alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2009055EN.01005201.xml

| 7.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 55/52 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 55/52

---

Action brought on 17 December 2008 — Petrilli v Commission

(Case F-100/08)

(2009/C 55/94)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Alessandro Petrilli (Grottammare, Italy) (represented by: J.-L. Lodomez, J. Lodomez, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the Appointing Authority's decision on the fixing of the applicant's main residence.

Form of order sought

The applicant claims the Tribunal should:

| — | Annul the decision of 16 September 2008 by which the Appointing Authority rejected the fixing of the applicant's main residence in Italy; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of 16 September 2008 by which the Appointing Authority rejected the fixing of the applicant's main residence in Italy;

| — | So far as is necessary, annul any decision which the Commission might make relating to the procedure following the complaint, brought by the applicant after the communication of new evidence; |
| --- | --- |

—

So far as is necessary, annul any decision which the Commission might make relating to the procedure following the complaint, brought by the applicant after the communication of new evidence;

| — | order the Commission to pay, on the sums due in respect of the retroactive application of the correction coefficient for Italy on the applicant's pension from 1 July 2007, interest on the basis of the rate set by the ECB for its principal refinancing operations, applicable during the relevant period, increased by two points; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay, on the sums due in respect of the retroactive application of the correction coefficient for Italy on the applicant's pension from 1 July 2007, interest on the basis of the rate set by the ECB for its principal refinancing operations, applicable during the relevant period, increased by two points;

| — | order the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs.

---
# C_2011238EN.01001402.xml

| 13.8.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 238/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.8.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 238/14

---

Judgment of the General Court of 7 July 2011 — Longinidis v Cedefop

(Case T-283/08) (1)

1

(Appeal - Staff case - Members of the temporary staff - Contract for an indefinite period - Dismissal - Statement of reasons - Manifest error of assessment - Rights of the defence)

2011/C 238/20

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Pavlos Longinidis (Thessaloniki, Greece) (represented initially by: P. Giatagantzidis and S. Stavopoulou, later by: P. Giatagantzidis and K. Kyriazi, lawyers)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (Cedefop) (represented by: M. Fuchs, Agent, assisted by P. Anestis, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 24 April 2008 in Case F-74/06 Longinidis v Cedefop (not yet published in the ECR) seeking to have that judgment set aside.

Longinidis

Cedefop

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders Mr Pavlos Longinidis to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training in the present instance. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Pavlos Longinidis to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training in the present instance.

---

(1)  OJ C 272, 25.10.2008, corrigendum OJ C 313, 6.12.2008.

1

---
# United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604 July 26, 2006 Before Hon. MICHAEL S. KANNE, Circuit Judge Hon. DIANE P. WOOD, Circuit Judge Hon. DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge No. 04-1507 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee ,

v. RODNEY MCLEE, Defendant-Appellant

. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. No. 02 CR 635 Charles P. Kocoras, Judge

.
O R D E R This court ordered a limited remand so the district court could state on the record whether the sentence remains appropriate now that United States v. Booker , 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005), has limited the Sentencing Guidelines to advisory status. See United States v. Paladino , 401 F.3d 471 (7th Cir. 2005). The district judge has now replied that he would today impose the same sentence, knowing of the Sentencing Guidelines’ advisory status. McLee’s sentence of 262 months concurrent on Counts 1 and 2 was the lowest possible sentence within the advisory range of 262 to 327 months, and these terms were ordered to run concurrent with shorter terms on Counts 5 and 8. Combined with a 60-month consecutive sentence on Count 3, he was sentenced to a total of 322 months. The United States did not respond to our invitation to file an argument in this court regarding the district court’s Paladino remand statement. McLee now argues that a proper consideration of the factors specified in 18 U.S.C. UNPUBLISHED ORDER Not to be cited per Circuit Rule 53No. 04-1507 Page 2 § 3553(a) would have resulted in a different sentence at the original sentencing such that a “full remand” for resentencing is required. In Paladino , we held that if a district court responds to a limited remand with a statement that it would reimpose the same sentence, “we will affirm the original sentence against a plain-error challenge provided that the sentence is reasonable.” 401 F.3d at 484. We do not see any reason why McLee’s sentence of 322 months would be deemed “unreasonable” in post- Bookerpractice. The judgment of the district court therefore is AFFIRMED.
### Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under EO

