disposed of, and then send the accounts to referees for adjustment. The jury, in the meantime, are directed to bring in a verdict for an amount sufficient to cover the plaintiff’s claim, which is to be modified, or reduced to the amount reported by the referees. This practice saves much time, and the referees can look into the items of the accounts with a proper degree of accuracy and care. If the referees named are objected to by either party, the court will draw them from the jury box, and obtain an impartial tribunal by this means. This course will be resorted to in the present case, if the parties object to the referees now named to the court. _

*Motion*granted,

[E. Burr, *Att’y for the plff.*P. A. Cowdry, *Att’y for the defts.]*
### M A N D A T E

TO THE 332ND DISTRIC T COURT of HIDALGO COUNTY, GREE TINGS:

Before our Court of Appeals for the Thirteenth District of Texas, on the 24th day of April,
2014 , the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

RUFINO IBANEZ AND ANTONI O ARAIZA, Appellant s

,

v.

GRACIELA ALONZO Appellee.

CAUSE NO. 13

- 13

- 00001

- CV (Tr.Ct.No. C

- 278

- 10

- F)

was determined; and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on

appeal, concludes the judgment of the trial court should be AFFIRMED. The Court

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED. Costs of the appeal are adjudged

against appellants.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

April 24 , 2014.



WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order o f our said Court of Appeals for the Thirteenth District of Texas, in this behalf, and in all things have it duly recognized, obeyed and executed.

WITNESS, the Hon. Rogelio Valdez, Chief Justice of our Court of Appeals, with the seal thereof affixed, at th e City of Edinburg, Texas this 30th day of January, 2015.

Dorian E. Ramirez, CLERK