alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §3394. Limitation on revoking or amending certain pre-1969 certificates of public convenience and necessity

#### (a) General rule

The Commission may not, during the 10-year period beginning on November 9, 1978, revoke or amend any certificate of public convenience and necessity issued before January 1, 1969, under section 7 of the Natural Gas Act [15 U.S.C. 717f] for the transportation of natural gas owned by any electric utility except upon the application of the person to whom such certificate was issued.

#### (b) Commission curtailment authority

The limitation under subsection (a) shall not affect the authority of the Commission to enforce any curtailment of deliveries of natural gas under the Natural Gas Act [15 U.S.C. 717 et seq.].

(Pub. L. 95–621, title IV, §404, Nov. 9, 1978, 92 Stat. 3396.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Natural Gas Act, referred to in subsec. (b), is act June 21, 1938, ch. 556, 52 Stat. 821, which is classified generally to chapter 15B (§717 et seq.) of this title. For complete classification of this act to the Code, see section 717w of this title and Tables.
#### § 153.10 Authorization not exclusive.

No authorization granted pursuant to subpart B of this part and section 3 of the Natural Gas Act shall be deemed to prevent the Commission from granting authorization under subpart B to any other person at the same general location, or to prevent any other person from making application for such authorization.
#### Jarmon and others *vs.*Wiswall and others.

1. A final decree may be amended after enrollment, in a material point, where the amendment is in a matter as to which there could not have been a doubt of the complainant’s right to have it made part of the decree, if *69it liad been asked for when the decree was entered, and the omission to insert it in the decree, as part thereof, arose from inadvertence. But such amendment must be made on petition and notice.

2. An order made in a foreclosure suit after the sale of the mortgaged premises under the execution issued on the decree, requiring a defendant, (against whom no decree to such effect was taken, though the complainant was entitled to such decree,) to pay the deficiency, and awarding execution against him in case of his failure to do so, vacated, for want of notice of the application therefor.

The bill in this case was for foreclosure and sale of mortgaged premises. It prayed a decree against John Hoey for deficiency. Notice was given to him, according to the 38tli rule of this court, at the time of serving the subpoena to answer. No decree was taken against him, however. After the sale of the mortgaged premises, under the execution issued on the decree, the complainant filed his petition, setting forth these facts, and praying that an order might be made in the cause, requiring Air. Hoey to pay the existing deficiency, and awarding execution against him in case of his failure to do so.

The order was granted on application, without notice, and motion is now made to vacate it.

*Mr. John G. Vose,*of New York, for the motion.

*Mr. G. P. Kingsley,*contra.

The Chancellor.

It is insisted that it has been the practice of the court to-grant such orders as that under consideration, on *ex parte*application, without notice. If such has been the practice, I am not willing to follow it so far as the amendment of decrees after enrollment is concerned. The application, in this case, was, in fact, for a material amendment of the final decree after enrollment. Such amendment may be made, on the ground that it is an amendment in a matter as to which there could not have been a doubt of the complainant’s right to have it made part of the decree, if it had been asked for when- the decree was entered, and the omission to insert it in *70the decree, as part thereof, arose from inadvertence. *Dorsheimer*v. *Rorback, ante p.*33 *; Sprague*v. *Jones,*9 *Paige*395. But it must be made bn petition and notice.

