alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2021211EN.01002301.xml

| 15.6.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 211/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.6.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 211/23

---

STATEMENT BY THE COMMISSION

The Commission agrees that affordable and accessible COVID-19 vaccines and tests for SARS-CoV-2 infection are crucial in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic. Taking into account that not the entire population will have been vaccinated when Regulations (EU) 2021/953 and (EU) 2021/954 of the European Parliament and of the Council enter into force, access to affordable and widely available testing possibilities is important to facilitate free movement and mobility in Europe.

To support Member States’ testing capacities, the Commission has already mobilised funds under the Emergency Support Instrument to purchase rapid antigen tests and has launched a joint procurement for over half a billion rapid antigen tests. The International Federation of Red Cross is also supporting Member States to increase testing capacity, using funding from the Emergency Support Instrument.

To further support the availability of affordable tests, in particular for persons who cross borders daily or frequently to go to work or school, visit close relatives, seek medical care, or to take care of loved ones, the Commission commits to mobilise additional funds of EUR 100 million under the Emergency Support Instrument for the purchase of tests for SARS-CoV-2 infection that qualify for the issuance of a test certificate pursuant to Regulation Regulations (EU) 2021/953 If necessary, additional funding above EUR 100 million could be mobilised, subject to approval by the budgetary authority.

---
#### § 2901.9 Effective date.

This rule shall become effective on October 29, 1979.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

December 6, 2017

No. 04-17-00736-CR

Porucha Denise PHILLIPS,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 187th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2016CR9223A

The Honorable Laura Lee Parker, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The trial court’s certification in this appeal states “this criminal case is a plea-bargain 

case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” The clerk’s record contains a written plea 

bargain, and the punishment assessed did not exceed the punishment recommended by the 

prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant; Rule 25.2(a)(2) applies. See TEX. R. APP. P. 

25.2(a)(2).

This court must dismiss this appeal “if a certification that shows the defendant has a right 

of appeal has not been made part of the record under these rules.” Id. R. 25.2(d); see Chavez v. 

State, 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). 

We ORDER Appellant to cause an amended trial court certification to be filed in this 

court within THIRTY days of the date of this order showing Appellant has the right of appeal. 

See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d), 37.1; see also Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610 (Tex. Crim. App. 

2005); Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, no pet.). If no 

amended trial court certification is filed as ordered, this appeal will be dismissed. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 25.2(d).

All other appellate deadlines are SUSPENDED pending further order of this court.
_________________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 6th day of December, 2017.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
### IS '- \-, - u b 1 9 Ap r 201 1 Fro m:MN

GAirline s Inc . Istanbu l TUBKE Y T o : T o who mi t ma y b e concerne d Re f :Renewa l o f Certificat e o f

Airworthines s W e kindl y infor myo u tha t MN GAirline s ha s renewe d Certificat e o f

Ai r worthines s fo r

TC-MC Fwhic hB737-40 0 a s attached . Pleas e updat e your/ou r record s accordingly , Attachments : 1-Renewe dCo

Afo r TC-MC F Bes t Regards , Atill aARIKA

N Manage r Schedulin g an dPlannin g MN GAirline s 

# [ Q ^

Ataluri t Havalimam , B Kapisi , Tekni k Hanga rYarn , 3^14 9 Yesilko y- Istanbu l / Turke y Phone ; +9 0 21 2 46 5 4 4 1 3 Fa>. : +9 0 21 2 46 5 4 4 9 6 - e-mail : scheduiinp(aimnQairllnes.co m Website : httpi/A-rtwv.ftnqairlines.ca m MN G Airline s i s a wholl yowne d subsidiaryo fMN G Holdin gft.- .



# I I * 5 cn 9 > m i 

# 4 l l H I 

# III . E g "' ^ 

# lii ^
- s i s -= 2 £ b "s ^ ^^3 

# F^ J - . ^ = 

# "^—r—1—

r > ^ 3 E D ^
= • ? 

