alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T h e p a rtie s c o n s e n te dto p r o c e e db e f o r e am a g is tr a te ju d g e . ** T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on *** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , J OSEP H H ALL, D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e llan t. N o. 10- 10211 D. C . No . 2 : 0 6 - c r - 0 0 3 1 0 - HD M ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt

f orthe D i s tr i c tof

N e va da P e ggyA . L e e n, M a gi s tr a t e Judge , P r e s i di ng ** S ubm i tt e d M a r c h 8, 2011 *** B efo re: F A R R IS , L E A V Y , an dB Y B E E , C i rcu i tJu d g es. Jose ph H al l appeal s pro se fr om the di stri ctcourt ’ s orderdenyi ng hi s F eder al R u le o f C r im in a l P r o c e du r e s e c tio n 4 1 ( e ) m o tio n f o rth e r e tu rn o f

s e iz e dc u rr e n c y . W e h a v e j u r i s d i c t i o n u n d e r2 8 U . S. C. § 1 2 9 1 , a n dw e a f f i rm. 

# FI LED

MA R 15 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS10- 10211 2 H al l co n t en d s th atth e g o v ern m en tfai l edt o co m p l y w i th th e du e p ro cess n o tic e r e q u ir e m e n t b e c au s e it f a ile dto e n s u r e th a t h e w a s p e r s o n a llys e rv e dw ith the not i c e of

the pe ndi ng f

or f e i tur e pr oc e e di ngs . T he r e c or d r e f l e c t s tha t , by de l i ve r i ng ac e rt i f

i e d- m a i l not i c e of

pe ndi ng a dm i ni s tr a t i ve f or f e i tur e pr oc e e di ngs a ddr e s s e d t o H a l l a tthe de t e nt i on c e nt e rw he r e he w a s i nc a r c e r a t e d a nd r e c e i vi ng a re ce i ptconfi rm i ng del i very , the go vernm entcom pl i ed w i th the du e proces s not i ce r e q u ir e m e n ts f

o rp r o p e rtys e iz u r e . See D u sen b ery v. U ni ted States , 534 U . S . 161, 1 6 8 - 7 1 ( 2 0 0 2 ) . AF F I RME D.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 123 (Thursday, September 13, 2012)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1514]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                          HONORING TOM LaBONGE

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. JANICE HAHN

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, September 13, 2012

  Ms. HAHN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor Los Angeles City Councilman 
Tom LaBonge, a distinguished public servant, who is receiving the 2012 
Jack Webb Award for his commitment and support for the men and women of 
the Los Angeles Police Department. Tom's parents gave him a deep love 
for the City of Angels. His civic spirit was inspired as a teenager 
when he served on Mayor Tom Bradley's Youth Council. In 1976, upon 
earning his undergraduate degree from California State University Los 
Angeles, he joined the staff of Councilwoman Peggy Stevenson, 13th 
District, and later he moved to work for John Ferraro, Council 
President.
  Over the course of 15 years as an aide to John Ferraro, Tom learned 
the value of public service. In spite of the demands of working for the 
Council President, Tom still found time to coach LAPD's football team, 
the Centurions.
  Later, as chief of field operations for Mayor Riordan, Tom oversaw a 
staff of deputies assigned to neighborhoods throughout every region of 
the 465-square-mile city and acted as the Mayor's special 
representative at community events.
  In 2011, Tom won a special election to represent the people of the 
4th City Council District. As his tenure in the Council winds down, Tom 
remains busy promoting the city he loves and working diligently to make 
Los Angeles a better place to live, work, and play.
  Whether tackling issues that impact his constituents or coaching cops 
on the gridiron, Tom's life has been devoted to service and as such, he 
has earned this award. It is truly a privilege to be his friend.

