alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 609.7 Appeal and review. ( a ) *Applicable State law.* The provisions of the applicable State law concerning the right of appeal and fair hearing from a determination or redetermination of entitlement to State unemployment compensation shall apply to determinations and redeterminations of eligibility for or entitlement to UCFE and waiting period credit. Any such determination or redetermination shall be subject to appeal and review only in the manner and to the extent provided in the applicable State law with respect to determinations and redeterminations of entitlement to State unemployment compensation.
( b ) *Rights of appeal and fair hearing.* The provisions on right to appeal and opportunity for a fair hearing with respect to claims for UCFE shall be consistent with this part and with sections 303(a)(1) and 303(a)(3) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 503(a)(1) and 503(a)(3).
( c ) *Promptness on appeals.* ( 1 ) Decisions on appeals under the UCFE Program shall accord with the Secretary's “Standard for Appeals Promptness—Unemployment Compensation” in part 650 of this chapter, and with § 609.1(d).
( 2 ) Any provision of an applicable State law for advancement or priority of unemployment compensation cases on judicial calendars, or otherwise intended to provide for the prompt payment of unemployment compensation when due, shall apply to proceedings involving claims for UCFE.
( d ) *Appeal and review by Federal agency.* If a Federal agency believes that a State agency's determination or redetermination of an individual's eligibility for or entitlement to UCFE is incorrect, the Federal agency may seek appeal and review of such determination or redetermination in the same manner as an interested employer may seek appeal and review under the applicable State law.
[47 FR 54687, Dec. 3, 1982, as amended at 71 FR 35514, June 21, 2006]
§ 680.220 Are there particular career services an individual must receive before receiving training services under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act? ( a ) Yes, except as provided by paragraph (b) of this section, an individual must at a minimum receive either an interview, evaluation, or assessment, and career planning or any other method through which the one-stop center or partner can obtain enough information to make an eligibility determination to be determined eligible for training services under WIOA sec. 134(c)(3)(A)(i) and § 680.210. Where appropriate, a recent interview, evaluation, or assessment, may be used for the assessment purpose.
( b ) The case file must contain a determination of need for training services under § 680.210 as determined through the interview, evaluation, or assessment, and career planning informed by local labor market information and training provider performance information, or through any other career service received. There is no requirement that career services be provided as a condition to receipt of training services; however, if career services are not provided before training, the Local WDB must document the circumstances that justified its determination to provide training without first providing the services described in paragraph (a) of this section.
( c ) There is no Federally required minimum time period for participation in career services before receiving training services.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose MARTINEZ-GARCIA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 04-41276

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided Feb. 22, 2006.

*590Before BARKSDALE, STEWART, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Jose Martinez-Garcia (Martinez) appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction of illegal reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. The district court sentenced Martinez to 41 months in prison, based on a prior conviction for an alien smuggling offense.

Martinez contends that his sentence is illegal under *United States v. Booker,*543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), because it was imposed pursuant to a mandatory application of the federal sentencing guidelines. Martinez thus alleges a “Fanfan” error. *See United States v. Walters,*418 F.3d 461, 463 (5th Cir.2005). In the district court, Martinez objected to his sentence under *Blakely v. Washington,*542 U.S. 296, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), and the Government concedes that the issue is preserved and that it is subject to review for harmless error.

The Government has not carried its burden of showing beyond a reasonable doubt that the district court’s error did not affect Martinez’s sentence. *See Walters,*418 F.3d at 464; *United States v. Pineiro,*410 F.3d 282, 285-86 (5th Cir.2005). We therefore vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing in accordance with *Booker. See Walters,*418 F.3d at 464; *Pineiro,*410 F.3d at 285-86.

Martinez also contends that the “felony” and “aggravated felony” provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are unconstitutional. Martinez’s constitutional challenge to § 1326(b) is foreclosed by *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). Although Martinez contends that *Almendarez-Torres*was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule *Almendarez-Torres*in light of *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that *AlmendarezTorres*remains binding. *See United States v. Garza-Lopez,*410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), *cert. denied,*— U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 298, 163 L.Ed.2d 260 (2005). Martinez properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of *Almendarez-Torres*and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review. Accordingly, the conviction is affirmed.

