alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Plaintiff, *v.*Joseph P. Kelly, Defendant.

(Court of General Sessions of the Peace, in and for the City and County of New York,

July, 1900.)

Fine — When the General Sessions will not remit ,a fine imposed by the Special Sessions.

The Court of Special Sessions in the city and county of New York has power to remit a fine imposed by it, and, therefore, the Court of General Sessions of the Peace in said city and county, although having power to do so, will not remit a fine imposed by the former court, where no application in the matter has been made to it and where no good reason is assigned why the Court of General Sessions should act.

*320Application to remit a fine imposed by the Court of Special Sessions.

Edward J. Kenney, Jr., for motion.

No one in opposition.

Foster, J.

The defendant for a serious misdemeanor (receiving money for promising to secure a position for the complainant in the street cleaning department of the city of New York) was sentenced by the Court of Special Sessions to one year’s imprisonment and to pay a fine of $400, and to stand committed, one day for each dollar of the fine unpaid. This court is now asked to remit the fine, because the defendant has served the one year’s imprisonment imposed, and also twenty-five days on account of the unpaid fine; has been a “ good prisoner”; and is unable to pay the balance of the fine. While this court has the undoubted power to remit such fine (Code Crim. Pro., § 484), it ought not to exercise it unless some good reason for so doing is shown, otherwise, this court would be sitting in review of the judgment of the Court of Special Sessions. That court is given ample power to grant the relief prayed for, by the act creating it (Laws of 1895, chap. 601), and it seems to me that no reason is given, or appears, why the application is not so made. That court imposed the fine after a hearing or trial, and with a full knowledge of the circumstances of the defendant’s crime, and doubtless, because it felt that the maximum imprisonment, which it had power to inflict, was not an adequate punishment for the crime of which the defendant was convicted. The good conduct of the prisoner is not a sufficient reason for the action of this court; for that, the law gives, and the defendant has undoubtedly received, a commutation of sentence. Nor is his impecuniosity a sufficient reason, for the Court of Special Sessions appears to have had that contingency in mind when they directed the detention of the prisoner one day for each dollar of the fine unpaid. For these reasons, notwithstanding the recommendation of the district attorney, I must deny the motion, but with leave to renew to the Court of Special Sessions, or, on such further facts as the petitioner may be able to present.

Motion denied, with leave to renew to the Court of Special Sessions.
# C_2023116EN.01003001.xml

| 31.3.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 116/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.3.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 116/30

---

New national side of euro coins intended for circulation

(2023/C 116/11)

Image 1

National side of the new commemorative 2-euro coin intended for circulation and issued by Slovakia

Euro coins intended for circulation have legal tender status throughout the euro area. For the purpose of informing the public and all parties who handle the coins, the Commission publishes a description of the designs of all new coins (1). In accordance with the Council conclusions of 10 February 2009 (2), euro-area Member States and countries that have concluded a monetary agreement with the European Union providing for the issuing of euro coins are allowed to issue commemorative euro coins intended for circulation, provided that certain conditions are met, particularly that only the 2-euro denomination is used. These coins have the same technical characteristics as other 2-euro coins, but their national face features a commemorative design that is highly symbolic in national or European terms.

Issuing country: Slovakia

Subject of commemoration: The 100th anniversary of the first blood transfusion in Slovakia

Description of the design: The design features an equilateral cross as an internationally recognised symbol of medical aid, hope and humanity. Inscribed in each arm is one of the four blood groups: A, B, 0, and AB. Incused within the cross are two more equilateral crosses, one within the other, with a drop of blood appearing at the centre of this image. Depicted around the central cross are the equally spaced lower parts of eight test tubes, each containing an incused stylised blood drop. Between each tube is a blood drop in relief. To the right of the bottom tube are the stylised initials ‘MP’, referring to the national side’s designer Mária Poldaufová; to the left is the mint mark of the Kremnica Mint (Mincovňa Kremnica), consisting of the letters ‘MK’ placed between two dies. Around most of the edge of the coin’s inner part is the inscription ‘PRVÁ TRANSFÚZIA KRVI 1923 – 2023’ (in English the words mean ‘first blood transfusion’). Along the lower part of the edge is the name of the issuing country ‘SLOVENSKO’, with a dot on either side separating it from the inscription.

The coin’s outer ring depicts the 12 stars of the European flag.

Estimated number of coins to be issued: 1 000 000

Date of issue: March 2023

---

(1)  See OJ C 373, 28.12.2001, p. 1 for the national faces of all the coins issued in 2002.

(2)  See the conclusions of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 10 February 2009 and the Commission Recommendation of 19 December 2008 on common guidelines for the national sides and the issuance of euro coins intended for circulation (OJ L 9, 14.1.2009, p. 52).