                          ____________________
```
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 120 (Monday, September 10, 2012)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1459]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                 THE GREATER KANAWAH VALLEY FOUNDATION

                                 ______
                                 

                       HON. SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO

                            of west virginia

                    in the house of representatives

                       Monday, September 10, 2012

  Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to congratulate The Greater 
Kanawha Valley Foundation on obtaining their National Standards for 
U.S. Community FoundationsTM accreditation from the 
Community Foundations National Standards Board.
  The Community Foundations National Standards Board was established as 
a supporting organization of the Council on Foundations, a nonprofit 
membership association of grant making foundations and corporations, to 
administer the National Standards. This board is responsible for 
upholding the quality, value, and integrity of the National Standards 
for U.S. Community FoundationsTM, the first and only 
accreditation program of its kind.
  In the United States, community foundations serve tens of thousands 
of donors, administer more than $40 billion in charitable funds, and 
address the core concerns of more than 700 communities and regions. 
With such a presence--nationally and within local communities--comes 
responsibility.
  Achieving confirmation and reconfirming compliance with National 
Standards is a rigorous process, guaranteeing that every community 
foundation that receives the designation has adhered to excellent 
philanthropic practice. This program requires community foundations to 
document their policies for governance, donor services, investments, 
grantmaking, community leadership, and administration.
  The Greater Kanawha Valley Foundation of Charleston, West Virginia 
has obtained its National Standards accreditation by demonstrating a 
commitment to operational quality, integrity, accountability, and 
adherence to the highest standards for grantmaking.
  On behalf of the residents of Charleston, I congratulate The Greater 
Kanawha Valley Foundation on receiving its National Standards 
accreditation and commend the foundation's dedicated service to 
Charleston and communities in West Virginia.

                          ____________________
```
# C_2010024EN.01001501.xml

| 30.1.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.1.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/15

---

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 26 November 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic

(Case C-13/09) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Directive 2006/86/EC - Traceability requirements - Notification of serious adverse reactions and events - Technical requirements for the coding, processing, preservation, storage and distribution of human tissues and cells - Failure to adopt within the prescribed period)

2010/C 24/24

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: C. Cattabriga and S. Mortoni, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Italian Republic (represented by: G. Calmieri, acting as Agent, and F. Arena, avvocato dello Stato)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to adopt, within the prescribed period, the provisions necessary to comply with Commission Directive 2006/86/EC of 24 October 2006 implementing Directive 2004/23/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards traceability requirements, notification of serious adverse reactions and events and certain technical requirements for the coding, processing, preservation, storage and distribution of human tissues and cells (OJ 2006 L 294, p. 32)

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | declares that the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Commission Directive 2006/86/EC of 24 October 2006 implementing Directive 2004/23/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards traceability requirements, notification of serious adverse reactions and events and certain technical requirements for the coding, processing, preservation, storage and distribution of human tissues and cells, by not adopting all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with that directive; |
| --- | --- |

1.

declares that the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Commission Directive 2006/86/EC of 24 October 2006 implementing Directive 2004/23/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards traceability requirements, notification of serious adverse reactions and events and certain technical requirements for the coding, processing, preservation, storage and distribution of human tissues and cells, by not adopting all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with that directive;

| 2. | orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 55, 7.3.2009.

1

---
# C_2008079EN.01003101.xml

| 29.3.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 79/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.3.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 79/31

---

Action brought on 18 January 2008 — Bastos Viegas v OHIM — Pierre Fabre Médicament (OPDREX)

(Case T-33/08)

(2008/C 79/60)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Bastos Viegas, AS (Penafiel, Portugal) (represented by: G. Marín Raigal and P. López Ronda, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Pierre Fabre Médicament, S.A.

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 14 November 2007 (Case R 1238/2006-4) so as to dismiss the opposition lodged by Pierre Fabre and grant Community trade mark application No 2 429 249 ‘OPDREX’ (figurative) and order the opponent to pay the costs of both proceedings; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 14 November 2007 (Case R 1238/2006-4) so as to dismiss the opposition lodged by Pierre Fabre and grant Community trade mark application No 2 429 249 ‘OPDREX’ (figurative) and order the opponent to pay the costs of both proceedings;

| — | Order the defendant to bear its own costs and to pay the costs of the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to bear its own costs and to pay the costs of the applicant;

| — | Order the intervener to bear its own costs and to pay the costs of the applicant in these proceedings |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the intervener to bear its own costs and to pay the costs of the applicant in these proceedings

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant.

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark ‘OPDREX’ (application for registration No 2 429 249, for goods in Classes 5 and 10 and services in Class 35).

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Pierre Fabre Médicament, S.A.

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in opposition: National word mark ‘OPTREX’ for goods in Class 5 (pharmaceutical goods).

