alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-60343

Summary Calendar

JOSE DOLORES HERNANDEZ-ARGUIJO,

Petitioner

v.

LORETTA LYNCH, U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

BIA No. A089 229 511

Before JOLLY, BARKSDALE, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jose Dolores Hernandez-Arguijo, a citizen of Honduras, petitions for 

review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), dismissing his 

challenge of a decision of the Immigration Judge (IJ), who denied his 

application for withholding of removal. Hernandez’ application was based on

persecution on account of his religion and membership in a particular social 

group. Where, as here, the BIA’s decision adopts or is affected by the IJ’s 

* Pursuant to 5th Cir. 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 5th Cir. 

R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

May 13, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 14-60343 Document: 00513041665 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/13/2015
No. 14-60343

reasoning, the decisions of the IJ and BIA are reviewed. E.g., Wang v. Holder, 

569 F.3d 531, 536 (5th Cir. 2009). Whether an alien demonstrated eligibility 

for withholding of removal is a factual determination reviewed for substantial 

evidence. E.g., Orellana-Monson v. Holder, 685 F.3d 511, 517-18 (5th Cir. 

2012).

To be entitled to withholding of removal, an applicant must establish a 

clear probability of persecution on account of one of five protected grounds,

either by showing that persecution upon removal is more likely than not to 

occur or by establishing past persecution, thereby creating a presumption that 

future persecution is more likely than not to occur. See 8 U.S.C. 

§ 1231(b)(3)(A). Persecution generally requires a showing that “harm or 

suffering will be inflicted upon” the applicant. Roy v. Ashcroft, 389 F.3d 132, 

138 (5th Cir. 2004) (citation and quotation marks omitted).

Aside from receiving three threats over a three-year period, Hernandez

does not allege he suffered physical harm or that harm is more likely than not

to occur upon his return. While threats of violence, along with evidence of 

intent to carry out the threats, may be sufficient to constitute persecution, e.g.,

Tamara-Gomez v. Gonzales, 447 F.3d 343, 348-49 & n.8 (5th Cir. 2006), 

Hernandez continued working as a youth coordinator without incident for more 

than three years, his wife and children continue living in Honduras without 

incident, and there is no indication the threats will be, or are intended to be, 

carried out. Because a reasonable factfinder would not be compelled to find 

that Hernandez would more likely than not face persecution upon removal, the 

BIA’s decision that he is not entitled to withholding of removal is supported by 

substantial evidence. 

DENIED.

2

 Case: 14-60343 Document: 00513041665 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/13/2015
USDA 

iiiii 

CJ 

CJ 

CJ 

CJ 

1111 

1111 

2023 RMA Crops' Indemnities

Source: USDA Risk Management Agency - Summary of Business

Data Current Date: April 1, 2024

Layer Credits: USDA & US Census Bureau

 The information displayed in this map is intended to serve as an aid in displaying data provided or stored by the Risk Management Agency. It does not modify, replace or supersede any USDA published policy provisions or procedures.

Map Projection: USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic

Map Creation Date: April 04, 2024

Maps created by USDA Risk Management Agency are for spatial and visual context for depicting the basic information for “where”. Maps are not considered a survey. General Reference Only.

RMA Risk Management Services Division

 -- Public Information --

This map depicts weekly crop insurance indemnity data by county as of the data current date denoted on the map

No Indemnity ($0.00)

$0.01 - $1,000,000.00

$1,000,000.01 - $10,000,000.00

$10,000,000.01 - $25,000,000.00

$25,000,000.01 - $50,000,000.00

$50,000,000.01 - $170,551,917.00

and is published biweekly.
EX-10.126



 Exhibit 10.126 
 A.N.: 130339 
 AMD_00126443.0 

AMENDMENT 
 Date of
Amendment: April 15, 2014 
 AMENDMENT (this “Amendment”) to that certain Amendment (MSCI reference number AMD_00119879.0)
dated January 23, 2014 (the “Modification”) to the Index License Agreement for Funds (MSCI reference number IXF_00040) dated as of March 18, 2000 (as previously amended, the “Agreement”) by and between
MSCI Inc. (formerly known as Morgan Stanley Capital International Inc.) (“MSCI”) and BlackRock Institutional Trust Company, N.A. (formerly known as Barclays Global Investors, N.A.) (“Licensee”). Capitalized terms
used but not defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Modification or the Agreement, as the case may be. 
  

	1.	Section 2 of the Modification is hereby deleted in its entirety and replace with the following: 


Licensee may use the Indexes set forth in Section 1 above solely with respect to the following Funds (each, an “IMI ETF”
and each IMI ETF shall also be a “Fund” as such term is defined in the Agreement): 

	 	•	 	 iShares Core MSCI Europe ETF 



	 	•	 	 iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF 


 Or such other names as agreed by Licensee and MSCI in writing. 
 The IMI ETFs shall be exchange
traded funds listed on a national securities exchange located in the United States. 
  

