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

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 192 (Thursday, October 5, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 46614]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-21432]

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

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

[OMB Control No. 2900-NEW]

Agency Information Collection Activity Under OMB Review: Decision 
Ready Claims (DRC) Exam Review

AGENCY: Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans 
Affairs.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, 
this notice announces that the Veterans Benefits Administration, 
Department of Veterans Affairs, will submit the collection of 
information abstracted below to the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) for review and comment. The PRA submission describes the nature 
of the information collection and its expected cost and burden and it 
includes the actual data collection instrument.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before November 6, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments on the collection of information 
through www.Regulations.gov, or to Office of Information and Regulatory 
Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Attn: VA Desk Officer; 725 
17th St. NW., Washington, DC 20503 or sent through electronic mail to 
[email protected]. Please refer to ``OMB Control No. 2900-
NEW'' in any correspondence.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cynthia Harvey-Pryor, Enterprise 
Records Service (005R1B), Department of Veterans Affairs, 811 Vermont 
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20420, (202) 461-5870 or email 
[email protected]. Please refer to ``OMB Control No. 2900-
NEW'' in any correspondence.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

    Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501-21.

    Title: Decision Ready Claims (DRC) Exam Review (VA Form 21-0985).
    OMB Control Number: 2900-NEW.
    Type of Review: New collection.
    Abstract: VA Form 21-0985 will be used to identify the condition(s) 
that a veteran would like VA to schedule a contract examination for in 
support of his/her Decision Ready Claim.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number. The Federal Register Notice with a 
60-day comment period soliciting comments on this collection of 
information was published at 82 FR 142 on July 26, 2017, pages 34748.
    Affected Public: Individuals or Households.
    Estimated Annual Burden: 2,500.
    Estimated Average Burden per Respondent: 15 minutes.
    Frequency of Response: On occasion.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 10,000.