The order will be vacated.
§ 93.519 Special provisions. ( a ) *In-bond shipments from Canada.* ( 1 ) Swine from Canada transported in-bond through the United States for immediate export shall be inspected at the border port of entry and, when accompanied by an import permit obtained under § 93.504 of this part and all conditions therein are observed, shall be allowed entry into the United States and shall be otherwise handled as provided in paragraph (b) of § 93.501. Swine not accompanied by a permit shall meet the requirements of this part in the same manner as swine destined for importation into the United States, except that the Administrator may permit their inspection at some other point when he or she finds that such action will not increase the risk that communicable diseases of livestock and poultry will be disseminated to the livestock or poultry of the United States.
( 2 ) *In-transit shipments through Canada.* Swine originating in the United States and transported directly through Canada may re-enter the United States without Canadian health or test certificates when accompanied by copies of the United States export health certificates properly issued and endorsed in accordance with regulations in part 91 of this chapter: *Provided,* That, to qualify for entry, the date, time, port of entry, and signature of the Canadian Port Veterinarian that inspected the swine for entry into Canada shall be recorded on the United States health certificate, or a document containing the information shall be included with the certificate that accompanies the swine. In all cases it shall be determined by the veterinary inspector at the United States port of entry that the swine are the identical swine covered by said certificate.
( b ) *Exhibition swine.* Swine from the United States which have been exhibited at the Royal Agricultural Winter Fair at Toronto or other publicly recognized expositions in Canada, including racing, rodeo, circus, or stage exhibitions in Canada, and have not been in that region for more than 90 days are eligible for return to the United States without Canadian health or test certificates, if they are accompanied by copies of the United States health certificate, issued and endorsed in accordance with the export regulations contained in Part 91 of this chapter for entry into Canada: *Provided,* That all swine offered for re-entry upon examination by the veterinary inspector at the U.S. port of entry, are found by the inspector to be free of communicable diseases and exposure thereto and are determined to be the identical swine covered by said certificates or are the natural increase of such swine born after official test dates certified on the dam's health certificate.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 0579-0020) [55 FR 31495, Aug. 2, 1990, as amended at 59 FR 67133, Dec. 29, 1994. Redesignated and amended at 62 FR 56012, 56020, Oct. 28, 1997; 81 FR 40151, June 21, 2016]
STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

STATE OF LOUISIANA

VERSUS

ABDELLATIF DEVOL

NO. 2022 KW 0257

JULY 5, 2022

In Re: Abdellatif Devol, applying for supervisory writs, 19th

Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge, 

No. 12- 14- 0663. 

BEFORE: McCLENDON, WELCH, AND HESTER, JJ. 

WRIT DENIED. 

PMC

JEW

CHH

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

DEPUTY CLERK OF COURT

FOR THE COURT
### §1693r. Exemption for State regulation

The Bureau shall by regulation exempt from the requirements of this subchapter any class of electronic fund transfers within any State if the Bureau determines that under the law of that State that class of electronic fund transfers is subject to requirements substantially similar to those imposed by this subchapter, and that there is adequate provision for enforcement.

(Pub. L. 90–321, title IX, §922, formerly §920, as added Pub. L. 95–630, title XX, §2001, Nov. 10, 1978, 92 Stat. 3741; renumbered §921, Pub. L. 111–24, title IV, §401(1), May 22, 2009, 123 Stat. 1751; renumbered §922 and amended Pub. L. 111–203, title X, §§1073(a)(3), 1084(1), July 21, 2010, 124 Stat. 2060, 2081.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Another section 922 of Pub. L. 90–321 is classified to section 1693q of this title.

Renumbering of section 920 of Pub. L. 90–321 as section 921 by section 401(1) of Pub. L. 111–24 was executed prior to the renumbering of section 921 of Pub. L. 90–321 as section 922 by section 1073(a)(3) of Pub. L. 111–203 as the probable intent of Congress, notwithstanding section 403 of Pub. L. 111–24, set out as an Effective Date note under section 1693l–1 of this title and section 4 of Pub. L. 111–203, set out as an Effective Date note under section 5301 of Title 12, Banks and Banking, which provided that the renumbering by Pub. L. 111–24 was effective 15 months after May 22, 2009, and the renumbering by Pub. L. 111–203 was effective 1 day after July 21, 2010.

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 922 of Pub. L. 90–321 was renumbered section 923 and is classified as an Effective Date note under section 1693 of this title.

#### Amendments

2010—Pub. L. 111–203, §1084(1), substituted "Bureau" for "Board" in two places.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 2010 Amendment

Amendment by section 1084(1) of Pub. L. 111–203 effective on the designated transfer date, see section 1100H of Pub. L. 111–203, set out as a note under section 552a of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
This schedule  contains summary  financial  information  extracted from the Form
10-Q for the quarter  ended  September 30, 1999 and is qualified in its entirety
by reference to the unaudited financial statements contained therein.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                       1,781,006
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                       4,040,893
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                  2,972,500
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                     167,257,440
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                       164,098,706
<LOANS>                                    153,732,599
<ALLOWANCE>                                  1,400,366
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             345,095,637
<DEPOSITS>                                 233,939,349
<SHORT-TERM>                                 7,000,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          1,812,000
<LONG-TERM>                                 55,677,368
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           41,972
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  46,624,948
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             345,095,637
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              8,361,153
<INTEREST-INVEST>                            8,169,727
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               484,675
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                            17,015,555
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           6,465,838
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           8,841,704
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        8,173,851
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                              34,515
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              5,104,965
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,526,832
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   2,268,664
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,268,664
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.56
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.56
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.33
<LOANS-NON>                                    882,571
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             1,716,790
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  316,424
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            1,400,366
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           987,366
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                        413,000


