alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Official Journal C 244/2010

| | ISSN 1725-2423
  doi:10.3000/17252423.C_2010.244.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 244 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5310 September 2010 |

ISSN 1725-2423

doi:10.3000/17252423.C_2010.244.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 244

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5310 September 2010

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2010/C 244/01 | Commission communication pursuant to Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council on cooperation between national authorities responsible for the enforcement of consumer protection laws, concerning the competent authorities and single liaison offices (1) | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2010/C 244/01

Commission communication pursuant to Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council on cooperation between national authorities responsible for the enforcement of consumer protection laws, concerning the competent authorities and single liaison offices (1)

1

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls
o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :
A1 7 A0 56 7
. USA GYMNASTI CS I NC d/ b/ a U SA GYMNASTI CS v. J ANE DOE.

Th i s Co u rt g ran t ed t h e ap p l i cat i o n fo r in t erl o cu t o r y a p p eal , fi l ed b y USA Gy m n as t ics , In c., o f t he t ri al co u rt 's o rd er d en y i n g i t s m ot i o n fo r s u m m ary ju d g m en t

. Aft er a t h o ro u g h co ns i derat i o n o f t h e cas e, i n cl ud i n g o ur rev i ew o f t h e en t i re reco rd ,
we h av e d et erm i n ed t h at t h e t ri al co u rt d i d n o t err. Acco rd i n gl y , we co n cl u d e t h at t h e ap p li cat io n fo r in terl oc u t o ry ap p eal was i m p ro vi d en tl y g ran t ed , an d w e v acat e o u r

o rd er g ran t i n g t he ap pl i cat i on an d d i s m i s s t h e ap peal

.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia C le r k ’ s O f f i c e , A t l a n ta ,

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r ti fy t h a t t h e a b o v e is a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m
t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d th e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. April 18, 2017

04/18/2017
For Congress Video 
[Gene Dodaro:]  Hello, I'm Gene Dodaro, Comptroller General of the United States and head of the Government Accountability Office. GAO provides both new and returning members of Congress with nonpartisan, professional, fact based analysis and expertise on a wide range of issues, cutting across the entire breadth of the federal government. Our work supports Congress in its appropriation, legislative, oversight and other responsibilities. Each year, GAO recommendations are used to improve hundreds of government programs and operations and save taxpayers billions of dollars. We have subject area experts that cover the full range of the federal government's responsibility; from health care to defense, energy, the environment, transportation and many others. GAO's a multidisciplinary organization. In addition to this wide range of subject area experts, we also have a wide range of technical experts such as public policy analysts, economists, I.T. specialists, scientists, actuaries, financial auditors and statisticians.  
[Voiceover:] GAO's technology assessments analyze the latest developments in science and technology, draw attention to public policy implications of technological change, and make core concepts accessible to policymakers. This includes work on quantum computing and artificial intelligence in algorithms used in federal law enforcement. In fulfilling our mandate to provide Congress with in-depth information on the most pressing science and technology issues, we have tripled the size of our science, technology assessment and analytics team.  Similarly, we plan to continue adding staff to our information technology and cybersecurity team. In addition, we provide policy analysis and outline options for congressional consideration for all areas of government spending. We can also do real time analysis of unfolding events. Most recently, we audited the federal response to the regulations and policies around the COVID 19 pandemic, providing briefings, reports and recommendations as trillions of federal relief dollars went out to millions of individuals and businesses.  From deep dive comprehensive reports to two page quick reads, GAO uses a range of products to meet congressional needs. We also make our work available on social and digital media platforms like Facebook, LinkedIn and Instagram. The "For Congress" and "Find an Expert' sections of our website at GAO.gov, offer more details on how we can help your offices.  
[Gene Dodaro:] GAO is a good investment, regularly producing hundreds of recommendations to save money and improve government operations. Over the last five years, for example, GAO returns on average $145 taxpayer dollars for every dollar of our budget. Last year we issued hundreds of reports and testified before dozens of congressional committees and subcommittees. I hope this short video has made clear GAO's value to Congress and the American people.  We look forward to working with you and continuing to help the Congress meet its constitutional responsibilities.
```

[Federal Register: March 3, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 41)]
[Notices]               
[Page 9587]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr03mr10-33]                         

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMISSION OF FINE ARTS

 
Notice of Meeting

    The next meeting of the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts is scheduled 
for 18 March 2010, at 10 a.m. in the Commission offices at the National 
Building Museum, Suite 312, Judiciary Square, 401 F Street, NW., 
Washington DC, 20001-2728. Items of discussion may include buildings, 
parks and memorials.
    Draft agendas and additional information regarding the Commission 
are available on our Web site: http://www.cfa.gov. Inquiries regarding 
the agenda and requests to submit written or oral statements should be 
addressed to Thomas Luebke, Secretary, U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, at 
the above address; by e-mailing staff@cfa.gov; or by calling 202-504-
2200. Individuals requiring sign language interpretation for the 
hearing impaired should contact the Secretary at least 10 days before 
the meeting date.

    Dated: February 24, 2010 in Washington DC.
Thomas Luebke,
AIA Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-4324 Filed 3-2-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6330-01-M
```
# Official Journal C 25A/18 J