12866 and EO 13563 Int eragency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

EO 12866 Interagency Comments on U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) draft final rule titled, “Renewable Fuel Standard Program: Standards for 2014, 2015, and 2016 and Biomass

- Based Diesel Volume for 2017,” RIN 2060

- AS22

While it would be instructive to show not only the costs but also the potential benefits of the standards being finalized and analyzing both will be an important consideration in any future reassessment of the RFS program , the short timeframe provided for the annual renewable fuel rule process does not allow sufficient time for EPA to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the benefits of the 2015 and 2016 standards and the statute does not require it. Moreover, as discussed in the final rule establishing the 1.28 billion gallon requirement for BBD in 2013, the costs and benefits of the RFS program as a whole are best assessed when the program is fully mature in 2022 and beyond. 1 We continue to believe that this is the case, as the annual standard

setting process encourages consideration of the program on a piecemeal (i.e., year

- to

- year) basis, which may not reflect the long

- term economic effects of the program. Therefore, for the purpose of this annual rulemaking, we have not quantified benefits for the 2015 and 2016 final standards. We do not have a quantified estimate of the GHG impacts for the single year (e.g., 2015, 2016). When the RFS program is fully phased in, the program will result in considerable volume s of renewable fuels that will reduce GHG emissions in comparison to the fossil fuels which they replace. EPA estimated GHG, energy security, and air quality impacts and benefits for the 2010 RFS2 final rule for 2022.

1 77 FR 59477, September 27, 2012. Deleted: u nderstanding

Deleted: would

Deleted: As mentioned a bove

Deleted: If, at some point in the future, the agency needs to issue a rulemaking to modify the applicable volumes set forth in the statute as a result of lowering the applicable statutory volumes by at least 20 percent for two consecutive years or at least 50 percent for a single year, then the agency will conduct a comprehensive benefit

- cost analysis of the revised volumes at that time.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 118 (Friday, August 3, 2012)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1421]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                          PERSONAL EXPLANATION

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. DAN BENISHEK

                              of michigan

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, August 2, 2012

  Mr. BENISHEK. Mr. Speaker on rollcall No. 539, on Tuesday, July 31, 
2012, my plane was delayed in Detroit due to bad weather. As a result, 
I missed votes that evening, including a measure of personal 
importance, H.R. 3803, the District of Columbia Pain Capable Unborn 
Child Act.
  Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

                          ____________________
```
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4463 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.4463

                     One Hundred Fifteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
           the third day of January, two thousand and eighteen

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
6 Doyers Street in New York, New York, as the ``Mabel Lee Memorial Post 
                                Office''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. MABEL LEE MEMORIAL POST OFFICE.
    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 6 Doyers Street in New York, New York, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Mabel Lee Memorial Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Mabel Lee 
Memorial Post Office''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 108 (Wednesday, July 18, 2012)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1279]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

 RETIREMENT OF DOMINIC ROMEO FROM NEW JERSEY FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. FRANK A. LoBIONDO

                             of new jersey

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, July 18, 2012

  Mr. LoBIONDO. Mr. Speaker, I extend my deepest appreciation to 
Dominic Romeo for the more than 50 years of service to the state of New 
Jersey as a law enforcement officer and advocate for the Fraternal 
Order of Police. The true embodiment of a public servant, Dom began his 
career in 1959 as a seasonal police officer in his hometown of Wildwood 
and rose through the ranks, including two stints as President of the 
Cape May County FOP Lodge 7. His leadership and commitment to the oath 
`to serve and protect' are a model for current and aspiring officers. 
His advice and insight have helped me on Congressional issues related 
to law enforcement. On behalf of South Jersey residents and all those 
kept safe by his selfless actions, I wish Dom Romeo a very relaxing, 
rewarding retirement and thank him both for his steadfast friendship 
and service to South Jersey.

                          ____________________
```
Order entered December 20 , 2018