AFFIRMED IN PART; VACATED AND REMANDED IN PART.

*

 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.
```

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 249 (Wednesday, December 29, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 82132]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-32875]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

ITS Joint Program Office; Human Factors for IntelliDrive \SM\ 
(HFID); Public Meeting; Notice of Public Meeting

AGENCY: Research and Innovative Technology Administration, U.S. 
Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Notice.

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

    The U.S. Department of Transportation ITS Joint Program Office (ITS 
JPO) and the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration 
(NHTSA) will host a free public meeting to discuss the Human Factors 
for IntelliDrive (HFID) program on January 6, 2011 from 10 a.m. to 5:30 
p.m. at the Flamingo Las Vegas, 3555 Las Vegas Boulevard South Las 
Vegas, Nevada 89109.
    IntelliDrive is a research program under development that will 
allow vehicles to communicate wirelessly with other vehicles and the 
surrounding infrastructure, such as traffic signals and work zones. The 
program has the potential to significantly reduce vehicle crashes, 
enhance mobility and improve the environment. One of the supporting 
research programs is Human Factors for IntelliDrive (HFID), a program 
aimed at understanding the effects of providing drivers with critical 
safety warning messages. The vision of the HFID research is to address 
the number of new, competing visual and audible stimuli that put 
demands on a driver's attention. The goal of the program is to develop 
guidelines to ensure future IntelliDrive interfaces are effective 
without increasing distraction. The HFID program will support all of 
the IntelliDrive applications--safety, mobility, and sustainability--
for multiple vehicle types to include: passenger vehicles, passenger 
transit vehicles, and heavy trucks.
    At this meeting, ITS JPO and NHTSA will provide an overview of the 
entire Human Factors for IntelliDrive program, including Vehicle to 
Vehicle (V2V) communication and Vehicle to Infrastructure (V2I) 
communication, heavy truck-related research, and environmental research 
related IntelliDrive. The presenters will also cover each of the five 
HFID research tracks and then lead a discussion to facilitate the 
exchange of ideas with stakeholders. The feedback obtained during the 
meeting will be considered for the current program and future HFID 
projects.
    Registration will be available on-site. For additional questions, 
please contact Nicole Oliphant at noliphant@itsa.org or 202-721-4215.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on the 22nd day of December 2010.
John Augustine,
Managing Director, ITS Joint Program Office.
[FR Doc. 2010-32875 Filed 12-28-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-HY-P
```
cc: Hon. Douglas W. Herndon, District Judge 

Cannon & Tannery 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Clark County District Attorney 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A 

2
# C_2012234EN.01000201.xml

| 4.8.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 234/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.8.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 234/2

---

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

(Text with EEA relevance, except for products falling under Annex I to the Treaty)

2012/C 234/03

| Date of adoption of the decision | 29.6.2012 |
| --- | --- |
| Reference number of State Aid | SA.34905 (12/N) |
| Member State | France |
| Region | Auvergne | Mixed |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | Prolongation jusque fin 2013 du programme «effluents fromagers de Haute-Dordogne» N 778/06, précédemment approuvé par la Commission. |
| Legal basis | Articles L 1511-1 et suivants et L 3231-2 du Code général des collectivités territoriales (CGCT)
  Loi no 2004-338 du 21 avril 2004 portant transposition de la directive cadre sur l'eau (directive 2000/60/CE du 23 octobre 2000)
  Décret no 2005-475 du 16 mai 2005 relatif au SDAGE
  Arrêté du 16 mai 2005 portant délimitation des bassins ou groupements de bassin en vue de l’élaboration des SDAGE schémas départementaux d'aménagement |
| Type of measure | Scheme | — |
| Objective | Investments in agricultural holdings, Investment in processing and marketing |
| Form of aid | Direct grant |
| Budget | — |
| Intensity | 75 % |
| Duration (period) | Until 31.12.2013 |
| Economic sectors | Mixed farming, Animal production |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Ministère de l'agriculture et de l'agroalimentaire |
| 78 rue de Varenne |
| 75349 Paris 07 SP |
| FRANCE |

Date of adoption of the decision

29.6.2012

Reference number of State Aid

SA.34905 (12/N)

Member State

France

Region

Auvergne

Mixed

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Prolongation jusque fin 2013 du programme «effluents fromagers de Haute-Dordogne» N 778/06, précédemment approuvé par la Commission.