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 25A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6518 January 2022 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 25A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6518 January 2022

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | V   Announcements |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Commission |
| 2022/C 25 A/01 | The European Commission Joint Research Centre – Publication of a vacancy for the function of Director ‘Nuclear Safety and Security’ (grade AD 14) (Article 29(2) of the Staff Regulations) – COM/2022/10411 | 1 |

Contents

page

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Commission

2022/C 25 A/01

The European Commission Joint Research Centre – Publication of a vacancy for the function of Director ‘Nuclear Safety and Security’ (grade AD 14) (Article 29(2) of the Staff Regulations) – COM/2022/10411

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
263 La. 72

#### STATE of Louisiana v. Frank HUDSON.

No. 52556.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 4, 1972.

*199Sanders Cazedessus, Baton Rouge, for defendant-appellant.

William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Harry H. Howard, Asst. Atty. Gen., Sargent Pitcher, Jr., Dist. Atty., J. David McNeill, III, Asst. Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The trial court sustained defense counsel’s motion to quash a Bill of Information on the ground that further prosecution was prescribed. The State appeals.

The defendant is charged with simple burglary, La.R.S. 14:62, a non-capital burglary. In such cases, La.C.Cr.P. Art. 578 (2) provides that, unless the time limitation is interrupted or suspended, no trial shall be commenced “after two years from the date of institution of the prosecution.”

The State relies upon the provision of La.C.Cr.P. Art. 579 that:

> “The period of limitation established by Article 578 shall be interrupted if: ^

> “(2) The defendant cannot be tried because of insanity or because his presence for trial cannot be obtained by legal process, or *for any other cause beyond the control of the state.*

> “The periods of limitation established by Article 578 shall commence to run anew from the date the cause of interruption no longer exists.” (Emphasis ours.)

The State contends that a motion for continuance by the defense counsel in which the State concurred interrupted prescription.

The facts of this case are as follows:

The Bill of Information against the accused was filed on September 11, 1969. Nothing was ever filed on behalf of the defendant until a motion for continuance was filed on June 5, 1970, which had a notice attached, “I agree to a continuance in the above matter”, signed by an Assistant District Attorney.

The continuance was granted by the Court, apparently (the record is not clear) on June 12, 1970 1 when the notation shows that the case was passed and re-assigned for trial on September 23, 1970.2 Subsequently, the defendant’s case was assigned for trial on May 29, 1972.

On this date defendant filed a motion to quash further prosecution because more than two years had elapsed since the date of filing the Bill of Information. In sustaining this motion, the trial court relied upon the circumstance that the State had agreed to the continuance and that therefore the State’s inability to try the defendant did not result from “cause beyond the control of the state”, La.C.Cr.P. Art. 579(2).

The trial court ruled correctly. See State v. Benson, 254 La. 867, 227 So.2d 913 (1969).

For the reasons assigned we affirm the judgment of the trial court sustaining defendant’s motion.

Affirmed.

1

. The notations on the bill show, however, that on May 5, 1970 (i. e., prior to the June 5 motion) the fixing on June 12, 1970 had been cancelled on motion of the assistant district attorney, subject to later re-assignment.

2

. This assignment was cancelled on July 22, 1970. The case subsequently was set March 15, 1972 on motion of the State for trial on May 29, 1972.
#### Phillip CHAFETZ, Appellant, v. Harold GREENE et al., Appellees.

No. 67-171.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Oct. 17, 1967.

*19Louis R. Beller, Miami Beach, for appellant.

Thomas C. Britton, County Atty., for appellees.

Before PEARSON, HENDRY and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is from a decree dismissing a complaint which sought to enjoin a special election called to determine whether the Dade County Home Rule Charter should be amended. The election has been held and inasmuch as no other relief than the injunction was sought, the matter is now moot and the appeal is dismissed. Cf. Tyler v. Peacock, 98 Fla. 981, 124 So. 463 (1929); Gill v. City of North Miami Beach, Fla.App.1963, 156 So.2d 182.