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 18
- 00982
- CV JOHN H. GEORGE, Appellant

V.
MARIA GUADALUPE GEOR GE, Appellee On Appeal from the 254t h Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF
- 17
- 11713



### O RDER By order dated November 13, 2018, the Court ordered Janet Saavedra, Official Court Reporter for the 254th Judicial District Court, to file the partial reporter’s recor d within thirty days. As of today’s date, the reporter’s record has not been filed. Accordingly, we ORDER Ms. Saavedra to file the partial reporter’s record by January 7, 201 9

. We DIRECT the Clerk of this Court to send a copy of this order to Ms. Saavedr a and all parties.
/s/ ADA BROWN JUSTICE
## In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07

- 18

- 00038

- CR

DERRICK JAMES WILLIA MS, JR., APPELLANT
V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE On Appeal from the 272nd District Court Brazos County, Texas Trial Court No. 17

- 02667

- CRF

- 272, Honorable Travis B. Bryan, Presiding 

### August 2 , 2018 MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE, JJ. Derrick James Williams, Jr., appellant, appeals his conviction for unauthorized use of a motor vehicle, enhanced. After a jury trial, appellant was found guilty and punishment was assessed at eight years’ imprisonment. Appellant filed an appeal and couns el was appointed. 1

1 Because this appeal was transferred from the Tenth Court of Appeals , we are obligated to apply its precedent when available in the event of a conflict between the precedents of that court and this C ourt

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 41.3.2

Appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw and an Anders 2 brief in the cause. Through those documents , counsel certified that , after diligently searching the record , the appeal was without merit. Accompanying the brief and m otion is a copy of a letter informing appellant of h is counsel ’ s belief that there was no reversible error and of appellant ’ s right to file a response , pro se

. So too did the letter indicate that a copy of the appellate record was provided to appellant. By letter dated May 3 , 2018, this Court also notified appellant of h is right to file h is own response by June 29 , 2018

. Appellant filed a
response. In compliance with the principles enunciated in Anders , appellate counsel discussed one potential area for appeal , which included whether the evidence was sufficient to support guilt. However , counsel then explained why the issue lacked merit. In addition , we conducted our own review of the record and appellant’s response to assess the accuracy of counsel ’ s c onclusions and to uncover any arguable error pursuant
to In re Schulman , 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) , and Stafford v. State , 813 S.W.2d 508 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (en banc). No such error was uncovered. Accordingly , the motion to withdraw is granted , and the judgment is affirmed. 3

Brian Quinn Chief Justice
Do not publish.

2 See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744

– 45, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967).

3 Appellant has the right to file a petition for discretionary review with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 117 (Thursday, August 2, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6005-S6006]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                         NOMINATIONS DISCHARGED

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Homeland 
Security and Governmental Affairs Committee be discharged from further 
consideration of PN 1731, Kimberley Sherri Knowles to be an associate 
judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia; that the 
nomination be confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made 
and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate; that no 
further motions be in order to the nomination; that any related 
statements be printed in the Record, and the President be immediately 
notified of the Senate's action.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The nomination considered and confirmed is as follows:

               superior court of the district of columbia

       Kimberley Sherri Knowles, of the District of Columbia, to 
     be an Associate Judge of the

[[Page S6006]]

     Superior Court of the District of Columbia for the term of 
     fifteen years.