	2.	This Amendment is intended to amend and operate in conjunction with the Modification and Agreement, and together this Amendment, the Modification and the Agreement
constitute the complete and exclusive statement of the agreement between the parties and supersede in full all prior proposals and understandings, oral or written, relating to the subject matter hereof. To the extent that this Amendment conflicts
with the Modification or the Agreement, this Amendment shall control. No right or license of any kind is granted to Licensee except as expressly provided in the Modification, the Agreement and this Amendment. 


 

	3.	This Amendment shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the laws of the State of New York without regard to its conflict or choice of laws principles.


 ACKNOWLEDGED AND AGREED 
  

									
	LICENSEE: BlackRock Institutional Trust Company, N.A.	  		  	MSCI Inc.
					
	 By
	  	/s/ Paul C. Lohrey	  		  	By	  	/s/ David Kinzelberg
		  	  
	  		  		  	  

					
	 Name
	  	PAUL C. LOHREY	  		  	Name	  	DAVID KINZELBERG
		  	  
	  		  		  	  

		  	 (printed)
	  		  		  	
					
	 Title
	  	MANAGING DIRECTOR	  		  	Title	  	EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
		  	  
	  		  		  	  

					
	 Date
	  	APRIL 16, 2014	  		  	Date
§ 95.27 Blood meal, blood albumin, intestines, and other animal byproducts for industrial use; importations permitted subject to restrictions. Blood meal, blood albumin, bone meal, intestines, or other animal materials intended for use in the industrial arts, which do not meet the conditions or requirements of § 95.26 shall be handled and treated in the following manner after arrival at the port of entry. ( a ) They shall be consigned from the coast or border port of arrival to an approved establishment: *Provided, however,* That upon permission by the Deputy Administrator, Veterinary Services they may be stored for a temporary period in approved warehouses under bond and under the supervision of an inspector: *And provided further,* That I. T. or in-bond shipments of such products may go forward under customs seals from a coast or border port of arrival, with the approval of an inspector at said port, to another port of consumption entry, subject after arrival at the latter port to the other provisions of this section.
( b ) They shall be moved from the coast or border port of arrival or, in the case of I. T. or in-bond shipments, from the interior port to the establishment in cars or trucks or in vessel compartments with no other materials contained therein, sealed with seals of the Department, which shall not be broken except by Veterinary Services inspectors or other persons authorized by the Deputy Administrator, Veterinary Services so to do, or without sealing as aforesaid and with other freight when packed in tight cases or casks acceptable to an inspector at the port of entry.
( c ) They shall be handled at the establishment under the direction of an inspector in a manner to guard against the dissemination of foot-and-mouth disease. They shall not be removed therefrom except upon special permission of the Deputy Administrator, Veterinary Services and upon compliance with all the conditions and requirements of this section relative to the movement of the said products from the port of arrival to the said establishment.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 0579-0015) [28 FR 5981, June 13, 1963, as amended at 59 FR 67134, Dec. 29, 1994. Redesignated and amended at 78 FR 73003, 73007, Dec. 4, 2013; 83 FR 15494, Apr. 11, 2018]
### §198. Repealed. Oct. 10, 1940, ch. 851, §4, 54 Stat. 1111

Section, acts Jan. 25, 1929, ch. 102, title III, 45 Stat. 1119; Apr. 18, 1930, ch. 184, title III, 46 Stat. 198; Feb. 23, 1931, ch. 280, title III, 46 Stat. 1334; July 1, 1932, ch. 361, title III, 47 Stat. 502; Mar. 1, 1933, ch. 144, title III, 47 Stat. 1393; Apr. 7, 1934, ch. 104, title III, 48 Stat. 551; Mar. 22, 1935, ch. 39, §1, 49 Stat. 90; May 15, 1936, ch. 405, §1, 49 Stat. 1336; June 16, 1937, ch. 359, title III, §1, 50 Stat. 287; Apr. 27, 1938, ch. 180, title III, §1, 52 Stat. 273; June 29, 1939, ch. 248, title III, 53 Stat. 909, related to purchases of supplies and equipment on the open market.
# C_2010346EN.01002502.xml

| 18.12.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 346/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.12.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 346/25

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Lombardia — Sezione Terza (Italy) lodged on 5 July 2010 — Edison Trading SpA v Autorità Per l’Energia Elettrica e il Gas

(Case C-330/10)

()

2010/C 346/41

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Lombardia — Sezione Terza

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Edison Trading SpA

Applicant:

Defendant: Autorità Per l’Energia Elettrica e il Gas

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Do Articles 23, 43, 49 and 56 of the Treaty and Article 11(2) and (6) and Article 24 of Directive 54/03/EC (1) preclude national legislation which, without the European Commission having been notified, requires on a permanent basis certain electricity producers which are, in certain circumstances, essential for the purpose of meeting the requirements of the demand for dispatching services, to submit bids on the energy exchange markets, in accordance with programmes determined by the network operator in accordance with external rules, and which prevents producers from freely determining the remuneration for such bids by linking the remuneration to criteria that have not been pre-determined according to transparent, non-discriminatory and market-based procedures?