</TABLE>
# C_2013189EN.01001802.xml

| 29.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 189/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 189/18

---

Judgment of the General Court of 16 May 2013 — Reber v OHIM — Klusmeier (Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart PREMIUM)

(Case T-530/10) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart PREMIUM - Earlier national figurative marks W. Amadeus Mozart - No genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 15(1), first subparagraph and second subparagraph(a), and Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2013/C 189/34

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Reber Holding GmbH & Co. KG (Bad Reichenhall, Germany) (represented by: O. Spuhler and M. Geitz, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented: initially by R. Manea, then by D. Walicka, agents

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Anna Klusmeier (Bielefeld, Germany) (represented by: G. Schmitt-Gaedke, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 14 September 2010 (Case R 363/2008-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Reber Holding GmbH & Co. KG and Ms Anna Klusmeier

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Reber Holding GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs, including the costs necessarily incurred by Mrs Anna Klusmeier for the purpose of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Reber Holding GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs, including the costs necessarily incurred by Mrs Anna Klusmeier for the purpose of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).

---

(1)  OJ C 30, 29.1.2011.

1

---
§ 91.9 Ports. ( a ) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, livestock exported by air or sea may be exported only through ports designated as ports of embarkation by the Administrator. Any port that has an export inspection facility that meets the requirements of § 91.10 permanently associated with it is designated as a port of embarkation. The Program Handbook contains a list of designated ports of embarkation. A list may also be obtained from a Veterinary Services area office. Information on area offices is available on APHIS' import-export Web site (*http://www.aphis.usda.gov/import_export/index.shtml*).
( b ) The Administrator may approve other ports for the exportation of livestock on a temporary basis with the concurrence of the port director. The Administrator will grant such temporary approvals only for a specific shipment of livestock, and only if pre-export inspection of that shipment has occurred at an export isolation facility or an export inspection facility not associated with the port of embarkation, as provided in § 91.7.
( c ) Temporarily approved ports of embarkation will not be added to the list of designated ports of embarkation and are only approved for the time period and shipment conditions specified by APHIS at the time of approval.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 0579-0432)
Together, America Prospers

Community Facilities Program

Disaster Repair Grants

What does this 

program do?

USDA Rural Development offers 

Community Facilities (CF) 

Disaster Grants to help repair 

essential community facilities 

damaged in incidents named 

as calendar year (CY) 2022 

Presidentially declared disasters. 

CF Disaster Grants are available 

to eligible states, counties, cities, 

townships, incorporated towns, 

villages, authorities, boroughs, 

districts, Tribes, and communitybased nonprofit organizations. 

For the purposes of this program, 

the essential community facility 

must be in a primarily rural area. 

Who can apply?

• Public bodies as noted above

• Community-based nonprofit 

organizations

• Federally recognized Tribes 

What is an eligible area?

Areas such as cities, villages, towns, 

townships, and federally recognized 

Tribal lands with populations fewer 

than 20,000 are eligible. Your 

community facility must be located 

in an area in which a Presidentially 

declared disaster occurred in CY22.

How can funds be used?

Grants can be used to repair 

community facilities damaged 

in incidents named as CY 2022 

Presidentially declared disasters. 

Funds also can be used to replace 

damaged equipment or vehicles, to 

purchase equipment necessary to 

make repairs to damaged facilities, 

and to pay eligible project expenses. 

Examples of essential community 

facilities include:

• Health care facilities

• Child care centers

• Town halls or courthouses

• Community centers 

• Public safety buildings and 

equipment

• Libraries and museums

• Buildings that support distance 

learning or telemedicine 

What are some of the grant terms? 

• Funds are available on a continual 

basis until expended.

• There is no minimum or maximum 

award. Grants can cover up to 75 

percent of your total project cost.

• You can combine CY22 Disaster 

Repair grants with CF Direct Loans 

or Loan Guarantees – and also 

incorporate commercial financing 

– provided all other eligibility 

requirements are met.

How do we get started? 

• Applications are accepted at your 

local USDA RD office. 

• Program resources can be found at 

https://tinyurl.com/36f9wwzs.

Who can answer questions? 

Your local USDA RD office can help. A 

list of locations is available at https://

go.usa.gov/xJHPE.

