alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2005182EN.01001702.xml

| 23.7.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 182/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.7.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 182/17

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Sixth Chamber)

of 26 May 2005

in Case C-287/04: Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Sweden (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Directive 93/104/EC - Organisation of working time - Failure to transpose within the prescribed period)

(2005/C 182/32)

Language of the case: Swedish

In Case C-287/04 Commission of the European Communities (Agents: L. Ström van Lier and N. Yerrell) v Kingdom of Sweden (Agent: A. Kruse) — action under Article 226 EC for failure to fulfil obligations, brought on 5 July 2004 — the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of A. Borg Barthet (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber, U. Lõhmus and A. Ó Caoimh, Judges; M. Poiares Maduro, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, gave a judgment on 26 May 2005, in which it:

| 1. | Declares that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Articles 3, 6 and 8 of Council Directive 93/104/EC of 23 November 1993 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time, the Kingdom of Sweden has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Articles 3, 6 and 8 of Council Directive 93/104/EC of 23 November 1993 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time, the Kingdom of Sweden has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

| 2. | Orders the Kingdom of Sweden to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Kingdom of Sweden to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 228 of 11. 09. 2004

1

---
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

June 16, 2015

N o. 04

- 15

- 00087

- CV

ESTATE OF SHIRLEY L. BENSON

,

From the Probate Court No 2, Be xar County, Texas

Trial Co urt No. 155,572 & 155,572

- A Honorable Tom Rickhoff, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

On March 30, 2015, this appeal was abated and administratively closed based on the underlying cause being removed to federal court. On June 12, 2015, appellant notified this court that the underlying cause was remanded to the trial court. It is therefore ORDERED that this appeal is REINSTATED on the docket of this court. Appellee’s brief must be filed no later than fourteen days from the date of this order.

________________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

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

court on this 16th day of June, 2015

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
# Antigua and Barbuda

58 items

        -    Report  		2021 Investment Climate Statements: Antigua and Barbuda	  July 21, 2021 
        -    Report  		2021 Trafficking in Persons Report: Antigua and Barbuda	  July 1, 2021 
        -    Report  		2020 Report on International Religious Freedom: Antigua and Barbuda	  May 12, 2021 
        -    Media Note  		Secretary Blinken’s Roundtable with CARICOM Foreign Ministers	  April 21, 2021 
        -    Report  		2020 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Antigua and Barbuda	  March 30, 2021 
        -    		Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs: Eastern Caribbean Summary	   
        -    Report  		2020 Investment Climate Statements: Antigua and Barbuda	  September 8, 2020 
        -    Report  		2020 Trafficking in Persons Report: Antigua and Barbuda	  June 25, 2020 
        -    Report  		2019 Report on International Religious Freedom: Antigua and Barbuda	  June 10, 2020 
        -    Report  		2019 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Antigua and Barbuda	  March 11, 2020 

previous page123456next page

Back to Top
#### Larry GRANT, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 78-1828.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

June 17, 1980.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Joseph C. Segor, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen. and James H. Greason, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before BARKDULL, HUBBART and BASKIN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant’s probation was revoked after an affidavit was filed alleging breach of three conditions of his probation. At the outset of the hearing, two of the alleged breaches were dismissed. At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court determined that the appellant had violated his probation and revoked same, finding him in violation as to each of the allegations contained in the affidavit of violation. This was error, and the matter is returned to the trial court solely for the purpose of correcting the revocation order. See: *Robinson*v. *State,*366 So.2d 1239 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979).