Legal basis

Articles L 1511-1 et suivants et L 3231-2 du Code général des collectivités territoriales (CGCT)

Loi no 2004-338 du 21 avril 2004 portant transposition de la directive cadre sur l'eau (directive 2000/60/CE du 23 octobre 2000)

o

Décret no 2005-475 du 16 mai 2005 relatif au SDAGE

o

Arrêté du 16 mai 2005 portant délimitation des bassins ou groupements de bassin en vue de l’élaboration des SDAGE schémas départementaux d'aménagement

Type of measure

Scheme

—

Objective

Investments in agricultural holdings, Investment in processing and marketing

Form of aid

Direct grant

Budget

—

Intensity

75 %

Duration (period)

Until 31.12.2013

Economic sectors

Mixed farming, Animal production

Name and address of the granting authority

Ministère de l'agriculture et de l'agroalimentaire

78 rue de Varenne

75349 Paris 07 SP

FRANCE

Other information

—

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm

---
#### Center Capital Corp., Respondent, v. Dahlia Operating Corp. et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants.

Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs. Do opinion. Present — Peek, P. J., Dore, Callahan, Yan Yoorhis and Shientag, JJ.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, March 03, 2021.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, March 03, 2021

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A21I0133. RASHAD BURCH v. VEVERRIC MILLS et al. .

Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby DENIED.

LC NUMBERS:

19EV0006585
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. George Phillips, Appellant, et al., Defendants.

No opinion. Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Untermyer, Dore and Callahan, JJ.
NUMBER 13-21-00092-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI — EDINBURG 

IN RE C.N.E.

 

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

 

ORDER

Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Longoria and Tijerina

Order Per Curiam

On April 6, 2021, relator C.N.E.1 filed a petition for writ of mandamus seeking to 

compel the trial court to order the trial court to: (1) dismiss the suit for modification filed 

by real party in interest, A.J.S., to the extent that it requests he be granted the right to

establish the primary residence of the parties’ minor child; and (2) vacate a temporary 

1 See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 109.002(d) (“On the motion of the parties or on the court’s own 

motion, the appellate court in its opinion may identify the parties [in a suit affecting the parent-child 

relationship] by fictitious names or by their initials only.”).
2

order which, inter alia, changed a primary residence restriction. 

The Court requests that the real party in interest, A.J.S., or any others whose 

interest would be directly affected by the relief sought, file a response to the petition for 

writ of mandamus on or before the expiration of ten days from the date of this order. See 

TEX. R. APP. P. 52.2, 52.4, 52.8.

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed on the

6th day of April, 2021.
### §2604. Allocation, transfer and availability of funds; separate appropriation accounts on Treasury books

The President may allocate or transfer to any agency of the United States Government any part of any funds available for carrying out the purposes of this chapter. Such funds shall be available for obligation and expenditure for the purposes for which authorized in accordance with authority granted in this chapter or under authority governing the activities of the agencies of the United States Government to which such funds are allocated or transferred. Funds allocated or transferred pursuant to this section to any such agency may be established in separate appropriation accounts on the books of the Treasury.

(Pub. L. 87–510, §4(b), June 28, 1962, 76 Stat. 123.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This chapter, referred to in text, was in the original "this Act", meaning Pub. L. 87–510, June 28, 1962, 76 Stat. 121, known as the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of 1962, which enacted this chapter, amended section 1104 of Title 8, Aliens and Nationality, repealed sections 1925(a), (c), (d), and 1951(c) of this title, enacted a provision set out as a note under section 2601 of this title, and amended a provision set out as a note under section 1182 of title 8. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 2601 of this title and Tables.
Editorial Note on Part 655
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 655 appear at 71 FR 35521, 35522, June 21, 2006.