# ^ k s j \ 

# 1 T ^ r / ' . 1



## 1 '

v J o - 3 ' O

c - ^ ~ J r 1

O *ii= > V '
1 1 1
' L — j 1 , 1

1

i i 

## i 1 i

] 1

! ' F —

] 1

1 

## 1

1 [


## 1

1

1

1 

# 1

1 

# 1

O ( 0 

# s i

s t 5 o

•f i t a 

## S i 

# I


# n 5 E ^ U i

uj ;

3 . - ^ ; 4 - z 

### o

o < o 

# s D C I

t C > Ci r o -<

•5 S 6 S ^ 

# II I 

# I l |

—t Q

i O c 

### s

= u S O
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996             DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996             DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                         144,871                 196,814
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0                       0
<PP&E>                                               0                       0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,067,820               3,619,103
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0                       0
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             0                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,067,820               3,619,103
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,067,820               3,619,103
<SALES>                                              0                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               349,807               1,157,261
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                61,090                 100,471
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                288,717               1,056,790
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                   288,717               1,056,790
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0
        

</TABLE>
### law offices 

# LACHT 

# R stephen lachter+associates pile

Brett Kruger, Acting Chief US Air Carrier Licensing Division Department ofTransportation 1200 New JerseyAvenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 September 22, 2014 

# AT

Re: FrontierAirlines US-Mexico Exemption Authority (Docket DOT-OST-2013-0144) Dear Mr. Kruger: On August 16, 2013 the Department granted FrontierAirlines, Inc. ("Frontier") exemption authority to provide scheduled foreign airtransportation ofpersons, property and mail between three city-pairs 1. Lansing, Michigan- Puerto Vallarta, Mexico (LANPVR); 2. Lansing, Michigan - Cancun, Mexico (LAN-CUN); and 3. St. Louis, Missouri - San Jose del Cabo, Mexico (STL-SJD). These services were intended to be operated on a seasonal basis only and, consistent with the exemption, Frontier operated in all three markets this pastwinter. While Frontier plans, once again, to provide seasonal service nextyear on the STL-SJD route, the carrier has determined notto institute service in either Lansing market. Therefore, consistentwith the Department's policy, this is to notifyyou that Frontier intends to discontinue seasonal service in both markets. Ifyou have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.



# sA ER & ASSOCIATES, PLLC COUNSEL FOR FRONTIER AIRLINES, INC.


## stephen.lachter@lachterlaw.coin slcpllen lacllter & associates pile- 1150 coniH.:cticul avenue. suite 900- washington, de 20036- telephone: 202J!62.43:2 1
-

**1~1' ;:**  202.ll35.3219
#### §§ 3565.356-3565.399 [Reserved]
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

MARK F. BEDFORD,

Petitioner,

v. CASE NO. 4:03cv291-RH/WCS

JAMES V. CROSBY,

Respondent.

_______________________________/

ORDER DENYING § 2254 PETITION

This matter is before the court on the magistrate judge’s report and

recommendation (document 25), to which no objections have been filed. Upon

consideration,

IT IS ORDERED:

The report and recommendation is ACCEPTED and adopted as the opinion

of the court. The clerk shall enter judgment stating, “The petition under 28 U.S.C.

§2254 challenging petitioner’s conviction in the Circuit Court, Second Judicial

Circuit, Leon County, Florida, case number 96-1373, for armed robbery with a

weapon, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, and resisting an officer with

Case 4:03-cv-00291-RH-WCS Document 26 Filed 07/25/05 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No: 4:03cv291-RH/WCS

violence is DENIED with prejudice.” The clerk shall close the file.

SO ORDERED this 25th day of July, 2005.

s/Robert L. Hinkle 

Chief United States District Judge 

Case 4:03-cv-00291-RH-WCS Document 26 Filed 07/25/05 Page 2 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-40316

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

NEFI RIZO-REYES,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:12-CR-1308-1

Before JONES, BENAVIDES, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Nefi Rizo-Reyes was convicted by a jury of illegal reentry following prior 

deportation and was sentenced below the advisory guidelines range to 57 

months of imprisonment. He maintains that the evidence was insufficient to 

support his conviction. Because he preserved his challenge to the sufficiency 

of the evidence, our review is de novo. See United States v. Frye, 489 F.3d 201, 

207 (5th Cir. 2007). 

* 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

January 16, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 14-40316 Document: 00512905503 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/16/2015
No. 14-40316

Rizo-Reyes challenges whether the Government proved that he was an 

alien at the time of his illegal reentry. He argues that the sole issue is whether 

the evidence established that his parents were married before his birth, a fact 

that would render him subject to more exacting residency requirements that 

he cannot satisfy. See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1401, 1409. Rizo-Reyes maintains that the 

evidence equally supported that his parents were not married at the time of 

his birth and, thus, he is entitled to an acquittal. 