    By direction of the Secretary.
Cynthia Harvey-Pryor,
Department Clearance Officer, Office of Quality, Privacy and Risk, 
Department of Veterans Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2017-21432 Filed 10-4-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8320-01-P
```
**Exhibit 23.1.1**

 

**CONSENTOF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in theRegistration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-95249) pertaining to theTESSCO Technologies Incorporated Team Member Stock Purchase Plan and theRegistration Statements (Form S-8 No. 33-87178 and Form S-8 No. 333-118177),pertaining to the TESSCO Technologies Incorporated Amended and Restated 1994Stock and Incentive Plan and Employee Incentive Stock Option Plan, of ourreport dated June 9, 2008, with respect to the consolidated financialstatements and schedule of TESSCO Technologies Incorporated included in theAnnual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended March 30, 2008.

 

 
|                | /s/ Ernst & Young, LLP |
|---------------------|---------------------------------|
|                |                            |
| Baltimore, Maryland |                            |
| June 9,  2008  |                            |

 

----
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-18-0000636 20-NOV-2019 07:46 AM
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

MENA SAMIR DOUS,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 45 MM 2019

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 8th day of July , 2019, the Petition for Leave to File Petition for

Allowance of Appeal Nunc Pro Tunc is DENIED.
Order filed, December 3, 2021.

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14

- 21

- 00564

- CV

____________

JOSE HUERTA , Appellant

V.

ZHONGTIAN INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMPANY , Appellee

On Appeal from the 240th District Court

Fort Bend C ounty, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 20

- DCV

- 278750



### ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due November 9, 2021. See Tex. R.

App. P. 35.1. The court sent past due notice for the reporter’s record on

November 10, 2021. No response was received, and t he record has not been filed

with the court. Because the reporter’s record has not been filed timely, we issue

the following order.

We order Elizabeth Wittu , the court reporter, to file the record in this

appeal within 30 days of the date of this order

.

PER CURIAM

Panel Consists of Justices Wise, S pa in, and Hassan
#### McAllister et al. v. TEBO et al.

(Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

March 11, 1895.)

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.

J. A. Hyland, for respondents and appellants.

Goodrich, Deady & Goodrich, for libelants and appellees.

Appeal dismissed, pursuant to the twenty-third rule.
#### William Lee WALKER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. A. KANE, Warden; et al., Respondents-Appellees.

No. 07-55066.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 8, 2011.*

Filed March 10, 2011.

William Lee Walker, Soledad, CA, pro se.

Beneth A. Browne, Office of the California Attorney General, Los Angeles, CA, for Respondents-Appellees.

Before: FARRIS, LEAYY, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner William Lee Walker appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We dismiss.

Walker contends that the Board’s 2002 decision to deny him parole was not supported by “some evidence” and therefore violated his due process rights. After briefing was completed in this case, this court held that a certificate of appealability (“COA”) is required to challenge the denial of parole. *See Hayward v. Marshall,*603 F.3d 546, 554-55 (9th Cir.2010) (en banc). Now the Supreme Court has held that the only federal right at issue in the parole context is procedural, and the only proper inquiry is what process the inmate received, not whether the state court decided the case correctly. *See Swarthout v. Cooke,*— U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 859, 862-63, 178 L.Ed.2d 732 (2011). Because Walker raises no procedural challenges, a COA cannot issue, and we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. *See*28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).

All pending motions and requests are denied.

DISMISSED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Gerald Baker, Appellant.

[859 NYS2d 367]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (James A. Yates J.), rendered on or about March 22, 2007, unanimously affirmed.

Application by appellant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see Anders v California,*386 US 738 [1967]; *People v Saunders,*52 AD2d 833 [1976]). We have reviewed this record and agree with appellant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous points which could be raised on this appeal.

*400Pursuant to Criminal Procedure Law § 460.20, defendant may apply for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals by making application to the Chief Judge of that Court and by submitting such application to the Clerk of that Court or to a Justice of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of this Department on reasonable notice to the respondent within 30 days after service of a copy of this order.

Denial of the application for permission to appeal by the judge or justice first applied to is final and no new application may thereafter be made to any other judge or justice. Concur—Lippman, P.J., Tom, Gonzalez, Buckley and Catterson, JJ.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3048 

To amend the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 to remove the ineligibility 

of individuals who participate in a strike. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 25, 2009 

Mr. BACA introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Agriculture 

A BILL 

To amend the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 to remove 

the ineligibility of individuals who participate in a strike. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Worker Eligibility 

5 Fairness Act of 2009’’. 

6 SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS. 

7 (a) ELIGIBILITY DISQUALIFICATIONS.—Section 6(d) 

