alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2022119EN.01000501.xml

| 14.3.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 119/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.3.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 119/5

---

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 20 January 2022 — Romania v European Commission, Hungary

(Case C-899/19 P) (1)

(Appeal - Law governing the institutions - Citizens’ initiative - Regulation (EU) No 211/2011 - Article 4(2)(b) - Registration of a proposed citizens’ initiative - Condition requiring that that proposed citizens’ initiative does not manifestly fall outside the framework of the European Commission’s powers to submit a proposal for a legal act for the purpose of implementing the Treaties - Decision (EU) 2017/652 - Citizens’ initiative ‘Minority SafePack — one million signatures for diversity in Europe’ - Registration in part - Article 5(2) TEU - Principle of conferral - Article 296 TFEU - Obligation to state reasons - Audi alteram partem rule)

(2022/C 119/06)

Language of the case: Romanian

Parties

Appellant: Romania (represented by: E. Gane, L. Liţu, M. Chicu and L. E. Baţagoi, acting as Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: initially by I. Martínez del Peral, H. Stancu and H. Krämer, subsequently by I. Martínez del Peral and H. Stancu, acting as Agents, Hungary (represented by: M. Z. Fehér and K. Szíjjártó, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders Romania to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Romania to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;

| 3. | Orders Hungary to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders Hungary to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 54, 17.2.2020.

---
In The Matter Of: 

TANGO AIR, INC. 

SERVED: September 27,2016 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

W ASIDNGTON, DC 

Docket No. FAA-2015-3317 

d/b/a SCHUBACH AVIATION 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. 2015WP090037 

Respondent 

ORDER DISMISSING PROCEEDING 

On April13, 2016, an Order Setting Litigation Dates and Procedures was filed. Among 

other things, this Order set a Pre-Hearing Telephone Conference for January 18, 2017, and set 

the Hearing for March 14-17, 2017. 

On September 27, 2016, the Respondent filed an untitled letter withdrawing its request 

for hearing, stating that, although Respondent continues to deny the allegations in the FAA's 

Complaint, "[t]he parties have agreed to settle this matter." 

After having reviewed the case file, all pleadings and motions, all relevant case law, 

statutes, regulations, rules, and authority, and being fully advised; 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 

1. The Pre-Hearing Telephone Conference set for January 18, 2017, is cancelled. 

2. The Hearing set for March 14-17, 2017, is cancelled. 

3. Pursuant to 14 C .F .R. § 13.215, the Respondent has withdrawn its Request for Hearing, 

and this proceeding is dismissed with prejudice. 

Attachment: Service List 
Docket No. FAA-2015-3317 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST- BY U.S. MAIL 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl 0001 

Mr. David F. Shayne 

Complainant's Counsel 

Office of the Regional Counsel, ANM-7 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Enforcement Division, Western Team 

1601 Lind Avenue, S.W. 

Renton, W A 98057 

TEL: 425-227-2165 

FAX: 425-227-1007 

Mr. Michael L. Dworkin 

Respondent's Counsel 

Michael L. Dworkin and Associates 

465 California Street, Suite 210 

San Francisco, CA 94104 

FAX: 415-421-2560 

Judge J.E. Sullivan 

US. Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

ONE COPY 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-6941 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
IIB 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4301 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 8, 2018 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 201 Tom Hall Street in Fort Mill, South 

Carolina, as the ‘‘J. Elliott Williams Post Office Building’’. 

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


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 4301 RFS

1 SECTION 1. J. ELLIOTT WILLIAMS POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 201 Tom Hall Street in Fort 

4 Mill, South Carolina, shall be known and designated as 

5 the ‘‘J. Elliott Williams Post Office Building’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘J. Elliott Williams 

10 Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives May 7, 2018. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 10.2


 


AMENDMENT NO. 4

TO 

EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


 


This Amendment No. 4 to
the Employment Agreement, dated as of November 1, 1999, as amended to date
(the “Agreement”), by and between
eAcceleration Corp.,
a Delaware corporation (the “Company”),
and Diana T. Ballard
(“Employee”), is dated for
reference purposes as of August 21, 2004 (this “Amendment”).