Reversed and remanded, with directions.
# Cambodia

126 items

        -    Report  		2023 Trafficking in Persons Report: Cambodia	  June 15, 2023 
        -    Press Statement  		Undemocratic Actions Ahead of Cambodian Elections	  Matthew MillerMay 25, 2023 
        -    Report  		2022 Report on International Religious Freedom: Cambodia	  May 15, 2023 
        -    Press Statement  		Khmer New Year 2023	  Antony J. BlinkenApril 12, 2023 
        -    Media Note  		Release of Japan-U.S.-Mekong Power Partnership Action Plan	  April 6, 2023 
        -    Report  		2022 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Cambodia	  March 20, 2023 
        -    Press Statement  		On the Conviction of Kem Sokha	  Ned PriceMarch 3, 2023 
        -    Media Note  		Annual Global Human Rights Defender Award Recipients Announced	  February 1, 2023 
        -    Remarks  		Remarks for International Religious Freedom Summit 2023 “Documenting International Religious Freedom”	  Beth Van SchaackJanuary 31, 2023 
        -    Press Statement  		Cambodia’s Arrest of Union Leader Chhim Sithar	  Ned PriceNovember 29, 2022 

previous page12345…13next page

Back to Top
HomeBulgaria

# Bulgaria

111 items

        -    TIAS  		Bulgaria (22-721) – Agreement Concerning Leahy Ineligible Units Written Agreement Requirement	  July 21, 2022 
        -    Report  		2022 Trafficking in Persons Report: Bulgaria	  July 19, 2022 
        -    Press Statement  		Remembering the Victims of Hizballah Attacks	  Ned PriceJuly 18, 2022 
        -    Report  		2021 Report on International Religious Freedom: Bulgaria	  June 2, 2022 
        -    Media Note  		Assistant Secretary Donfried’s Travel to the Republic of Bulgaria	  May 17, 2022 
        -    Readout  		Secretary Blinken’s Virtual Meeting with Bulgarian Prime Minister Petkov	  May 10, 2022 
        -    Funding Opportunity Announcement  		DRL FY21 IRF Promoting Interfaith Respect and Social Inclusion in Bulgaria and Romania	  April 28, 2022 
        -    Report  		2021 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Bulgaria	  April 12, 2022 
        -    Press Statement  		Bulgaria’s National Day	  Antony J. BlinkenMarch 3, 2022 
        -    Readout  		Counselor Chollet and Under Secretary Fernandez Meet with Bulgarian Energy Delegation	  February 15, 2022 

previous page1…34567…12next page

Back to Top
#### § 570.402 Effect of amendment.

Unless otherwise specifically provided, any amendment, modification, or revocation of any provision in or appendix to this part or chapter or of any order, regulation, ruling, instruction, or license issued by OFAC does not affect any act done or omitted, or any civil or criminal proceeding commenced or pending, prior to such amendment, modification, or revocation. All penalties, forfeitures, and liabilities under any such order, regulation, ruling, instruction, or license continue and may be enforced as if such amendment, modification, or revocation had not been made.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          51,694
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  158,703
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (23,093)
<INVENTORY>                                    622,867
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               853,931
<PP&E>                                         766,082
<DEPRECIATION>                               (710,249)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,812,522
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,464,455
<BONDS>                                        580,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      1,458
<COMMON>                                       267,968
<OTHER-SE>                                      78,641
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,812,522
<SALES>                                        367,425
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               367,425
<CGS>                                          347,780
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  347,780
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               554,343
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                23,093
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              16,170
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (550,868)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (534,698)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (550,868)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.14)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.14)
        


</TABLE>
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JORGE MARTINEZ,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 10-73015

Agency No. A094-318-047

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted March 10, 2015** 

Before: FARRIS, WARDLAW, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

Jorge Martinez, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of

the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an

immigration judge’s decision denying his application for withholding of removal 

and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Our jurisdiction is

FILED

MAR 19 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s

factual findings. See Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). 

We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to consider Martinez’s challenge to the agency’s

discretionary denial of his application for voluntary departure. See EsquivelGarcia v. Holder, 593 F.3d 1025, 1030 (9th Cir. 2010).

Substantial evidence supports both the BIA’s determination that Martinez

failed to establish a nexus between any harm he suffered and fears and a protected

ground, see Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (a “desire to be

free from . . . random violence by gang members bears no nexus to a protected

ground”), and the BIA’s finding that he failed to show it is more likely than not

any harm would occur, see Nagoulko v. INS, 333 F.3d 1012, 1018 (9th Cir. 2003)

(future persecution too speculative). Thus, Martinez’s withholding of removal

claim fails. 