When the evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to the 

Government, a rational jury could have found that it was sufficient to uphold 

Rizo-Reyes’s conviction. See United States v. Vargas-Ocampo, 747 F.3d 299, 

301 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 135 S. Ct. 170 (2014); United States v. 

Terrell, 700 F.3d 755, 760 (5th Cir. 2012), cert. denied, 133 S. Ct. 1834 (2013). 

The Government presented a marriage certificate showing that Rizo-Reyes’s 

parents were married in Mexico in 1974, which preceded Rizo-Reyes’s birth in 

1978. While Rizo-Reyes offered contrary evidence suggesting that his parents 

were not married at the time of his birth, the record supports, and we must 

presume, that the jury resolved any conflict in favor of the Government. See 

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 326 (1979). We must defer to the jury’s 

finding and its construction of the evidence. Id. Rizo-Reyes’s reliance on the 

“equipoise rule” is misguided because we have abandoned that standard in 

evaluating sufficiency claims. See Vargas-Ocampo, 747 F.3d at 301-02. 

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

2

 Case: 14-40316 Document: 00512905503 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/16/2015
# CI2021244EN.01000101.xml

| 22.6.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CI 244/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.6.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CI 244/1

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 21 June 2021

appointing one member of the Advisory Committee on Freedom of Movement for Workers for Portugal

(2021/C 244 I/01)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2011 on freedom of movement for workers within the Union (1), and in particular Articles 23 and 24 thereof,

Having regard to the lists of candidates submitted to the Council by the Governments of the Member States,

Whereas:

| (1) | By its Decisions of 21 September 2020 (2), 11 December 2020 (3)
  , (4) and 13 April 2021 (5), the Council appointed the members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Freedom of Movement for Workers for the period from 25 September 2020 to 24 September 2022. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

By its Decisions of 21 September 2020 (2), 11 December 2020 (3)
  , (4) and 13 April 2021 (5), the Council appointed the members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Freedom of Movement for Workers for the period from 25 September 2020 to 24 September 2022.

| (2) | The government of Portugal has submitted one nomination for a post to be filled, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The government of Portugal has submitted one nomination for a post to be filled,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following is hereby appointed as member of the Advisory Committee on Freedom of Movement for Workers for the period ending on 24 September 2022:

| I. | GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVES







  Country | Members | Alternate members |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Portugal | Ms Ana Margarida SILVA | |

I.

GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVES

Country

Members

Alternate members

Portugal

Ms Ana Margarida SILVA

Article 2

The members and alternate members not yet nominated will be appointed by the Council at a later date.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

Done at Luxembourg, 21 June 2021.

For the Council

The President

J. BORRELL FONTELLES

---

(1)  OJ L 141, 27.5.2011, p. 1.

1

(2)  Council Decision of 21 September 2020 appointing the members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Freedom of Movement for Workers (OJ C 315I, 23.9.2020, p. 5).

2

(3)  Council Decision of 11 December 2020 appointing members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Freedom of Movement for Workers for Cyprus (OJ C 432I, 14.12.2020, p. 1).

3

(4)  Council Decision of 11 December 2020 appointing one member and one alternate member of the Advisory Committee on Freedom of Movement for Workers for Ireland and Malta (OJ C 432I, 14.12.2020, p. 3).

4

(5)  Council Decision of 13 April 2021 appointing the members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Freedom of Movement for Workers for Italy (OJ C 149I, 27.4.2021, p. 1).

5

---
#### § 3560.655 Agency requested extension.

Before accepting an offer to prepay from a borrower with a restricted loan, the Agency must first make a reasonable effort to enter into a new restrictive-use agreement with the borrower. Under this agreement, the borrower would make a binding commitment to extend the low-income use of the housing and related facilities for 20 years for loans with interest credit, beginning on the date on which the new agreement is executed. If the borrower is unwilling to enter into a new restrictive-use provisions and restrictive-use agreement, the Agency should proceed to take the actions described in § 3560.658.
THE STATE OF TEXAS

M A N D A T E

*********************************************

TO THE 217TH DISTRICT COURT OF ANGELINA COUNTY, GREETING:

Before our Court of Appeals for the 12th Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 10th 

day of June, 2015, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

DOUGLAS RAY RICHARDS, Appellant

NO. 12-13-00320-CR; Trial Court No. CR-28710

Opinion by James T. Worthen, Chief Justice.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

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

“THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record and briefs filed herein, and the 

same being considered, it is the opinion of this court that there was no error in the judgment.