8 of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2015(d)) 

9 is amended— 

10 (1) in paragraph (1)(D) by striking clause (iv), 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
2 

•HR 3048 IH

1 (2) by striking paragraph (3), and 

2 (3) by redesignating paragraph (4) as para3 graph (3). 

4 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— 

5 (1) ELIGIBLE HOUSEHOLDS.—Section 5 of the 

6 Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2014) is 

7 amended— 

8 (A) in subsection (d)(14) by striking ‘‘sec9 tion 6(d)(4)(I)’’ and inserting ‘‘section 

10 6(d)(3)(I)’’, and 

11 (B) in subsection (e)(3)(B)(iii) by striking 

12 ‘‘section 6(d)(4)’’ and inserting ‘‘section 

13 6(d)(3)’’. 

14 (2) ADMINISTRATION.—Section 11(e)(19) of 

15 the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 

16 2020(e)(19)) is amended by striking ‘‘section 

17 6(d)(4)’’ and inserting ‘‘section 6(d)(3)’’. 

18 (3) ADMINISTRATIVE COST-SHARING AND QUAL19 ITY CONTROL.—Section 16(h) of the Food and Nu20 trition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2025(h)) by is amend21 ed— 

22 (A) in paragraph (3)— 

23 (i) by striking ‘‘section 6(d)(4)’’ and 

24 inserting ‘‘section 6(d)(3)’’, and 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
3 

•HR 3048 IH

1 (ii) by striking ‘‘section 

2 6(d)(4)(I)(i)(II)’’ and inserting ‘‘section 

3 6(d)(3)(I)(i)(II)’’, 

4 (B) in paragraph (4) by striking ‘‘section 

5 6(d)(4)’’ and inserting ‘‘section 6(d)(3)’’, and 

6 (C) in paragraph (5) by striking ‘‘section 

7 6(d)(4)’’ and inserting ‘‘section 6(d)(3)’’. 

8 (4) MINNESOTA FAMILY INVESTMENT

9 PROJECT.—Section 22(b)(4) of the Food and Nutri10 tion Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2032(b)(4)) is amended 

11 by striking ‘‘section 6(d)(4)’’ and inserting ‘‘section 

12 6(d)(3)’’. 

13 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE; APPLICATION OF AMENDMENTS. 

14 (a) EFFECTIVE DATE.—Except as provided in sub15 section (b), this Act and the amendments made by this 

16 Act shall take effect upon the Act’s passage into law. 

17 (b) APPLICATION OF AMENDMENTS.—The amend18 ments made by this Act shall not apply with respect to 

19 certification periods that begin before the Act’s passage 

20 into law. 

Æ 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
# National Breast Cancer Awareness Month, 2017

As we observe National Breast Cancer Awareness Month, our Nation joins in solidarity with those who are currently battling breast cancer and we remember those we have lost to the disease. Too many Americans endure the pain and heartbreak of losing a family member or friend to breast cancer. Memories of our loved ones, and their courage in the face of suffering, drive us to find a cure.

More than 250,000 American women and 2,000 men will likely be diagnosed with some form of breast cancer in 2017. Fortunately, thanks to early detection and improved treatment options, deaths from breast cancer have decreased significantly in the last decade. The First Lady and I encourage all women to talk to their healthcare providers about mammograms and other methods of early detection, and about their risk of developing breast cancer, and what can be done to reduce that risk.

My Administration is helping pave the way for medical breakthroughs to strengthen our fight against breast cancer by leveraging the tools provided under the 21st Century Cures Act. Our Nation's biomedical research laboratories, universities, and industry innovators are global leaders in discovering, developing, and advancing the medical breakthroughs necessary to better detect, diagnose, and treat breast cancer. Their cutting-edge therapies are redefining breast cancer care and giving patients and families affected by this disease new hope that we will defeat it once and for all.

During this month, we stand strong for those facing a breast cancer diagnosis, and we take a moment to thank our friends and family who tirelessly lend their support, and we pause to reflect on those we have lost to this terrible disease. Our Nation's researchers, innovators, doctors, nurses, public health professionals, and advocates have helped improve the process and possibility of recovery, and together we hope to forge a future free of breast cancer. By raising awareness of breast cancer and supporting research, prevention, and early detection, we will move closer to eradicating this disease.

                    NOW, THEREFORE, I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim October 2017 as National Breast Cancer Awareness Month. I encourage citizens, government agencies, private businesses, nonprofit organizations, the media, and other interested groups to increase awareness of how Americans can fight breast cancer. I also invite the Governors of the States and Territories and officials of other areas subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to join me in recognizing National Breast Cancer Awareness Month.                          ( print page 46356)    

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-ninth day of September, in the year of our Lord two thousand seventeen, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty-second.

[FR Doc. 2017-21550

Billing code 3295-F7-P
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

212 

CAF 13-02243 

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, PERADOTTO, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ.

 

IN THE MATTER OF RICARDO SUAREZ AND LAURA 

SUAREZ, PETITIONERS-RESPONDENTS, 

 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

MELISSA WILLIAMS, RESPONDENT-APPELLANT, 

AND ERNESTO SUAREZ, RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT. 

 

MELVIN & MELVIN, PLLC, SYRACUSE (CHRISTOPHER M. JUDGE OF COUNSEL), FOR

RESPONDENT-APPELLANT. 

LINDA M. CAMPBELL, SYRACUSE, FOR PETITIONERS-RESPONDENTS. 

PATRICK J. HABER, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILD, SYRACUSE. 

 

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Onondaga County

(Michelle Pirro Bailey, J.), entered March 26, 2013 in a proceeding

pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The order, among other

things, awarded petitioners Laura Suarez and Ricardo Suarez and