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upholding in part of the opposition, in respect of certain goods in Classes 5 and 10.

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulment of the contested decision, in so far as it rejects the Community trade mark application in respect of ‘surgical apparatus and instruments’ in Class 10.

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Incorrect application of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Community trade mark.

Pleas in law:

---
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In connection with the Quarterly Report of Reed’s, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2010 as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Christopher J. Reed, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and




(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.






Dated:  May 11, 2010








/s/ Christopher J. Reed


Christopher J. Reed


Chief Executive Officer


(Principal Executive Officer)





A signed original of this certification 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.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 117 (Thursday, August 2, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H5634]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                              {time}  0910
                  LET'S INVEST IN THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

  (Mr. HIGGINS asked and was given permission to address the House for 
1 minute.)
  Mr. HIGGINS. Mr. Speaker, our economic problems are eminently 
solvable. They just require confidence in the American people. But the 
American people have lost confidence in Congress, and it's easy to see 
why.
  Exhibit A: the inability to reach a deal on a grand bargain on debt 
reduction. Last year, the Speaker and the President negotiated a plan 
to reduce the debt by $4 trillion through a mix of spending cuts and 
revenue increases, revenues that would come, not from raising taxes, 
but closing special deals, institutionalized corruption.
  That plan represented a balanced and bipartisan approach. The economy 
today would be performing much better had that deal been enacted. But 
the Tea Party-controlled Republican House rejected the deal.
  Exhibit B: the refusal to act boldly to create jobs and rebuild the 
infrastructure of America. We just spent $89 billion rebuilding the 
roads of Afghanistan. Last week we passed a bill to spend just $52 
billion a year in rebuilding roads and bridges right here in America. 
That's a weak plan. In fact, it's pathetically weak. That is why the 
American people have lost confidence in Congress.
  The best tax policy is to invest in America and the American people 
and to bring lost taxpayers back to work.