---
#### § 1221.12 Capital.

A covered swap entity shall comply with the capital levels or such other amounts applicable to it as required by the Director of FHFA pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 4611.

[80 FR 74914, Nov. 30, 2015]
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 279

To amend the Small Business Act to include drought in the definition of 

disaster for purposes of the disaster loan program administered by the 

Small Business Administration. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 8, 2003

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Small Business 

A BILL

To amend the Small Business Act to include drought in 

the definition of disaster for purposes of the disaster 

loan program administered by the Small Business Administration.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Small Business 

5 Drought Relief Act’’. 
2

•HR 279 IH 

1 SEC. 2. INCLUSION OF DROUGHT IN DEFINITION OF DIS2 ASTER. 

3 Section 3(k) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 

4 632(k)) is amended by inserting ‘‘drought,’’ after ‘‘wind5 storms,’’.

Æ
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### National Aeronautics and Space Administration

          - [Notice (09-089)]

# AGENCY:

National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463, as amended, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration announces a public teleconference of the Review of U.S. Human Space Flight Plans Committee. The agenda topics for the meeting include:
      - Finalization of the scoring of the Human Space Flight options.

# DATES:

Thursday, October 8, 2009, 1 p.m.-2 p.m. (Eastern).

*Teleconference Information:*

*Toll-free number:*                         1-888-373-5705.                    

*Toll number:*                         1-719-457-3840.                    

*Participant Passcode:*                         190078.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Mr. Philip R. McAlister, Office of Program Analysis and Evaluation, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC 20546.                         *Phone:*                         202-358-0712.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The teleconference will be open to the public up to the limit of the teleconference service (300 people). Public callers will be in listen-only mode. It is imperative that the meeting be held on this date in order for the Committee's Final Report to support the timeframes associated with the Federal budget process. For this reason it is not possible to accommodate the full notice period.

P. Diane Rausch,

Advisory Committee Management Officer, National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

[FR Doc. E9-24251 Filed 10-6-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7510-13-P
#### § 238.81 Purpose.

This subpart implements section 19(e)(1) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (FDIA), which prohibits persons who have been convicted of certain criminal offenses or who have agreed to enter into a pre-trial diversion or similar program in connection with a prosecution for such criminal offenses from occupying various positions with a savings and loan holding company. This part also implements section 19(e)(2) of the FDIA, which permits the Board to provide exemptions, by regulation or order, from the application of the prohibition. This subpart provides an exemption for savings and loan holding company employees whose activities and responsibilities are limited solely to agriculture, forestry, retail merchandising, manufacturing, or public utilities operations, and a temporary exemption for certain persons who held positions with respect to a savings and loan holding company as of October 13, 2006. The subpart also describes procedures for applying to the Board for an exemption.
EX-10.8




					
	



				Exhibit 10.8

 March 27, 2015 
 Michele
Peppers 
 Dear Michele: 
 You are among a select group of key
employees who are being included in a retention program. As we discussed, you play a critical role in the successful operation of the Financial Reporting function at Career Education Corporation (“CEC”). 

Specifically, in consideration for your continued active employment in good standing with CEC, which shall include but not be limited to the successful
performance of your day-to-day responsibilities, as well as such additional duties as may be assigned to you through the date below, you will be eligible for Retention Bonus payments under the terms and conditions set forth below. 

Retention Bonus Payments 
 If you are actively employed in
good standing by CEC as of the following dates, CEC will make the following Retention Bonus Payments to you: 
  

	 	•	 	September 15, 2015 

 Retention Bonus Payment: $37,000.00, less all applicable deductions

  

	 	•	 	March 15, 2016 

 Retention Bonus Payment: $37,000.00, less all applicable deductions 

These payments will be made to you within fifteen (15) business days after the applicable Retention Bonus Payment date listed above. 

If you leave the Company (whether by voluntary resignation or involuntary termination for Cause) at any time prior to the time any of the above contingencies
have been met, you will not be entitled to any portion of the Retention Bonus Payments prior to your separation from the Company. A for Cause termination includes, but is not limited to, discharge for poor performance, non-performance, or
misconduct. In the event you are involuntarily terminated from the Company other than for Cause prior to any of the Retention Bonus Payment dates listed above, you will be entitled to any Retention Bonus Payment that has not yet become due prior to
your separation from the Company. The payment will be made to you within fifteen (15) business days after your separation from the Company. 
 You and
the Company may mutually agree that you will transfer to a different position within CEC prior to any of the Retention Bonus Payment dates and, in that case, you would forego your eligibility for any outstanding Retention Bonus payments. 

  
 1 








 Exhibit 10.8 

In addition, notwithstanding anything contained herein, you will remain an employee-at-will. This means you are free to terminate your employment at any time,
for any reason, and the Company retains the same right. 
 By signing this letter below and returning a copy to me by April 8, 2015, you acknowledge
that you have read, understand and agree to the terms set forth herein. We appreciate your continued dedication to the Company. 
 Sincerely, 

 

	
	 /s/ Ronald D. McCray

	
	Ronald D. McCray
	Interim President and CEO

 AGREED TO AND ACCEPTED BY: 
  

					
	 /s/ Michele A. Peppers
				 4/8/15

			
	Accepted				Date


  
 2
<PAGE>

RESOLVED, THAT THE COMPANY'S AMENDED 1992 NONEMPLOYEE DIRECTOR STOCK OPTION PLAN
(THE "PLAN") BE AMENDED AS FOLLOWS:

1.   PARAGRAPHS 3.2 THROUGH 3.5 SHALL BE DELETED IN THEIR ENTIRETY AND THE
     FOLLOWING SHALL BE SUBSTITUTED IN PLACE THEREOF.

     III. STOCK OPTIONS

     3.2  STOCK OPTION TERM. UNLESS EARLIER EXERCISED OR TERMINATED PURSUANT TO
          THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 3.4, EACH STOCK OPTION SHALL EXPIRE AND NO
          LONGER BE EXERCISABLE ON A DATE WHICH IS TEN YEARS AFTER THE DATE OF
          GRANT.

     3.3  EXERCISE OF STOCK OPTIONS. OPTIONS GRANTED SHALL BECOME EXERCISABLE
          IMMEDIATELY UPON ISSUANCE. OPTIONS SHALL REMAIN EXERCISABLE UNTIL THE
          STOCK OPTION IS EXERCISED OR EXPIRES AS PROVIDED IN THIS ARTICLE III.
          AT THE TIME OF THE EXERCISE OF A STOCK OPTION, THE PURCHASE PRICE
          SHALL BE PAID IN FULL IN CASH, OR IN SHARES OF COMMON STOCK VALUED AT
          THEIR FAIR MARKET VALUE ON THE EXERCISE DATE. NO FRACTIONAL SHARES
          WILL BE ISSUED PURSUANT TO THE EXERCISE OF A STOCK OPTION, NOR WILL
          ANY CASH PAYMENT BE MADE IN LIEU OF FRACTIONAL SHARES.

     3.4  TERMINATION OF DIRECTOR STATUS. IN THE EVENT THAT THE HOLDER OF STOCK
          OPTIONS CEASES TO BE A DIRECTOR OF THE COMPANY FOR ANY REASON
          ("TERMINATION"), ALL STOCK OPTIONS SHALL THEREAFTER BE EXERCISABLE
          UNTIL THE EARLIER TO OCCUR OF THREE YEARS FROM THE DATE OF TERMINATION
          OR TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THE GRANT OF SUCH STOCK OPTION.

     3.5  DIVIDEND EQUIVALENTS. THE COMPANY SHALL PAY TO HOLDERS OF STOCK
          OPTIONS AN AMOUNT FOR EACH SHARE OF COMMON STOCK ISSUABLE UPON
          EXERCISE OF SUCH STOCK OPTIONS A "DIVIDEND EQUIVALENT" EQUAL TO THE
          CASH OR OTHER CONSIDERATION PAID AS A DIVIDEND OR DISTRIBUTION (OTHER
          THAN A DIVIDEND OR DISTRIBUTION PAYABLE IN COMMON STOCK) BY THE
          COMPANY WITH RESPECT TO ITS OUTSTANDING SHARES OF COMMON STOCK.
          DIVIDEND EQUIVALENTS SHALL BE PAID, WITH RESPECT TO ANY RECORD DATE
          FOR SUCH DIVIDEND OR DISTRIBUTION OCCURRING ON OR AFTER THE DATE OF
          GRANT OF ANY STOCK OPTION TO AND INCLUDING THE DATE OF EXERCISE OR
          TERMINATION OF SUCH STOCK OPTION, IN THE SAME MANNER AS PROVIDED FOR
          HOLDERS OF COMMON STOCK.

2.   PARAGRAPH 4.2 IS HEREBY DELETED IN ITS ENTIRETY. PARAGRAPHS 4.3 AND 4.4 ARE
     HEREBY RENUMBERED AS PARAGRAPHS 4.2 AND 4.3, RESPECTIVELY.
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


C\_2013182EN.01001201.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 27.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 182/12 |

---

Information communicated by the EFTA States regarding State aid granted under the Act referred to in point 1j of Annex XV to the EEA Agreement (Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/2008 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the common market in application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty (General Block Exemption Regulation))

2013/C 182/14

PART I

| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Aid No | GBER 4/13/R&D | | |
| EFTA State | Norway | | |
| Granting authority | Name | Avinor AS | |
| Address | | | | --- | | PO Box 150 | | 2061 Gardermoen | | NORWAY | | |
| Webpage | http://www.avinor.no | |
| Title of the aid measure | ‘Agreement on cooperation on research on Remote & Virtual Tower technology (RVT) — 2’ ‘Avtale om samarbeid om forskning på teknologi for fjernstyrte og virtuelle tårn (RVT) — 2’ | | |
| National legal basis (Reference to the relevant national official publication) | Contract | | |
| Weblink to the full text of the aid measure | http://www.avinor.no/avinor/presse/\_nyhetsarkiv?SAMARBEIDSAVTALE\_MELLOM\_AVINOR\_OG\_KONGSBERG&id=181-154688 | | |
| Type of measure | Ad hoc aid | Name of the beneficiary: Kongsberg Defence & Aerospace AS | |
| Date of granting | Ad hoc aid | 11.2.2013 | |
| Type of beneficiary | Large enterprises | X | |
| Budget | Overall amount of the ad hoc aid awarded to the undertaking | MNOK 2,5 | |
| Aid instrument (Article 5) | Grant | | MNOK 2 |
| Other (please specify) | | 500 working hours at NOK 1 000 = NOK 500 000 |

PART II

| | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| General objectives (list) | Objectives (list) | | Maximum aid intensity in % or maximum aid amount in NOK | SME — bonuses in % |
| Aid for research, development and innovation (Articles 30-37) | Aid for research and development projects (Article 31) | Industrial research (Article 31(2)(b)) | 50 % | |

---
*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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-40671

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

LUIS GONZALEZ

Defendant-Appellant.

 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

(1:95-CV-822)

 

October 16, 1998

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Luis Gonzalez, federal prisoner no. 04434-078, appeals the

district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate,

set aside, or correct sentence. Gonzalez has failed to address the

issue of whether the magistrate judge’s order denying his postjudgment motion for reconsideration, which was never adopted by the

district court, is appealable. Gonzalez has abandoned any argument

relating to the correctness of the post-judgment order. See Yohey

v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993). Thus, this
2

appeal is effective as to the district court’s initial order

denying § 2255 relief. 

Gonzalez has shown neither cause nor prejudice resulting from

failure to raise arguments regarding sufficiency of the evidence

and “guilt by association” on direct appeal, and he is thereby

procedurally barred from raising these issues in a § 2255 claim.

See United States v. Shaid, 937 F.2d 228, 231-32 (5th Cir. 1991)(en

banc). Gonzalez has not shown that counsel was ineffective for

failing to question a witness regarding whether Gonzalez stated

that he took responsibility for the vehicle and its contents. See

Garland v. Maggio, 717 F.2d 199, 206 (5th Cir. 1983)(“a conscious

and informed decision on trial strategy cannot be the basis for

constitutionally ineffective assistance of counsel unless it is so

ill chosen that it permeates the entire trial with obvious

unfairness”). The district court did not err by failing to hold an

evidentiary hearing. See United States v. Drummond, 910 F.2d 284,

285 (5th Cir. 1990).

The district court did not commit plain error, when reviewing

Gonzalez’s § 2255 motion, by not finding that the sentencing court

committed plain error when calculating his sentence. See United

States v. Vaughn, 955 F.2d 367 (5th Cir. 1992). Finally, the

district court did not commit plain error in failing to find that

Gonzalez was deprived effective assistance of counsel at

sentencing. See United States v. Smith, 915 F.2d 959, 963 (5th

Cir. 1990).

AFFIRMED.
3
CONSULTING AGREEMENT

As of June 14, 2000, I have been engaged as a consultant with
Electronic Identification, Inc. (the "Company"). In that role I
have advised and will continue to advise the Company concerning
bona-fide business matters as generally described below. I will
receive, as part of my compensation for these services, common
stock of the Company in an amount to be determined. I hereby
acknowledge the following representations to the Company.

I certify that I have not, and do not intend to, consult with or
advise the Company, as part of this Agreement, in connection with
the offer or sale of its securities in a capital-raising
transaction, and have not and will not directly or indirectly
promote or maintain a market for the Company's securities. I
enter into this agreement as a natural person on my own behalf,
not on behalf of any corporation, partnership, or other entity.

Signed this 27th day of June, 2000,




/s/ Kevin Taguchi
          Signature

Kevin Taguchi
Print Name

General Services to be provided:
   Legal
   Consulting
   Strategic Partnering