Finally, substantial evidence supports the BIA’s denial of Martinez’s CAT

claim because he failed to establish it is more likely than not he would be tortured

by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government of El Salvador if

2 10-73015
returned. See Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th Cir. 2008). Thus,

Martinez’s CAT claim fails.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.

3 10-73015
#### § 597.309 Foreign terrorist organization.

The term *foreign terrorist organization* means an organization designated or redesignated as a foreign terrorist organization, or with respect to which the Secretary of State has notified Congress of the intention to designate as a foreign terrorist organization, under 8 U.S.C. 1189(a).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                       3,866,176
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                      11,139,276
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 56,575,779
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                    728,350,275
<ALLOWANCE>                                  4,566,475
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             834,252,455
<DEPOSITS>                                 559,645,280
<SHORT-TERM>                                73,472,527
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                         14,423,378
<LONG-TERM>                                123,071,811
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    41,471,394
<OTHER-SE>                                  22,168,065
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             834,252,455
<INTEREST-LOAN>                             13,902,372
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              966,847
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               301,501
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                            15,170,720
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           6,036,114
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           8,955,376
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        6,215,344
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   90,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                              19,659
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              3,945,893
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,373,604
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   3,373,604
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,307,604
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.47
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.47
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.02
<LOANS-NON>                                    511,294
<LOANS-PAST>                                    23,894
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                942,924
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             4,563,594
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                   94,779
<RECOVERIES>                                     7,660
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            4,566,475
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                         4,193,928
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                        372,547
        

</TABLE>
§ 800.802 Confidentiality. ( a ) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, any information or documentary material submitted or filed with the Committee under this part, including information or documentary material filed under § 800.501(g), shall be exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. 552 *et seq.*), and no such information or documentary material may be made public.
( b ) Paragraph (a) of this section shall not prohibit disclosure of the following: ( 1 ) Information relevant to any administrative or judicial action or proceeding;
( 2 ) Information to Congress or to any duly authorized committee or subcommittee of Congress;
( 3 ) Information important to the national security analysis or actions of the Committee to any domestic governmental entity, or to any foreign governmental entity of a United States ally or partner, under the exclusive direction and authorization of the Chairperson, only to the extent necessary for national security purposes, and subject to appropriate confidentiality and classification requirements; or
( 4 ) Information that the parties have consented to be disclosed to third parties.
( c ) This section shall continue to apply with respect to information and documentary material submitted or filed with the Committee in any case where: ( 1 ) Action has concluded under section 721 concerning a notified transaction;
( 2 ) A request to withdraw a notice or a declaration is granted under § 800.509 or § 800.406(c), respectively, or where a notice or a declaration has been rejected under § 800.504(a) or § 800.406(a), respectively;
( 3 ) The Committee determines that a notified or declared transaction is not a covered transaction; or
( 4 ) Such information or documentary material was filed under subpart D and the parties do not subsequently file a notice under subpart E.
( d ) Nothing in paragraph (a) of this section shall be interpreted to prohibit the public disclosure by a party of documentary material or information that it has submitted or filed with the Committee. Any such documentary material or information so disclosed may subsequently be reflected in the public statements of the Chairperson, who is authorized to communicate with the public and the Congress on behalf of the Committee, or of the Chairperson's designee.
( e ) The provisions of the Defense Production Act Reauthorization of 2003, as amended (50 U.S.C. 4555(d)) relating to fines and imprisonment shall apply with respect to the disclosure of information or documentary material filed with the Committee under these regulations.
HomeChile