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the judgment of the court 

below be in all things affirmed, and that this decision be certified to the court below for 

observance.”

WHEREAS, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals 

for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District of Texas in this behalf, and in all things have it duly 

recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS, THE HONORABLE JAMES T. WORTHEN, Chief Justice of our Court 

of Appeals for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District, with the Seal thereof affixed, at the City of 

Tyler, this the 7

th day of August, 2015.

CATHY S. LUSK, CLERK

By: _______________________________

Chief Deputy Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

JOE N. WILFORD,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 4:03cv22-RH

PEAVY & SON CONSTRUCTION

CO., INC.,

Defendant.

__________________________________/

ORDER RESCHEDULING HEARING AND

DENYING MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA

A subpoena has been served on witness Paul A. Remillard requiring his

attendance at the hearing in this matter currently scheduled for 10:00 a.m. on June

28, 2005. He has moved to quash, asserting any testimony he could give “would

violate my oath of confidentiality,” that the subpoena was not served until June 27

and thus is untimely, and that he has a conflict (a mediation he is set to conduct in

another matter beginning at the same time, 10:00 a.m. on June 28).

Regardless of whether some testimony Mr. Remillard could give would be

inadmissible, it is incorrect that any testimony Mr. Remillard could give would be

inadmissible. And while one day’s notice is not much, in this instance Mr.

Case 4:03-cv-00022-RH Document 60 Filed 06/27/05 Page 1 of 2
1

 A member of Mr. Remillard’s staff called chambers by not later than

Thursday, June 23, 2005, to advise of his unavailability. A member of my staff

advised the caller—accurately—that rulings of the court could not be sought by a

unilateral telephone call. 

Remillard had at least five days’ actual notice of his required appearance.1

 Finally,

while Mr. Remillard’s conflict is a substantial concern, it does not appear to

prevent his attendance earlier on June 28.

The clerk has confirmed the availability of both sides beginning at 8:30 a.m.

on June 28. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED:

The hearing in this matter previously scheduled for 10:00 a.m. on June 28,

2005, is hereby rescheduled for 8:30 a.m. on June 28, 2005. The subpoena served

on witness Paul A. Remillard requiring his attendance at 10:00 a.m. on June 28,

2005, is hereby deemed amended to require his attendance at 8:30 a.m. on June 28. 

Mr. Remillard’s testimony will be presented at the outset of the hearing. Except to

the extent of this rescheduling, Mr. Remillard’s motion to quash is DENIED.

SO ORDERED this 27th day of June, 2005.

s/Robert L. Hinkle 

Chief United States District Judge 

Case 4:03-cv-00022-RH Document 60 Filed 06/27/05 Page 2 of 2
SCWC-22-0000456

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI‘I

U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE FOR ADJUSTABLE

RATE MORTGAGE TRUST 2005-2, ADJUSTABLE RATE MORTGAGE-BACKED

PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2005-2,

Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee,

vs.

KELLY EDWARDS, aka KELLY ANNE EDWARDS,

individually and as Trustee of the Edwards Family

Trust U/D/T dated September 19, 1996,

Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant,

and

THE ESTATE OF STUART D. EDWARDS, aka STUART DENZIL EDWARDS,

Respondent/Defendant-Appellee.

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

(CAAP-22-0000456; CIVIL NO. 3CC15100031K)

ORDER REJECTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ.)

The application for writ of certiorari, filed on 

December 21, 2022, by petitioner/defendant/appellant Kelly 

Edwards aka Kelly Anne Edwards is hereby rejected.

Dated: Honolulu, Hawaiʻi, February 14, 2023.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Michael D. Wilson

/s/ Todd W. Eddins

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCWC-22-0000456

14-FEB-2023

08:45 AM

Dkt. 11 ODAC
#### § 29.1030 Leaf structure.

The cell development of a leaf as indicated by its porosity. (See Elements of Quality Chart.)

[42 FR 21092, Apr. 25, 1977. Redesignated at 49 FR 16755, Apr. 20, 1984, and 51 FR 25027, July 10, 1986]