1

---

(1)  OJ 2003 L 176, p. 37

1

---
# C_2012295EN.01001001.xml

| 29.9.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 295/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.9.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 295/10

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 19 July 2012 — European Commission v French Republic

(Case C-145/11) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2001/82/EC - Veterinary medicinal products - Decentralised procedure for the grant of marketing authorisation for a veterinary medicinal product in a number of Member States - Generic medicinal products similar to the reference medicinal products already authorised - Refusal to approve request by a Member State - Composition and form of the medicinal product)

2012/C 295/16

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: M. Šimerdová, A. Marghelis and O. Beynet, Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: French Republic (represented by: G. de Bergues, S. Menez and R. Loosli-Surrans, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Articles 32 and 33 of Directive 2001/82/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 November 2001 on the Community code relating to veterinary medicinal products (OJ 2001 L 311, p. 1) — Decentralised procedure for the grant of marketing authorisation in more than one Member State — Generic medicinal products similar to the reference medicinal products already authorised — Member State’s refusal to approve based on scientific grounds related to the composition of the medicinal product and the choice of pharmaceutical form — Principle of mutual recognition

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Declares that, by refusing to approve two requests for marketing authorisation of the medicinal veterinary products CT-Line 15 % Premix and CT-Line 15 % Oral Powder in the context of the decentralised procedure provided for by Directive 2001/82/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 November 2001 on the Community code relating to veterinary medicinal products, as amended by Directive 2004/28/EC of the European Parliament of the Council of 31 March 2004, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 32 and 33 of that directive; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by refusing to approve two requests for marketing authorisation of the medicinal veterinary products CT-Line 15 % Premix and CT-Line 15 % Oral Powder in the context of the decentralised procedure provided for by Directive 2001/82/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 November 2001 on the Community code relating to veterinary medicinal products, as amended by Directive 2004/28/EC of the European Parliament of the Council of 31 March 2004, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 32 and 33 of that directive;

| 2. | Orders the French Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the French Republic to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 160, 28.5.2011.

1

---
STAKEHOLDER ANNOUNCEMENT

USDA Seeks Applications to Improve Water and Waste Treatment in Rural Areas

WASHINGTON, Oct. 7, 2021 – The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) today announced that it is 

accepting applications for grants to improve water treatment and waste disposal systems in rural areas.

The applications are being accepted under the Water and Waste Disposal Technical Assistance and Training 

Grants program. The program helps small communities improve water and waste treatment facilities for 

households and businesses.

Nonprofits that have the proven ability, background, experience and capacity to provide technical assistance or 

training on a national, regional or state basis are encouraged to apply. Eligible project areas include cities, towns 

and unincorporated rural areas with populations of up to 10,000 residents or tribal lands in rural areas. Special 

consideration may be given to projects that serve areas with populations of less than 5,500 residents or less than

2,500 residents.

Funds may be used to:

• Identify and evaluate solutions to water problems related to source, storage, treatment, distribution, 

collection, treatment and disposal.

• Provide technical assistance and training to improve management, operations and maintenance of water 

and waste disposal systems.

• Prepare water and waste disposal loan and grant applications.

Projects should be completed in 12 months.

Applications must be submitted through Grants.gov by 11:59 p.m. EST on Dec. 31, 2021.

USDA Rural Development encourages applicants to consider projects that will advance key priorities under the 

Biden-Harris Administration to help rural America build back better and stronger. Key priorities include 

combatting the COVID-19 pandemic; addressing the impacts of climate change; and/or advancing equity in 

rural America. For more information, visit https://www.rd.usda.gov/priority-points.

Additional information is available on Grants.gov. If you’d like to subscribe to USDA Rural Development 

updates, visit our GovDelivery subscriber page.

###

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender
### §4658. Defense Production Act of 1950 efforts

#### (a) In general

Not later than 180 days after January 1, 2021, the President shall submit to Congress a report on a plan of action for any use of authorities available in title III of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. 4531 et seq.) to establish or enhance a domestic production capability for microelectronics technologies and related technologies, subject to—

(1) the availability of appropriations for that purpose; and

(2) a determination made under the plan pursuant to such title III that such technologies are essential to the national defense and that domestic industrial capabilities are insufficient to meet these needs.