                          ____________________
```
MEMORANDUM

TO: Toni Jones, Charlene Spells, Ketan Patel, U.S. Environm ental Protection Agency

FROM: Brian Shrager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, K risten James and Jason

Huckaby, Eastern Research Group, Inc.

DATE: April 14, 2010

SUBJECT: Tire Derived Fuel (TDF) Clarification Request Summary

1.0 Introduction

This memorandum summarizes the information collected in a follow up survey of industrial and commercial boiler facilities burning tire der ived fuel (TDF). The purpose of this follow up survey was to obtain clarifying informatio n on the composition of the TDF combusted at the facility. Attachment A provides a summary table of the facilities and their survey response. Attachment B includes the orig inal response from each facility.

2.0 Information Collection

Facilities that selected TDF as a fuel type combusted i n EPA’s Combustion Survey (ICR No. 2286.01), “Phase I” survey were contacted by Brian Shr ager from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on February 4, 2010. Mr. Shrager re quested that facilities indicate which of the following statements was true rega rding the TDF used at the facility:

(1) The TDF is chipped tires that have had the metal componen ts of the tires
removed. (2) The TDF is chipped tires that have not had the metal com ponents of the tires
removed. (3) The TDF includes both materials described in (1) and (2). (4) Don’t know if the TDF has had the metal components remo ved. (5) Other (please explain).

EPA received a follow up response from 30 of the 31 facilit ies contacted for this survey.
# C_2009282EN.01004303.xml

| 21.11.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 282/43 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.11.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 282/43

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 6 October 2009 — Sundholm v Commission

(Case T-102/08 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Staff case - Officials - Reports - Career development report drawn up in compliance with a judgment of the Tribunal - Appraisal year 2001/2002 - Justified absences - Obligation to state reasons)

2009/C 282/82

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Asa Sundholm (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: S. Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis and E. Marchal, lawyers)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: C. Berardis-Kayser and G. Berscheid, Agents, assisted by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 13 December 2007 in Case F-27/07 Sundholm v Commission, not published in the ECR, seeking to have that judgment set aside.

Sundholm

Commission

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Sets aside the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 13 December 2007 in Case F-27/07 Sundholm v Commission, not published in the ECR; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Sets aside the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 13 December 2007 in Case F-27/07 Sundholm v Commission, not published in the ECR;

| 2. | Annuls the decision of 2 June 2006 by which the reporting officer on appeal established Ms Asa Sundholm's career development report for the period from 1 July 2001 to 31 December 2002; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Annuls the decision of 2 June 2006 by which the reporting officer on appeal established Ms Asa Sundholm's career development report for the period from 1 July 2001 to 31 December 2002;

| 3. | For the rest, dismisses the action brought at first instance; |
| --- | --- |

3.

For the rest, dismisses the action brought at first instance;

| 4. | Orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs of the procedure before the Civil Service Tribunal and of the present instance. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs of the procedure before the Civil Service Tribunal and of the present instance.

---

(1)  OJ C 107, 26.4.2008.

1

---
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR. 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 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5.4.

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-40926 Summary Calendar JULIUS WARNER MARACALIN Petitioner-Appellant v. MARVIN D MORRISON, Warden Respondent-Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:03-CV-631 Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Julius Warner Maracalin, federal prisoner # 02617-095, appeals from the district court’s denial of his motion for relief pursuant to F E D . R. C IV. P. 60(b) from the denial of his petition for 28 U.S.C. § 2241 relief, a denial of relief that we affirmed. Maracalin v. Morrison, 185 F. App’x 430, 431 (5th Cir.), c ert. denied, 127 S. Ct. 312 (2006). The denial ofMaracalin’s Rule 60(b) motion was not an abuse of discretion. See Seven Elves, Inc. v. Eskenazi , 635 F.2d 396, 402 (5th Cir. 1981). We held United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D February 19, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III ClerkNo. 07-40926

2 that Maracalin could not pursue relief pursuant to § 2241 on the contentions on which he sought a ruling in the Rule 60(b) motion. Maracalin, 185 F. App’x at 431. Because Maracalin cannot obtain relief in a § 2241 proceeding, the merits of his underlying contentions need not be addressed. Maracalin’s appeal is dismissed as frivolous. See 5 TH C IR. R. 42.2. Maracalin is warned that any future attempts to evade the requirements for filing a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, however styled, may result in the imposition of sanctions against him. APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-6891

SONIA WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

CLARENCE WILLIAMS, Sheriff; MAJOR WOODY;

ANTHONY DOWDY, Sergeant,

Defendants - Appellees,

and

CAPTAIN NEWTON; LIEUTENANT SPENCE; SERGEANT

BRANDT; SERGEANT SAUNDERS; DEPUTY SMITH;

DEPUTY MARTIN; DEPUTY CARR; DEPUTY DEBUSKE;

DEPUTY GUERRANT; MR. PENCILE; MR. CLARK;

MR. MUTCH; DEPUTY BROWN,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge.

(CA-95-100)

Submitted: February 27, 1997 Decided: March 11, 1997

Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
2

Sonia Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Steven Latham Micas, County

Attorney, Jeffrey Lee Mincks, Senior Assistant County Attorney,

Stylian Paul Parthemos, Wendell Charles Roberts, COUNTY ATTORNEY'S

OFFICE, Chesterfield, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Sonia Williams appeals the district court's order granting defendants' motion for summary judgment and dismissing her 42 U.S.C.

§ 1983 (1994) action. We have reviewed the record and the district

court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Williams v. Williams,

No. CA-95-100 (E.D. Va. May 16, 1996). 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.

AFFIRMED
# City of Martinsville - Appalachian Regional Commission

- Piedmont Community Services Board: Expanding Community Connection in Virginia Across the Commonwealth of Virginia, Community Service Boards (CSBs)&#160;serve as joint partnerships between state and local governments to meet&#160;critical&#160;behavioral health needs in&#160;every county.&#160;Piedmont Regional Community Services Board&#160;has long served as one of those entities, providing support for&#160;over the last 40 years for over 7,500 individuals each year.&#160;Piedmont’s offerings have included services for&#160;individuals facing&#160;mental health&#160;issues, developmental&#160;disabilities,&#160;substance [&#8230;]The post Piedmont Community Services Board: Expanding Community Connection in Virginia appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
- West Piedmont Planning District Commission Executive Director Kristina Eberly Email &#x6b;&#101;&#98;e&#x72;&#x6c;&#121;&#64;&#x77;&#x70;&#112;d&#x63;&#x2e;&#111;r&#x67;The post West Piedmont Planning District Commission appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.