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Foreign 
Relations Committee be discharged from further consideration of PN 
1826, James B. Cunningham, of New York, to be Ambassador to the Islamic 
Republic of Afghanistan; that the nomination be confirmed, the motion 
to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, there be no 
intervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order to 
the nomination; that any related statements be printed in the Record; 
that President Obama be immediately notified of the Senate's action, 
and the Senate then resume legislative session.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The nomination considered and confirmed is as follows:

                          department of state

       James B. Cunningham, of New York, a Career Member of the 
     Senior Foreign Service, Class of Career-Minister, to be 
     Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United 
     States of America to the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan.

                          ____________________
```
#### Armin Bauer, Plaintiff, *v.*Charlotte Bauer, Defendant.

Supreme Court, Special Term, Nassau County,

March 25, 1959.

*Albert, Wolk, Belous & Deutsch*for plaintiff.

*Charlotte Bauer,*defendant in person.

Marcus GL Christ, J.

This is a suit by the husband against the wife for (1) a separation, (2) a declaration of half ownership in the property in defendant’s name, and (3) an injunction against the wife from proceeding with a Florida divorce.

The parties were married in South Carolina on April 23,1943. There is one daughter of the marriage, Susan, born November 26,1944.

*37The life between the parties has been most disagreeable. The husband is a carpenter, working seasonally but for a long period of time the wife has built up a property and estate of her own and in her own name. She left the husband to live in Florida, taking her daughter with her. While there defendant started an action for divorce against the plaintiff. Also, without the husband’s knowledge or consent defendant wife purchased a parcel of property in Florida.

Upon the first cause of action plaintiff is entitled to judgment of separation upon the ground of abandonment.

The daughter has been shuttled back and forth to Florida and this is not good for her. She should be left in the Port Washington schools so that she can complete her education in some practical field of study.

The mother appeared nervous and erratic and it is the view of the court that the best interest of the daughter will be served by giving custody of her to the father, with a free right of visitation with and by the mother, the girl to remain with the mother until the father procures a suitable dwelling place for him and his daughter.

The property belonged to the wife before she was married, she had an independent estate and never agreed to give any part of it to the husband. The husband has made contributions by way of support but not to acquire an interest in the real estate.

Judgment is given on the second cause of action for the defendant wife. The property is hers and she may keep it.

The suit for divorce in Florida appears to have been abandoned. No injunction will issue against any suit in the future, since new and valid grounds may be later discovered and shown.

It is the view- of the court, although no binding order may be made, that the husband should execute the deed to the Florida property without conditions so that it may be sold and the wife’s investment not lost by default in taxes.

This constitutes the decision of the court pursuant to section 440 of the Civil Practice Act.

No costs are awarded to either party .

Settle judgment on notice.
# C_2009267EN.01008602.xml

| 7.11.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 267/86 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.11.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 267/86

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 25 September 2009 — Avogadri and Others v Commission

(Case F-58/08) (1)

1

2009/C 267/158

Language of the case: French

Language of the case: French

The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the name of Ms Monica Leva be removed from the list of applicants.

---

(1)  OJ C 209, 15.8.2008, p. 74.

1

---
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

ALEXANDER S. ORENSHTEYN,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES 

CORPORATION,

Defendant-Appellee.

______________________ 

2014-1082

______________________ 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the 

Southern District of New York in No. 1:02-cv-05074-JFKRLE, Senior Judge John F. Keenan.

______________________ 

ON MOTION

______________________ 

O R D E R

 Alexander S. Orenshteyn moves without opposition 

for a 90-day extension of time, until April 16, 2014, to file 

his principal brief.

Upon consideration thereof,

Case: 14-1082 Document: 8 Page: 1 Filed: 01/13/2014
2 ORENSHTEYN v. IBM

 IT IS ORDERED THAT: 

The motion is granted.

 FOR THE COURT

 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole 

Daniel E. O’Toole 

Clerk of Court

s27

Case: 14-1082 Document: 8 Page: 2 Filed: 01/13/2014