#### (b) Coordination

The President shall develop the plan of action required by subsection (a) in consultation with any relevant head of a Federal agency, an advisory committee established under section 708(d) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. 4558(d)), and appropriate stakeholders in the private sector.

(Pub. L. 116–283, div. H, title XCIX, §9908, Jan. 1, 2021, 134 Stat. 4860.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Defense Production Act of 1950, referred to in subsec. (a), is act Sept. 8, 1950, ch. 932, 64 Stat. 798, which is classified principally to chapter 55 (§4501 et seq.) of Title 50, War and National Defense. Title III of the Act is classified generally to subchapter II (§4531 et seq.) of chapter 55. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see section 4501 of Title 50 and Tables.
§ 107.2 Products under State license. ( a ) The Administrator shall exempt from the requirement of preparation pursuant to an unsuspended and unrevoked USDA establishment and product license, any biological product prepared solely for distribution within the State of production pursuant to a license granted by such State under a program determined by the Administrator to be consistent with the intent of the Act to prohibit the preparation, sale, barter, exchange, or shipment of worthless, contaminated, dangerous, or harmful biological products.
( b ) A request for exemption under this section must be made by the appropriate State authority and shall include information demonstrating that: ( 1 ) The State has the authority to license viruses, serums, toxins, and analogous products and establishments that produce such products; and
( 2 ) The State has the authority to review the purity, safety, potency, and efficacy of such products prior to release to the market; and
( 3 ) The State has the authority to review product test results to assure compliance with applicable standards of purity, safety, and potency prior to release to the market; and
( 4 ) The State has the authority to deal effectively with violations of State law regulating viruses, serums, toxins, and analogous products; and
( 5 ) The State effectively exercises the authority specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this section consistent with the intent of the Act prohibiting the preparation, sale, barter, exchange, or shipment of worthless, contaminated, dangerous, or harmful viruses, serums, toxins, or analogous products.
( c ) Each product to be exempted and each establishment preparing such product shall be identified by the State and the State shall give written notification to the Administrator of each such product and establishment. The State shall also give written notice to the Administrator of each new license issued and of each license terminated.
( d ) In order to determine whether a State exercises its authority with respect to biological products and establishments and whether its laws and regulations are being achieved, the Administrator, in cooperation with proper State authorities, may conduct an on-site evaluation of the State's program which may include inspection of establishments and/or products to be included under the exemptions in this section.
[52 FR 30131, Aug. 13, 1987, as amended at 56 FR 66783, Dec. 26, 1991]
#### § 82.2 Fees and charges.

The provisions of § 81.7 of this chapter are applicable to this part; however, where the charging of fees is appropriate, they need not be collected in advance.

[33 FR 358, Jan. 10, 1968, as amended at 47 FR 56980, Dec. 22, 1982]
Exhibit
      10.18

     

    Schedule
      of Disclosures for Jiangsu Sunshine Zoological and Forestry Co., Ltd. and China
      Greenscape Co., Ltd

     

    Preliminary
      Statement

    


    General
      Disclosures

    


    Specific
      Schedules

     

    
      
        	
                3.d

              	
                Subsidiaries

              
	
                3.g

              	
                Material
                  Contracts and Obligations

              
	
                3.i

              	
                Title
                  to and Condition of the Assets

              
	
                3.j

              	
                Intellectual
                  Property Rights

              
	
                3.l

              	
                Insurance

              
	
                3.m

              	
                Employees

              
	
                3.m.ii

              	
                Employee
                  Plans

              
	
                3.p

              	
                Real
                  Property

              
	 	 
	
                4.c

              	
                Subsidiaries

              
	
                4.h.ii

              	
                Sales
                  of Securities

              


      

    

     

    List
      of Assets
#### § 91.8 Rest, feed, and water at an export inspection facility associated with the port of embarkation prior to export.

All livestock that are intended for export by air or sea and that will be inspected for export at an export inspection facility associated with the port of embarkation must be allowed a period of at least 2 hours rest at an export inspection facility prior to being loaded onto an ocean vessel or aircraft for export. Adequate food and water must be available to the livestock during the rest period. An inspector may extend the required rest period up to 5 hours, at his or her discretion and based on a determination that more rest is needed in order to have assurances that the animals are fit to travel prior to loading. Pre-export inspection of the animals must take place at the conclusion of this rest period.
**Exhibit 10c**

 

**STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OFARCADIS NVPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO§ 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connectionwith the Annual Report of Arcadis NV (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the periodended December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission(the “Report”), I, Harrie L.J. Noy, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based on my knowledge:

 

1)              TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2)              Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/ Harrie  L.J. Noy                       |   |
|--------------------------------------------|--------|
| Name: Harrie  L.J. Noy                     |
| Title: Chief  Executive Officer ARCADIS NV |
| June 12,  2003                             |

 

1

----