§ 655.801 What protection do employees have from retaliation? ( a ) No employer subject to this subpart I or subpart H of this part shall intimidate, threaten, restrain, coerce, blacklist, discharge or in any other manner discriminate against an employee (which term includes a former employee or an applicant for employment) because the employee has— ( 1 ) Disclosed information to the employer, or to any other person, that the employee reasonably believes evidences a violation of sections 212(n) or (t) of the INA or any regulation relating to sections 212(n) or (t), including this subpart I and subpart H of this part and any pertinent regulations of DHS or the Department of Justice; or
( 2 ) Cooperated or sought to cooperate in an investigation or other proceeding concerning the employer's compliance with the requirements of sections 212(n) or (t) of the INA or any regulation relating to sections 212(n) or (t).
( b ) It shall be a violation of this section for any employer to engage in the conduct described in paragraph (a) of this section. Such conduct shall be subject to the penalties prescribed by sections 212(n)(2)(C)(ii) or (t)(3)(C)(ii) of the INA and § 655.810(b)(2), *i.e.,* a fine of up to $9,380, disqualification from filing petitions under section 204 or section 214(c) of the INA for at least two years, and such further administrative remedies as the Administrator considers appropriate.
( c ) Pursuant to sections 212(n)(2)(C)(v) and (t)(3)(C)(v) of the INA, an H-1B nonimmigrant who has filed a complaint alleging that an employer has discriminated against the employee in violation of paragraph (a)(1) of this section may be allowed to seek other appropriate employment in the United States, provided the employee is otherwise eligible to remain and work in the United States. Such employment may not exceed the maximum period of stay authorized for a nonimmigrant classified under sections 212(n) or (t) of the INA, as applicable. Further information concerning this provision should be sought from the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services of the Department of Homeland Security.
[65 FR 80233, Dec. 20, 2000, as amended at 69 FR 68229, Nov. 23, 2004; 71 FR 35521, June 21, 2006; 81 FR 43448, July 1, 2016; 82 FR 5380, Jan. 18, 2017; 83 FR 11, Jan. 2, 2018; 84 FR 217, Jan. 23, 2019; 85 FR 2296, Jan. 15, 2020; 86 FR 2967, Jan. 14, 2021; 87 FR 2333, Jan. 14, 2022; 88 FR 2214, Jan. 13, 2023; 89 FR 1814, Jan. 11, 2024]
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY ELEV