Affirmed.
#### Leo DRISCOLL, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 42362.

Supreme Court of Florida.

July 14, 1972.

Dismissal for Want of Prosecution granted.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari dismissed.

ROBERTS, C. J., and ERVIN, CARLTON, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
# Official Journal C 277A/2013

| | ISSN 1977-091X
  doi:10.3000/1977091X.CA2013.277.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 277A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5626 September 2013 |

ISSN 1977-091X

doi:10.3000/1977091X.CA2013.277.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 277A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5626 September 2013

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | V   Announcements |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions |
| 2013/C 277A/01 | Notice of open selection procedure — Web Content Officer — Reference: EF-TA-13-03 | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions

2013/C 277A/01

Notice of open selection procedure — Web Content Officer — Reference: EF-TA-13-03

1

---

REVIEW OF COMPETITION C A OJs

Please find below the list of C A published during the present year.

Unless otherwise indicated, OJs are published in all language versions.

| 5 | |
| --- | --- |
| 27 | (RO) |
| 29 | |
| 33 | |
| 34 | |
| 36 | (DA) |
| 41 | (BG) |
| 43 | (EN) |
| 49 | (ET) |
| 50 | (HU) |
| 51 | (SL) |
| 54 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 58 | (EN/GA) |
| 75 | |
| 81 | |
| 82 | |
| 88 | (BG) |
| 89 | (CS) |
| 94 | |
| 104 | |
| 109 | |
| 111 | |
| 112 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 117 | (ET) |
| 118 | |
| 120 | |
| 131 | |
| 143 | |
| 160 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 162 | |
| 166 | |
| 167 | |
| 168 | |
| 172 | |
| 173 | |
| 174 | |
| 176 | (BG/DE/EN/ET/FI/IT/LT/LV/MT/NL/PL/PT/SK/SL/SV) |
| 180 | (MT) |
| 182 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 183 | (IT) |
| 191 | |
| 192 | |
| 193 | |
| 194 | |
| 196 | |
| 197 | |
| 199 | |
| 200 | |
| 204 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 210 | (LV) |
| 211 | (PL) |
| 219 | |
| 227 | |
| 231 | |
| 235 | |
| 240 | |
| 264 | |
| 269 | |
| 276 | |
| 277 | |

5

27

(RO)

29

33

34

36

(DA)

41

(BG)

43

(EN)

49

(ET)

50

(HU)

51

(SL)

54

(DE/EN/FR)

58

(EN/GA)

75

81

82

88

(BG)

89

(CS)

94

104

109

111

112

(DE/EN/FR)

117

(ET)

118

120

131

143

160

(DE/EN/FR)

162

166

167

168

172

173

174

176

(BG/DE/EN/ET/FI/IT/LT/LV/MT/NL/PL/PT/SK/SL/SV)

180

(MT)

182

(DE/EN/FR)

183

(IT)

191

192

193

194

196

197

199

200

204

(DE/EN/FR)

210

(LV)

211

(PL)

219

227

231

235

240

264

269

276

277

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
No. 12-15-00073-CR

YAGO FOUNTAIN § IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

 Appellant §

§

vs. § 12TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

§

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

 Appellee

§

§ AT TYLER, TEXAS

APPELLANT’S FIRST MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE BRIEF

TWO WEEK REQUEST

TO THE HONORABLE COURT:

Now comes Austin Reeve Jackson, counsel for Appellant in the above entitled and 

numbered cause, and makes this Motion, and for good cause shows the following:

I.

Appellant’s brief in this matter is due on 1 July 2015. No prior extensions have 

been requested.

II.

While working on this case counsel has also been working on approximately 55

open appellate cases in this and other courts to which he has been appointed by Smith 

County. This has included investigating motions for new trials (looking for and talking 

with potential witnesses, jail and office visits with new appellate appointments, trial court 

appearances for the same), requests for and reviews of reporter’s and clerk’s records, 

research, briefing, review of opinions, investigation of potential PDR issues, etc. While 

not all of these cases have required significant attention from counsel during this time, 

ACCEPTED

12-15-00073-CR

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS

TYLER, TEXAS

7/1/2015 5:17:22 PM

CATHY LUSK

CLERK

 FILED IN 12th COURT OF APPEALS TYLER, TEXAS 7/1/2015 5:17:22 PM CATHY S. LUSK Clerk
many of them have which has resulted in counsel having been unable to devote the full 

attention necessary to this case prior to today’s date. 

II.

No prior extensions have been requested and is respectfully prayed that the in the 

interest of justice, the Court grant this motion.