 


Whereas,
the Company and Employee desire to amend the terms of the Agreement, pursuant
to the terms and conditions set forth herein, as of the date hereof.


 


Now, Therefore,
in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants set forth herein, and
intending to be legally bound, the parties hereto agree as follows:


 


1.                                     The first sentence
of Subparagraph (a) of Paragraph 3 of the Agreement is hereby amended in
its entirety as follows:


During the term of
employment, Employee shall be employed by the Company as Vice-Chairman of the
Board or in such other equivalent positions with the Company and its
affiliates, as may be determined by the Board of Directors of the Company, and
shall also serve as a director of the Company.


 


2.                                       Subparagraph
(a) of Paragraph 4 of the Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety as
follows:


 


The Company shall pay to
Employee a salary at the rate of $52,000 per annum, payable in equal bi-weekly
installments, or in such other manner as shall be consistent with the Company’s
payroll practices.


 


3.                                       Paragraph
10 of the Agreement is hereby amended to delete in its entirety the reference
to Neil M. Kaufman and insert in its place “Hillis Clark Martin & Peterson,
P.S., 500 Galland Building, 1221 Second Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101-2925,
Attention: Joel N. Bodansky.”


 


4.                                       The
changes to the Agreement made by this Amendment shall be effective as of the
date hereof, and shall amend and supersede any provisions to the contrary
contained in the Agreement.  Except as
expressly amended by this Amendment, the terms and conditions of the Agreement
shall remain in full force and effect in accordance with the terms of the
Agreement.


 


(signature page follows)


 


1





















 


In Witness Hereof,
the parties have executed this Amendment as of the date first written above.


 


	
   

  	
  eAcceleration Corp.

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
  /s/ E. Edward Ahrens

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Name: E. Edward Ahrens

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Title: Chief Financial
  Officer

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Employee:

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  /s/ Diana T. Ballard

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Diana T. Ballard

  



 


2
# Cherokee - Appalachian Regional Commission

- Creating PPE for Nurses and School Officials in Western North Carolina STEMwork in western North Carolina (WNCSTEMwork) is a teacher professional development initiative of the Kenan Institute for Engineering, Technology, and Science at North Carolina State University. With ARC support, this program supports six middle and high school teachers from ten counties as they develop their capacity to lead and sustain STEM workforce education. In April [&#8230;]The post Creating PPE for Nurses and School Officials in Western North Carolina appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
- Southwestern Commission Executive Director Sarah Thompson Email &#x73;&#x61;&#x72;&#97;&#104;&#64;re&#x67;&#x69;&#x6f;&#x6e;&#97;&#46;or&#x67;The post Southwestern Commission appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

JULY 25, 2006

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 05-16965

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 05-00169-CR-WS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

versus 

WILBER JACKSON, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Alabama

_________________________

 (July 25, 2006)

Before BLACK, BARKETT and MARCUS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

William Gregory Hughes, appointed counsel for Wilber Jackson in this

direct criminal appeal, has filed a motion to withdraw, supported by a brief

prepared pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed.
 Jackson suggests that he did not understand the plea agreement he signed and that his

1

trial counsel lied to him in order to get him to sign the agreement. Our independent review reveals

that the district court fully complied with the three “core concerns” of Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(b),

see United States v, Quinones, 97 F.3d 472, 475 (11th Cir. 1996) (discussing core concerns of Rule

11), and we have found no evidence in the record of improper inducement or misrepresentation of

the plea agreement.

2

2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s

assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. We are unpersuaded by

the argument Jackson raises in his response to counsel’s motion, as it does not raise

an issue of arguable merit.1

Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable

issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, Jackson’s motion for

new counsel is denied as MOOT, and Jackson’s conviction and sentence are

AFFIRMED.
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.                  

###### Tennessee Valley Authority

# AGENCY:

Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA).

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

The TVA Regional Energy Resource Council (RERC) will hold a meeting on December 12, 2023, regarding regional energy related issues in the Tennessee Valley.