What governs this program? 

• 7 CFR Part 3570, Subpart A – 

available at 

https://tinyurl.com/msjt4bkw

• Public Law 117-328, Division N – 

available at 

https://tinyurl.com/mr88c834 - 

(PDF) 

NOTE: Because information changes, always consult official program instructions 

or contact your local Rural Development office for help. A list is available at this 

link: https://go.usa.gov/xJHPE. You will find additional resources, forms, and program 

information at https://rd.usda.gov. USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, 

and lender.

Last Updated June 2023
#### § 1313.101 Purpose.

This part effectuates section 119 of the Rehabilitation, Comprehensive Services, and Developmental Disabilities Amendments of 1978, which amended section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 to prohibit discrimination on the basis of handicap in programs or activities conducted by Executive agencies or the United States Postal Service.
FORM RD 2006-46 (Rev. 01-98)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE MANUAL ISSUE No.

RURAL DEVELOPMENT WSAL 587

Washington, D.C 20250 DATE

July 13, 2023

PROCEDURE NOTICE

NOTICE

INSERT RD HB-1-3550 DIRECT SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING LOANS AND

(WSAL) GRANTS FIELD OFFICE HANDBOOK. 

Appendix 9 is completely revised to update the Income Limits for the

Sections 502 Direct and 504 Loan/Grant Program.

The effective date of these income limits is July 13, 2023. 

REMOVE INSERT

Appendix 9. Appendix 9 revised 07-13-23.

NOTICE

INSERT RD HB-1-3555 SFH GUARANTEED LOAN PROGRAM TECHNICAL

(WSAL) HANDBOOK. 

Appendix 5 is completely revised to update the Income Limits for the

Section 502 Guaranteed Loan Program. 

The effective date of these income limits is July 13, 2023. 

REMOVE INSERT

Appendix 5. Appendix 5 revised 07-13-23.

RD MANUAL CHANGES 

INSERT RD INS 2006-SS RURAL DEVELOPMENT PHYSICAL SECURITY - 

(WSAL) SIGNAGE. This Instruction is a new that 

succeeds the Unnumbered Letter on April 14, 

2021, entitled “First Amendment Activist Groups.” Rural Development offices 

need to clearly separate public spaces from employee-only spaces to ensure 

protection of our employees, customers, data, and facilities, while performing 

the mission of Rural Development (RD). Physical security signage is an 

integral part of the separation of public and employee-only spaces.

oOo

READ PROCEDURE - DISCUSS IN STAFF CONFERENCE - KEEP PROCEDURE MANUAL UP TO DATE
Order entered October 1 8 , 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 19 - 01133 - CR THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellant

V. DARIN BERNARD JOHNSON, Appellee On Appeal from the 29 2nd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F17 - 75869 - V



### O RDER Before the Court is the State’s October 10, 2019 motion to transfer the reporter’s record from cause number 05

- 19

- 00582

- CR, styled Darin Ber n ard Johnson v. The State of Texas , into this appeal. We GRANT the motion
. We DIRECT the Clerk of the Court to transfer the reporter’s record from the appeal in cause no. 05

- 19

- 00582

- CR into the above appeal.

/s/ LANA MYERS JUSTICE
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________ No. 96-3636NI

_____________ Mark Emerson Willey, * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the Northern v. * District of Iowa. * Douglas G. Schermer; City of * [UNPUBLISHED] Maquoketa; Cindy Fier, * * Appellees. *

_____________ Submitted: August 18, 1997

Filed: August 22, 1997

_____________ Before FAGG, BOWMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

_____________ PER CURIAM. Mark Emerson Willey appeals the dist rict court's order denying Willey's motion for new trial in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Following a bench trial, the district court awar ded Willey nominal damages against two defendants (Schermer and the City o f Maquo keta) who conceded liability for violation of Willey's First Amendment right s and absolved a third defendant (Fier) of any liability. A review of the record and the parti es' briefs show the ruling of the district court was correct. Because the appea l involves the straightforward application of settled principles of law, an extende d discussion is not warranted. We affirm the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.-2-

A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
#### § 557.12 Foreign canned or packaged fish and fish products bearing trade labels; sampling and inspection.

Foreign canned or packaged fish and fish products bearing on their immediate containers trade labels that have or have not been approved in accordance with the regulations in § 541.7 of this subchapter are to be sampled and inspected in the same manner as provided by § 327.12 of this chapter for foreign canned meat food products.