respondent Ernesto Suarez joint legal custody of the subject child. 

The order was reversed by opinion and order of this Court entered

March 20, 2015 (128 AD3d 20), and petitioners Ricardo Suarez and Laura

Suarez on June 9, 2015 were granted leave to appeal to the Court of

Appeals from the order of this Court (25 NY3d 1063), and the Court of

Appeals on December 16, 2015 reversed the order and remitted the case

to this Court for further proceedings in accordance with the opinion

of the Court of Appeals (___ NY3d ___ [Dec. 16, 2015]).

Now, upon remittitur from the Court of Appeals,

It is hereby ORDERED that, upon remittitur from the Court of

Appeals, the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without

costs.

 Memorandum: Respondent mother appeals from an order that, inter

alia, awarded joint legal custody of her child to petitioner

grandparents and respondent father. We previously held that the

grandparents failed to establish extraordinary circumstances to

deprive the mother of custody of the child, but the Court of Appeals

reversed our order and held that they had made such a showing (Matter

of Suarez v Williams, 128 AD3d 20, revd ___ NY3d ___ [Dec. 16, 2015]). 

The Court remitted the matter to us to consider issues raised but not

reached by us on the appeal. We now affirm.
-2- 212 

CAF 13-02243 

Contrary to the mother’s contention, Family Court’s determination

that it was in the child’s best interests to remain in the primary

physical custody of the grandparents is supported by a sound and

substantial basis in the record, and we will not disturb it (see

Matter of Misty D.B. v David M.S., 38 AD3d 1317, 1317). We have

considered the mother’s remaining contentions and conclude that they

lack merit. 

Entered: December 31, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
CHIEF JUSTICE

 ROGELIO VALDEZ

JUSTICES

 NELDA V. RODRIGUEZ

 DORI CONTRERAS GARZA

 GINA M. BENAVIDES

 GREGORY T. PERKES

 NORA L. LONGORIA

CLERK

 DORIAN E. RAMIREZ

NUECES COUNTY COURTHOUSE

901 LEOPARD, 10TH FLOOR

CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS 78401

361-888-0416 (TEL)

361-888-0794 (FAX)

HIDALGO COUNTY

ADMINISTRATION BLDG.

100 E. CANO, 5TH FLOOR

EDINBURG, TEXAS 78539

956-318-2405 (TEL)

956-318-2403 (FAX)

www.txcourts.gov/13thcoa

Court of Appeals 

Thirteenth District of Texas 

February 26, 2015

Hon. Scott P. Jones

Brock Person Guerra Reyna

17339 Redland Rd.

San Antonio, TX 78247

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Hon. Jacqueline M. Stroh

Attorney at Law

10101 Reunion Place, Suite 600

San Antonio, TX 78216

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Hon. Moises R. Hernandez

Hernandez Law Firm

P. O. Box 2999

Harlingen, TX 78551

Hon. Roger W. Hughes

Adams & Graham

134 E. Van Buren, Suite 301

P. O. Drawer 1429

Harlingen, TX 78551

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Re: Cause No. 13-12-00583-CV

Tr.Ct.No. 2006-CPC-92-B

Style: IN THE ESTATE OF MARIO GONZALEZ LIRA

Enclosed please find the opinion and judgment issued by the Court on this date.

Very truly yours,

Dorian E. Ramirez, Clerk

DER:ch

Enc.

cc: County Court at Law No. 2

Hon. Sylvia Perez, Cameron County Clerk (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Hon. J. Rolando Olvera Jr., Presiding Judge, Fifth Administrative Judicial Region

(DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2961 

To create additional permanent and temporary judgeships for the eastern 

district of California, to provide for an additional place of holding court 

in the eastern district of California, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 19, 2009 

Mr. MCCARTHY of California (for himself, Mr. HERGER, Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California, Mr. MCCLINTOCK, Mr. RADANOVICH, Mr. NUNES, 

and Mr. MCKEON) introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To create additional permanent and temporary judgeships 

for the eastern district of California, to provide for an 

additional place of holding court in the eastern district 

of California, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. NEW JUDGESHIPS FOR EASTERN DISTRICT OF 

4 CALIFORNIA. 

5 (a) PERMANENT JUDGESHIPS.—The President shall 

6 appoint, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2961 IH

1 4 additional district judges for the eastern district of Cali2 fornia. 

3 (b) TEMPORARY JUDGESHIP.— 

4 (1) APPOINTMENT.—The President shall ap5 point, by and with the advice and consent of the 

6 Senate, 1 additional district judge for the eastern 

7 district of California. 

8 (2) FIRST VACANCY NOT FILLED.—The first va9 cancy in the office of district judge in the eastern 

10 district of California occurring 10 years or more 

11 after the confirmation date of the judge named to 

12 fill the judgeship created by paragraph (1) shall not 

13 be filled. 

14 (c) TABLE.—In order that the table contained in sec15 tion 133(a) of title 28, United States Code, reflects the 

16 total number of permanent district judgeships authorized 

17 by virtue of subsection (a) of this section, such table is 

18 amended by striking the item relating to California and 

19 inserting the following: 

‘‘California: 

Northern ........................................................................................... 14

Eastern ............................................................................................. 10

Central .............................................................................................. 27

Southern ........................................................................................... 13.’’. 

20 (d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There 

21 are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be 

22 necessary to carry out this section, including such sums 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
3 

•HR 2961 IH

1 as may be necessary to provide appropriate space and fa2 cilities for the judicial positions created by this section. 

3 SEC. 2. ADDITIONAL PLACE OF HOLDING COURT. 

4 Section 84(b) of title 28, United States Code, is 

5 amended in the second sentence by inserting ‘‘Bakers6 field,’’ after ‘‘shall be held at’’. 

Æ 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS