alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# CE2009295EN.01016401.xml

| 4.12.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 295/164 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.12.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 295/164

---

Wednesday 3 September 2008Classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures (amendment of Directives 76/768/EEC, 88/378/EEC, 1999/13/EC, 2000/53/EC, 2002/96/EC and 2004/42/EC) ***I

P6_TA(2008)0393

European Parliament legislative resolution of 3 September 2008 on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directives 76/768/EEC, 88/378/EEC, 1999/13/EC and Directives 2000/53/EC, 2002/96/EC and 2004/42/EC in order to adapt them to Regulation (EC) ... on Classification, Labelling and Packaging of Substances and Mixtures, and amending Directive 67/548/EEC and Regulation (EC) No1907/2006 (COM(2007)0611 — C6-0347/2007 — 2007/0212(COD))

2009/C 295 E/41

(Codecision procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2007)0611),

having regard to Articles 251(2), 95 and 175(1) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C6-0347/2007),

having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure,

having regard to the report of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety and the opinion of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (A6-0142/2008),

| 1. | Approves the Commission proposal as amended; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

| 2. | Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

| 3. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.

---

Wednesday 3 September 2008P6_TC1-COD(2007)0212

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading of 3 September 2008 with a view to the adoption of Directive 2008/.../EC of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directives 76/768/EEC, 88/378/EEC, 1999/13/EC and Directives 2000/53/EC, 2002/96/EC and 2004/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council in order to adapt them to Regulation (EC) No ... on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position at first reading corresponds to the final legislative act, Directive 2008/112/EC.)

---
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7927

JULIUS SMILEY, Petitioner - Appellant, versus WARDEN, Broad River Correctional Institution; HENRY DARGAN MCMASTER, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge. (CA-05-955) Submitted: April 26, 2006 Decided: May 16, 2006 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Julius Smiley, Appellant Pro Se. Melody Jane Brown, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Julius Smiley seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are likewise debatable. See Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Smiley has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
§ 286.50 Is there a limit on the percentage of a Tribal Family Assistance Grant that can be used for administrative costs? ( a ) ACF will negotiate a limitation on administrative costs with each Tribal TANF applicant individually for the first year of a program's operation based on the applicant's proposed administrative cost allocation. No Tribal TANF grantee may expend more than 35 percent of its Tribal Family Assistance Grant for administrative costs during the first year.
( b ) ACF will negotiate a limitation on administrative costs with each Tribal TANF applicant individually for the second year of a program's operation based on the applicant's proposed administrative cost allocation. No Tribal TANF grantee may expend more than 30 percent of its TFAG for administrative costs during the second year.
( c ) ACF will negotiate a limitation on administrative costs with each Tribal TANF applicant individually for the third and all subsequent years of a program's operation based on the applicant's proposed administrative cost allocation. As negotiated, a Tribal TANF grantee may not expend more than 25 percent of its TFAG for administrative costs during any subsequent grant period. ( 1 ) For the purposes of determining administrative costs, Tribes with approved plans who have been operating Tribal TANF programs prior to the effective date of this regulation will be able to negotiate a reasonable adjustment in their approved administrative cost rate, not to exceed the limitations in the Final Rule delineated above.
( 2 ) [Reserved]
( d ) ACF will negotiate limitations on administrative costs based on, but not limited to, a Tribe's TANF funding level, economic conditions, and the resources available to the Tribe, the relationship of the Tribe's administrative cost allocation proposal to the overall purposes of TANF, and a demonstration of the Tribe's administrative capability.
#### § 81.107 Service on amici curiae.

All briefs, exceptions, memoranda, requests, and decisions referred to in this Subpart J shall be served upon amici curiae at the same times and in the same manner required for service on parties. Any written statements of position and trial briefs required of parties under § 81.71 shall be served on amici.
#### § 75.410 Collection of unallowable costs.

Payments made for costs determined to be unallowable by either the HHS awarding agency, cognizant agency for indirect costs, or pass-through entity, either as direct or indirect costs, must be refunded (including interest) to the Federal Government in accordance with instructions from the Federal agency that determined the costs are unallowable unless Federal statute or regulation directs otherwise. See also subpart D of this part, §§ 75.300 through 75.309.
# EUR-Lex - 52008DC0096 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 52008DC0096

**Report from the Commission to the Council - Anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) originating in the People’s Republic of China and Taiwan /* COM/2008/0096 final */ **

*

*

[pic] | COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES |

Brussels, 18.2.2008

COM(2008) 96 final

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL

Anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) originating in the People’s Republic of China and Taiwan

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL

Ant i-dumping proceeding concerning imports of polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) originating in the People’s Republic of China and Taiwan

This report is made pursuant to Article 9.2 of Council regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (OJ L 56, 6.3.1996, p. 1, as last amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 2117/2005 of 21 December 2005, OJ L 340, 23.12.2005, p. 17).

Article 9 of this Regulation stipulates the following:

"Termination without measures; imposition of definitive duties

(1) Where the complaint is withdrawn, the proceeding may be terminated unless such termination would not be in the Community interest.

(2) Where, after consultation, protective measures are unnecessary and there is no objection raised within the Advisory Committee, the investigation or proceeding shall be terminated. In all other cases, the Commission shall submit to the Council forthwith a report on the results of the consultation, together with a proposal that the proceeding be terminated . The proceeding shall be deemed terminated if, within one month, the Council, acting by a qualified majority, has not decided otherwise". (emphasis added) .

After consultations on the proposal to terminate the proceeding, objections were raised in the Advisory Committee. The proposal to terminate the case and the details of the consultation are set out in the annexes.

Annexes :

(1) Summary of the opinions provided during and after the meeting of the Advisory Committee.

(2) Draft Commission Decision setting the reasons for terminating the proceeding in question.
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.                  

###### Broadcasting Board of Governors

*Date and Time:*                     Tuesday, March 13, 2007, 2-4 p.m.                

*Place:*                     Cohen Building, Room 3321, 330 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20237.                

*Closed Meeting:*                     The members of the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) will meet in closed session to review and discuss a number of issues relating                           ( print page 10980)                        to U.S. Government-funded non-military international broadcasting. They will address internal procedural, budgetary, and personnel issues, as well as sensitive foreign policy issues relating to potential options in the U.S. international broadcasting field. This meeting is closed because if open it likely would either disclose matters that would be properly classified to be kept secret in the interest of foreign policy under the appropriate executive order (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1)) or would disclose information the premature disclosure of which would be likely to significantly frustrate implementation of a proposed agency action. (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(B)). In addition, part of the discussion will relate solely to the internal personnel and organizational issues of the BBG or the International Broadcasting Bureau. (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2) and (6)).                

*Contact Person for More Information:*                     Persons interested in obtaining more information should contact Carol Booker at (202) 203-4545.                

Dated: March 8, 2007.

Carol Booker,

Legal Counsel.

[FR Doc. 07-1170 Filed 3-8-07; 12:33 pm]

BILLING CODE 8230-01-M
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1854 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1854

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            December 9, 2009

   Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                           Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
   To amend the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 to modify an 
  environmental infrastructure project for Big Bear Lake, California.

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

SECTION 1. BIG BEAR LAKE, CALIFORNIA.

    Section 219(f)(84) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 
(121 Stat. 1259) is amended to read as follows:
            ``(84) Big bear lake, california.--$9,000,000 for water 
        supply infrastructure improvements for Big Bear Lake, 
        California.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives December 8, 2009.

            Attest:

                                            LORRAINE C. MILLER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
§ 84.47 Nonacademic services. ( a ) *Physical education and athletics.* ( 1 ) In providing physical education courses and athletics and similar aids, benefits, or services to any of its students, a recipient to which this subpart applies may not discriminate on the basis of disability. A recipient that offers physical education courses or that operates or sponsors intercollegiate, club, or intramural athletics shall provide to qualified students with disabilities an equal opportunity for participation in these activities.
( 2 ) A recipient may offer to students with disabilities physical education and athletic activities that are separate or different only if separation or differentiation is consistent with the requirements of § 84.43(d) and only if no qualified student with a disability is denied the opportunity to compete for teams or to participate in courses that are not separate or different.
( b ) *Counseling and placement services.* A recipient to which this subpart applies that provides personal, academic, or vocational counseling, guidance, or placement services to its students shall provide these services without discrimination on the basis of disability. The recipient shall ensure that qualified students with disabilities are not counseled toward more restrictive career objectives than are students without disabilities with similar interests and abilities. This requirement does not preclude a recipient from providing factual information about licensing and certification requirements that may present obstacles to persons with disabilities in their pursuit of particular careers.
( c ) *Social organizations.* A recipient that provides significant assistance to fraternities, sororities, or similar organizations shall assure itself that the membership practices of such organizations do not permit discrimination otherwise prohibited by this subpart.
[42 FR 22677, May 4, 1977, as amended at 70 FR 24320, May 9, 2005; 89 FR 40187, May 9, 2024]
EXHIBIT 31.1
   CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302(A) OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

                                   (Depositor)

                                 August 31, 2007

         I, Curtis Probst, Vice President of Goldman Sachs Asset Backed
Securities Corp., as Depositor, certify that:

         1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A, and all reports
on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of periods included in the year
covered by this report on Form 10-K/A of GS Auto Loan Trust 2006-1 (the
"Exchange Act periodic reports");

         2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a
whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a
material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect
to the period covered by this report;

         3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other
information required to be provided to under Form 10-D for the period covered by
this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

         4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statements
required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as
disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled
their obligations under the servicing agreements in all material respects; and

         5. All the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria
for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment
of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be
included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and
Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this
report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of
noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on
Form 10-K/A.

         In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on
information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: JPMorgan Chase
Bank, National Association, as Indenture Trustee, the Bank of New York as
successor Indenture Trustee, The Huntington National Bank, as a Receivables
Servicer, Ford Motor Credit Company, as a Receivables Servicer and Systems and
Services Technologies, Inc., as a Receivables Servicer.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certificate as of
the day and year first above written.

                  By:  /s/ Curtis Probst
                       -------------------
                  Name:    Curtis Probst
                  Title:   Vice President*

* Curtis Probst is the senior officer in charge of securitization of Goldman
Sachs Asset Backed Securities Corp.
1

 Defendant’s motion [43] to dismiss Counts 3 and 4 of the Amended Complaint will be

GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as moot. As to Count 3, defendant’s motion will be

denied as moot. As to Count 4, defendant’s motion to dismiss will be granted without prejudice

by agreement of the parties.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

____________________________________

)

CITIZENS UNITED, )

)

 Plaintiff, )

)

 v. ) Civil Action No. 07-2240 (ARR, RCL, RWR)

) (Three-Judge Court) 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, )

)

 Defendant. )

____________________________________)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This case returns to us on cross motions for summary judgment. Summary judgment

“should be rendered if the pleadings, the discovery and disclosure materials on file, and any

affidavits show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the movant is

entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c); Mills v. Winter, 540 F. Supp. 2d

178, 183 (D.D.C. 2008). There are no genuine issues of material fact presented in this case.

Based on the reasoning of our prior opinion, we find that the Federal Election Commission is

entitled to judgment as a matter of law. See Citizens United v. FEC, 530 F. Supp. 2d 274

(D.D.C. 2008) (denying Citizens United’s request for a preliminary injunction). Therefore,

plaintiff’s motion [52] for summary judgment will be DENIED, and defendant’s motion [55] for

summary judgment will be GRANTED.

1

 Accordingly, judgment will be entered for defendant.

Case 1:07-cv-02240-RCL-RWR Document 65 Filed 07/18/2008 Page 1 of 2
2

A separate order shall issue this date.

Signed by United States Circuit Judge A. Raymond Randolph, and United States District

Judges Royce C. Lamberth and Richard W. Roberts, on July 18, 2008.

Case 1:07-cv-02240-RCL-RWR Document 65 Filed 07/18/2008 Page 2 of 2
# CE2009286EN.01006801.xml

| 27.11.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 286/68 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.11.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 286/68

---

Tuesday 17 June 2008Textile names (recast) ***I

P6_TA(2008)0277

European Parliament legislative resolution of 17 June 2008 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on textile names (recast) (COM(2007)0870 — C6-0024/2008 — 2008/0005(COD))

2009/C 286 E/29

(Codecision procedure — recast)

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2007)0870),

having regard to Article 251(2) and Article 95 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C6-0024/2008),

having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 28 November 2001 on a more structured use of the recasting technique for legal acts (1),

1

having regard to Rules 80a and 51 of its Rules of Procedure,

having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (A6-0215/2008),

| A. | whereas, according to the Consultative Working Party of the Legal Services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, the proposal in question does not include any substantive amendments other than those identified as such in the proposal and whereas, as regards the codification of the unchanged provisions of the earlier acts together with those amendments, the proposal contains a straightforward codification of the existing texts without any change in their substance, |
| --- | --- |

A.

whereas, according to the Consultative Working Party of the Legal Services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, the proposal in question does not include any substantive amendments other than those identified as such in the proposal and whereas, as regards the codification of the unchanged provisions of the earlier acts together with those amendments, the proposal contains a straightforward codification of the existing texts without any change in their substance,

| 1. | Approves the Commission proposal as adapted to the recommendations of the Consultative Working Party of the Legal Services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Approves the Commission proposal as adapted to the recommendations of the Consultative Working Party of the Legal Services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission;

| 2. | Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

| 3. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 77, 28.3.2002, p. 1.

1

---
#### § 2490.111 Notice.

The agency shall make available to employees, applicants, participants, beneficiaries, and other interested persons such information regarding the provisions of this part and its applicability to the programs or activities conducted by the agency, and make such information available to them in such manner as the head of the agency finds necessary to apprise such persons of the protections against discrimination assured them by section 504 and this part.