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, undersigned counsel respectfully 

prays that, in accordance with the applicable law, the Court grant this Motion and extend 

the date by which to file a brief by two weeks. 

Respectfully submitted,

/s/Austin Reeve Jackson

Texas Bar No. 24046139

112 East Line, Suite 310

Tyler, TX 75702

Telephone: (903) 595-6070

Facsimile: (866) 387-0152

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

This is to certify that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing document 

was served on counsel for the State by facsimile concurrently with its filing. 

/s/Austin Reeve Jackson
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

TYRONE FORTUNE,

Petitioner

v.

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 376 EAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Commonwealth Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 31st day of January, 2018

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.
LINDA DENISE WILLIAMS,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D15-2596

_____________________________/

Opinion filed October 5, 2015.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Escambia County.

Edward P. Nickinson, III, Judge.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Steven L. Seliger, Assistant Public 

Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROBERTS, C.J., MARSTILLER and MAKAR, JJ., CONCUR.
----

Action brought on 9 May 2005 by Jean-François Vivier against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case C-T-196/05)

(2005/C 193/51)

Language of the case: French

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 9 May 2005 by Jean-François Vivier, residing in Le Petten (Netherlands), represented by Sébastien Orlandi, Albert Coolen and Etienne Marchal, lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant was recruited by the Commission as a temporary servant, in a post for which the level of responsibility had been fixed in the vacancy notice by reference to grades A7 to A4, which under the new system are equivalent to grades A*8 to A*12. Upon recruitment, however, his classification was fixed in grade A*6.

The applicant claims that that decision should be annulled; he maintains that it fails to take account of Article 9 of the Rules applicable to other servants, since he was recruited at a grade below the level of responsibility envisaged for his post. The applicant further contends that Article 12 of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations, on which the Commission relies in order to justify its decision on classification, does not apply in his case, as he entered the service after 30 April 2004.

----
House Calendar No. 59

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 208

[Report No. 103–159]

RESOLUTION

Waiving certain points of order against the bill

1994, and for other purposes.offices for the fiscal year ending September 30,agencies, boards, commissions, corporations, andUrban Development, and for sundry independentpartments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and(H.R. 2491) making appropriations for the DeJUNE 24, 1993

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
IV

House Calendar No. 59

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 208

[Report No. 103–159]

Waiving certain points of order against the bill (H.R. 2491) making appropriations for the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and

Urban Development, and for sundry independent agencies, boards, commissions, corporations, and offices for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1994, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 24, 1993

Ms. SLAUGHTER, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following

resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed

RESOLUTION

Waiving certain points of order against the bill (H.R. 2491)

making appropriations for the Departments of Veterans

Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and for

sundry independent agencies, boards, commissions, corporations, and offices for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1994, and for other purposes.

1 Resolved, That during consideration of the bill (H.R.

2 2491) making appropriations for the Departments of Vet3 erans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and
2

HRES 208 RH

1 for sundry independent agencies, boards, commissions,

2 corporations, and offices for the fiscal year ending Sep3 tember 30, 1994, and for other purposes, all points of

4 order against provisions in the bill for failure to comply

5 with clause 2 or 6 of rule XXI are waived except as fol6 lows: beginning with ‘‘; $50,000,000 shall’’ on page 43,

7 line 7, through ‘‘State cost share’’ on line 25. Where

8 points of order are waived against only part of a para9 graph, a point of order against matter in the balance of

10 the paragraph may be applied only within the balance of

11 the paragraph and not against the entire paragraph. De12 bate on the amendment specified in the report of the Com13 mittee on Rules accompanying this resolution to be offered

14 by Representative Roemer of Indiana or a designee, and

15 on any amendments thereto, may not exceed two hours

16 equally divided and controlled by the proponent of the

17 amendment and an opponent. The amendments en bloc

18 specified in the report to be offered by Representative Be19 reuter of Nebraska or a designee and by Representative

20 Solomon of New York or a designee may amend portions

21 of the bill not yet read for amendment, shall be considered

22 as read, and shall not be subject to a demand for division

23 of the question in the House or in the Committee of the

24 Whole.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-20390

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

HUGO CORTEZ BERMUDEZ, also known as Hugo Cortez-Bermudez, also

known as Hugo Enrique Cortez,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:11-CR-677-1

Before JOLLY, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Hugo Cortez Bermudez has moved for

leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California,

386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011).

Cortez Bermudez has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the

relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Cortez Bermudez’s

response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

October 25, 2013

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

* 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.

 Case: 12-20390 Document: 00512419739 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/25/2013
No. 12-20390

nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave

to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities

herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

2

 Case: 12-20390 Document: 00512419739 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/25/2013