# DATES:

                        The meeting will be held virtually, on Tuesday, December 12, 2023, from 2 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. EST. To view the webinar, the public must visit                         *https://events.gcc.teams.microsoft.com/​event/​55132b7c-a2dc-45ed-ae3b-4bc87b3344d2@270992cd-9003-4971-84de-d1640c0bffc5*                         to register for the webinar. This link and instructions to view the meeting will be posted on TVA's RERC website at                         *www.tva.gov/​rerc.*

      ( print page 84035)    

# ADDRESSES:

                        The meeting will be fully virtual, and the meeting link is provided at                         *https://events.gcc.teams.microsoft.com/​event/​55132b7c-a2dc-45ed-ae3b-4bc87b3344d2@270992cd-9003-4971-84de-d1640c0bffc5.*                         Anyone needing special accommodations should let the contact below know at least one week in advance.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Bekim Haliti,                         *bhaliti@tva.gov*                         or 931-349-1894.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The RERC was established to advise TVA on its energy resource activities and the priorities among competing objectives and values. Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. 10.

The meeting agenda includes the following:

## December 12

1. Welcome and Introductions

2. IRP Process Update

3. IRP Scenarios and Strategies

                    Written comments are invited and may be emailed to                     *bhaliti@tva.gov.*

Dated: November 27, 2023.

Melanie Farrell,

Vice President, External Stakeholders and Regulatory Oversight, Tennessee Valley Authority.

[FR Doc. 2023-26452 Filed 11-30-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8120-08-P
# C_2008107EN.01004403.xml

| 26.4.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 107/44 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.4.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 107/44

---

Action brought on 26 February 2008 — Bennet and Others v OHIM

(Case F-19/08)

(2008/C 107/78)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Kelly-Marie Bennet (Mutxamel, Spain) and Others (represented by: G. Vandersanden, lawyer)

Applicants:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM)

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

First, annulment of the notices of open competitions OHIM/AD/02/07 and OHIM/AST/02/07, in so far as those notices have the effect of taking away from the applicants any possibility of their names appearing on the reserve list, the applicants being obliged to participate as a result of the termination clause unlawfully inserted to that end in their contracts for an indefinite period. Second, damages for the non-material loss suffered by the applicants.

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the notices of open competitions OHIM/AD/02/07 and OHIM/AST/02/07; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the notices of open competitions OHIM/AD/02/07 and OHIM/AST/02/07;

| — | Order the defendant to make good the non-material loss suffered by the applicants, assessed on a equitable basis and subject to a minimum of EUR 25 000 per applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to make good the non-material loss suffered by the applicants, assessed on a equitable basis and subject to a minimum of EUR 25 000 per applicant;

| — | Order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market to pay the costs.

---
Exhibit 23.1





CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS





We consent to the incorporation by reference in
the Registration Statements (33-79894, 33-87104,  33-89642, 33-98806, 333-25879, 333-47821 333-85184 and 333-85186) on Form S-8 of Onsite Energy Corporation of our report dated August 7, 2001, relating to the consolidated balance sheet of
Onsite Energy Corporation and subsidiaries as of June 30, 2001, and the related statements of operations, shareholders equity (deficit) and cash flows for the year ended June 30, 2001 which report appears in the June 30, 2002 annual report on
Form 10-KSB of Onsite Energy Corporation.





/s/    HEIN + ASSOCIATES LLP


Hein + Associates
LLPCertified Public Accountants





Orange, California


October 10, 2002
## In T he Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07

- 23

- 00352

- CR

RASHARI NAE FONNE BRENT , A PPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , APPELLEE On Appeal from the 426th District Court

Bell County, Texas 1 Trial Court No
. 80164 , Honorable Steven J. Duskie , Presiding



### January 9 , 2024 ORDER OF ABATEMENT AND REMAND Before PARKER and DOSS and YARBROUGH, JJ. Appellant, Rashari Nae Fonne Brent, appeals his conviction for murder 2 and sentence to fifty

- two years of confinement. The rep orter’s record was originally due October 24, 2023 , but we granted the reporter an exte nsion to November 27 to file the record. On November 27, 2023 , the reporter filed only seven of nine volumes of the

1 Originally appealed to the Third Court of Appeals, this appeal was transferred to this Court by the Texas Supreme Court pursuant to its docket equalization efforts. See T EX

. G OV ’ T C ODE A NN . § 73.001.