# Chile

120 items

        -    Press Statement  		Promoting Accountability in Support of the 75th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights	  Antony J. BlinkenDecember 8, 2023 
        -    Media Note  		The Kremlin’s Efforts to Covertly Spread Disinformation in Latin America	  November 7, 2023 
        -    Media Note  		Under Secretary Fernandez’s Travel to Chile, Uruguay and Paraguay	  November 4, 2023 
        -    Overseas Schools Fact Sheet  		Santiago, Chile: International School Nido De Aguilas: 2023-2024 Fact Sheet	  October 18, 2023 
        -    Media Note  		Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs Allen Travels to Fiji, Vanuatu, Australia, and Chile	  October 11, 2023 
        -    TIAS  		Chile (23-926) – Arrangement for the Exchange of Technical Information and Cooperation in Nuclear Safety Matters	  September 26, 2023 
        -    Media Note  		U.S.-Chile Political-Military Dialogue	  September 26, 2023 
        -    Press Statement  		Chile National Day	  Antony J. BlinkenSeptember 18, 2023 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – September 11, 2023	  Matthew MillerSeptember 11, 2023Washington, D.C.  
        -    Press Statement  		The 50th Anniversary of the Military Coup in Chile	  Matthew MillerSeptember 11, 2023 

previous page1234…12next page

Back to Top
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Annual accomplishments report[electronic resource].**
 
2004 | 2005 | 2006
 
SuDoc Number:Y 3.F 31/20:1/11
Item Number:1061-E-11 (online)
CGP systemNumber:1061-E-11 (online)
 
September 9, 2019
See T EX . R. A PP . P

. 52. 8( d) ( “ W hen deny i ng r el i ef , t he cour t m ay han d do w n an opi ni on b ut 1 i s n o t r e q u i re d to d o s o .”) ; T EX . R. A PP . P . 4 7 .4 (d i s ti n g u i s h i n g o p i n i o n s a n d m e m o ra n d u m o p i n i o n s ). 

### NUM BER 13-1 0-00 268- CR 

## COURT OF A PP EA LS T H I R T E E N T H D I S T R I C T O F T E X AS CORPUS CHRI ST I -E DI NBURG IN RE: CROS M EDRA NO On Petit ion fo r Writ of M an da mus . M EM ORA ND UM OPIN ION Be fo re C hie f J us tice Vald ez an d Ju stice s B en av ide s a nd Ve la

M emo rand um Opin ion Pe r Cu riam 1 Rel ator , C ro s M edrano, filed a pe ti ti on for w ri t of mandamus in the abov e c ause on Ma y 5, 2010 t hroug h w hic h he soug ht t o c ompel the t ri al cour t to r u le on h is moti on for nun c pro tun c judgmen t. Relator ha s now f iled an “U n o p p o s ed Motio n to Dismiss” this or ig ina l proceed ing on g ro unds that the t ri al cour t has already g ra nted the req uest ed reli ef and t he pet it ion for w ri t of mandamus has been re ndered moot. The Co urt, hav ing ex amined and fully consi dered the petiti on for w ri t of mandamus and relato r’s uno ppo sed motio n to dismiss, is of the opin ion that the mo tion to d is m issshoul d be g ra nted. See In re Kellogg Brow n & Root

, Inc. , 1 6 6 S

. W

. 3 d 7 3 2 , 7 3 7 (T e x. 2005) ( “A

ca se becomes moot if a c ontrov ersy ce ases to ex is t betw een t he par ti es at an y sta g e of the leg al proceed ing s . . .” ); State Bar of T exas v. Gom ez , 891 S.W .2d 2 43, 2 45 (Tex . 199 4) ( sta ti ng that , fo r a c o n tr o v ersy to be j ust ic iab le, there mustbe a real cont rov ersybetween th e pa rties thatw ill be a ctua lly resolv ed b y

the jud icial relief so ught). Acc ordin g ly , w e GRAN T the un oppos ed motio n t o d ismis s a nd D ISM ISS the p eti ti on for w ri t of mandamus as moot. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 52.8( a)

. PERC UR IAM Do not p ubl is h. SeeT EX . R. A PP . P. 47. 2(b). Del iv ered and filed the 28th day of Ma y , 201 0.