 1,021.96

 1,021.67

 1,021.42

 1,021.32

 1,021.19

 1,020.99

 1,020.74

 1,020.53

 1,020.28

 1,020.18

 1,019.99

 1,019.77

 1,019.64

 1,019.33

 1,019.11

 1,018.98

 1,018.94

 1,018.89

 1,018.84

 1,018.75

 1,018.62

 1,018.51

 1,018.42

 1,018.31

 1,018.16

 1,018.07

 1,017.99

 1,017.91

 1,017.78

 1,017.61

 1,017.49

 3,334.3

 3,327.3

 3,321.2

 3,318.8

 3,315.6

 3,310.8

 3,304.8

 3,299.7

 3,293.7

 3,291.3

 3,286.7

 3,281.4

 3,278.3

 3,270.8

 3,265.5

 3,262.4

 3,261.4

 3,260.2

 3,259.0

 3,256.9

 3,253.8

 3,251.1

 3,249.0

 3,246.3

 3,242.8

 3,240.6

 3,238.7

 3,236.8

 3,233.7

 3,229.6

 3,226.8

STORAGE

-6.8

-7.0

-6.1

-2.4

-3.1

-4.8

-6.0

-5.1

-6.0

-2.4

-4.6

-5.3

-3.1

-7.5

-5.3

-3.1

-1.0

-1.2

-1.2

-2.2

-3.1

-2.6

-2.2

-2.6

-3.6

-2.2

-1.9

-1.9

-3.1

-4.1

-2.9

CHANGE

 3,521

 3,016

 3,510

 5,405

 5,030

 3,806

 3,318

 3,616

 3,030

 4,795

 3,738

 3,996

 4,977

 3,062

 2,965

 2,873

 3,762

 3,730

 3,287

 4,008

 3,859

 3,957

 3,841

 4,048

 3,284

 3,724

 3,868

 3,837

 3,353

 3,648

 3,922

INFLOW

 6,833

 6,508

 6,456

 6,619

 6,354

 6,070

 6,284

 6,061

 5,940

 5,989

 6,026

 6,559

 6,513

 6,711

 5,529

 4,386

 4,104

 4,298

 3,869

 4,847

 5,365

 5,215

 4,786

 5,299

 5,024

 4,684

 4,714

 4,658

 4,830

 5,592

 5,279

POWER

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

SPILL

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

OUTLET

 122

 50

 107

 7

 264

 178

 71

 107

 128

 21

 21

 106

 42

 113

 106

 63

 141

 35

 21

 247

 63

 70

 141

 77

 70

 126

 119

 140

 84

 98

 84

C.F.S.

 .17

 .07

 .15

 .01

 .37

 .25

 .10

 .15

 .18

 .03

 .03

 .15

 .06

 .16

 .15

 .09

 .20

 .05

 .03

 .35

 .09

 .10

 .20

 .11

 .10

 .18

 .17

 .20

 .12

 .14

 .12

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .27

 1.93

 .52

 .02

 .00

 .00

 .38

 .87

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

OCTOBER 2011 SHASTA LAKE DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: December 1, 2011

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

RIVER

TOTALS -114.4 116,786 171,402 0 0 3,022 4.28 3.99

ACRE-FEET -114,400 231,645 339,976 0 0 5,994

COMMENTS:

* COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES AND EVAPORATION.

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 339,976

SPILL 0

OUTLET

TOTAL

 0

 339,976

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 3.99

JULY 1, 2011 4.44

 3,341.1
11 TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND

, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

D aniel Charles Jackson

, * From the 32nd District Court

of Nolan County,

Trial Court No. 125 87

.

Vs. No. 11

- 1 8

- 00 3 10

- CR * November 19 , 20 20

The State of Texas

, * Memorand um Opinion by Wright

, S. C.J.

(P anel consists of: Bailey , C.J.,

Stretcher , J. , and Wright, S.C.J.,

sitting by assignment )

( Willson , J., not participating)

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is no

error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court ’ s opi nion,

the judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed.
§ 681.490 What is adult mentoring? ( a ) Adult mentoring for youth must: ( 1 ) Last at least 12 months and may take place both during the program and following exit from the program;
( 2 ) Be a formal relationship between a youth participant and an adult mentor that includes structured activities where the mentor offers guidance, support, and encouragement to develop the competence and character of the mentee; and
( 3 ) While group mentoring activities and mentoring through electronic means are allowable as part of the mentoring activities, at a minimum, the local youth program must match the youth with an individual mentor with whom the youth interacts on a face-to-face basis.
( b ) Mentoring may include workplace mentoring where the local program matches a youth participant with an employer or employee of a company.
### §§5031, 5032. Repealed. Pub. L. 103–149, §4(a)(2), Nov. 23, 1993, 107 Stat. 1505

Section 5031, Pub. L. 99–440, title II, §203, Oct. 2, 1986, 100 Stat. 1095; Pub. L. 103–149, §4(a)(1), Nov. 23, 1993, 107 Stat. 1504, related to expansion of participation of black and other nonwhite South Africans in economy of South Africa.

Section 5032, Pub. L. 99–440, title II, §205, Oct. 2, 1986, 100 Stat. 1096, related to labor practices of United States Government in South Africa.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal effective June 8, 1994, date on which President certified to Congress that interim government, elected on nonracial basis through free and fair elections, had taken office in South Africa, see section 4(a)(2) of Pub. L. 103–149, set out in a Repeal of Chapter; South African Democratic Transition Support note under section 5001 of this title.