2 See T EX

. P ENAL C ODE A NN . § 19.02(b)(3).2

reporter’s record. By letter of December 4 , 2023 , we notified the reporter that the complete reporter’s record was overdue and directed her to advise this Court of the status of the record by December 14 . The reporter has not filed the complete record or had any further communication with this Cour t to date. Accordingly, we abate the appeal and remand the cause to the trial court for further proceedings. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 35.3(c) ( “ The trial and appellate courts are jointly responsible for ensuring that the appellate record is timely filed. ” ); 37 .3(a)(2) (requiring appellate courts to “ make whatever order is appropriate to avoid further delay and to preserve the parties ’ rights ” when the appellate record is not timely filed). On remand, the trial court shall determine the following: ( 1 ) what ta sks remain to complete the filing of the reporter ’ s record; ( 2 ) why the reporter has not completed the necessary tasks; ( 3 ) what amount of time is reasonably necessary for the completion of those tasks; and (4) whether the reporter can complete the tasks within the time the trial court finds reasonable. Should the trial court determine that the reporter will require more than thirty days to complete, certify, and file the complete reporter ’ s record, it shall arrange for a substitute reporter to do so. The trial court is directed to enter such orders necessary to address the aforementioned questions. So too shall it include its findings on those matters in a supplemental clerk ’ s record and cause that record to be filed with this C ourt by February 8 , 2024

.3

Should the reporter file the complete reporter’s record on or before January 23 , 2024, s he is directed to immediately notify the trial court of the filing, in writing, whereupon the tria l court shall not be required to take any further action. It is so ordered. Per Curiam Do not publish.
# State Resources and Contacts - Appalachian Regional Commission

- New York Strategy Statement The post New York Strategy Statement appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
- West Virginia Appalachian Development Plan The post West Virginia Appalachian Development Plan appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
- Virginia Strategy Statement The post Virginia Strategy Statement appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
- Virginia Appalachian Development Plan The post Virginia Appalachian Development Plan appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
- Tennessee Strategy Statement The post Tennessee Strategy Statement appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
- Tennessee Appalachian Development Plan The post Tennessee Appalachian Development Plan appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
- South Carolina Appalachian Development Plan The post South Carolina Appalachian Development Plan appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
- Pennsylvania Appalachian Development Plan The post Pennsylvania Appalachian Development Plan appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
- Ohio Appalachian Development Plan The post Ohio Appalachian Development Plan appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
- North Carolina Appalachian Development Plan The post North Carolina Appalachian Development Plan appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
# C_2008260EN.01002101.xml

| 11.10.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 260/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.10.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 260/21

---

Order of the President of the Civil Service Tribunal of 3 July 2008 — Plasa v Commission

(Case F-52/08 R)

(Staff case - Application for interim measures - Application for the suspension of operation of a decision to reassign - Urgency - None)

(2008/C 260/38)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Wolfgang Plasa (Algiers, Algeria) (represented by: G. Vandersanden, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: J. Currall and B. Eggers, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Application for the suspension of operation of the decision of 8 May 2008 by which the Commission of the European Communities reassigns the applicant to Brussels (Belgium) from 1 August 2008.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The application for interim measures is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The application for interim measures is dismissed.

| 2. | Costs are reserved. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Costs are reserved.

---
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 18

- 3604

_____________________________
D ERRICKO L EONARD , Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County

. J. Scott Duncan , Judge

. June 21, 2019

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
M AKAR , O STERHAUS , and B ILBREY , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Andy Thomas, Public Defender, Robin B. Rogers, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee
, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tri sha Meggs Pate, Bureau Chief
, Criminal Appeals, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.
| 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company. |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 3. | A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:  November 12, 2010 | By:    | /s/ Brian Neill         |   |
|------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|                               |   | Brian Neill,            |   |
|                               |   | Chief Financial Officer |   |
|                               |   |                    |   |