alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# CI2022429EN.01000101.xml

| 11.11.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CI 429/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.11.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CI 429/1

---

Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products of 10 November 2022

(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1)
  or Article 5 of Regulation (EU) 2019/6 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2))

(2022/C 429 I/01)

| — | Issuing of a marketing authorisation (Article 13 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council): Accepted













  Date of the decision | Name of the medicinal product | INN (International Non-Proprietary Name) | Holder of the marketing authorisation | Number of the entry in the Community Register | Pharmaceutical form | ATC code (Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical Code) | Date of notification |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 10.11.2022 | VidPrevtyn Beta | COVID-19 vaccine (recombinant, adjuvanted) | Sanofi Pasteur
  14 Espace Henry Vallée, 69007 Lyon, France | EU/1/21/1580 | Solution and emulsion for emulsion for injection | J07BX03 | 10.11.2022 |

—

Issuing of a marketing authorisation (Article 13 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council): Accepted

Date of the decision

Name of the medicinal product

INN (International Non-Proprietary Name)

Holder of the marketing authorisation

Number of the entry in the Community Register

Pharmaceutical form

ATC code (Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical Code)

Date of notification

10.11.2022

VidPrevtyn Beta

COVID-19 vaccine (recombinant, adjuvanted)

Sanofi Pasteur

14 Espace Henry Vallée, 69007 Lyon, France

EU/1/21/1580

Solution and emulsion for emulsion for injection

J07BX03

10.11.2022

Anyone wishing to consult the public assessment report on the medicinal products in question and the decisions relating thereto is invited to contact:

| European Medicines Agency |
| --- |
| Domenico Scarlattilaan 6 |
| 1083 HS Amsterdam |
| NETHERLANDS |

European Medicines Agency

Domenico Scarlattilaan 6

1083 HS Amsterdam

NETHERLANDS

---

(1)  OJ L 136, 30.4.2004, p. 1.

(2)  OJ L 4, 7.1.2019, p. 43.

---
#### WOOD v. STATE.

No. 17553.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 24, 1935.

Appeal Reinstated May 29, 1935.

*671Phil Kouri, of Wichita Falls, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

MORROW, Presiding Judge.

Theft is the offense; penalty assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for two years.

The appeal bond which appears in the record is insufficient to authorize consideration of the appeal by this court for the reason that it is not approved by the judge who presided in the trial of the case. See article 818, C. C. P. 1925; also, Baker v. State, 113 Tex. Cr. R. 120, 18 S.W. (2d) 623; Shadwick v. State, 122 Tex. Cr. R. 70, 53 S.W. (2d) 614; Boggs v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 75 S.W. (2d) 680.

The appeal will be dismissed upon the authority stated. If the appellant desires to perfect his appeal within fifteen days, it may be reinstated. Otherwise the dismissal will be conclusive.

On the Merits.

CHRISTIAN, Judge.

The record having been perfected, the • appeal is reinstated and the case considered on its merits.

R. W. Lindsey owned some pipe which he had used on his oil lease. An employee who had the possession and control of said pipe testified, in substance, as follows : On the night of the 16th of September, 1934, appellant and C. H. Stradley came to the oil lease and proceeded to load about sixty-four joints of the pipe on a truck. The witness made them desist and required them to haul the pipe to the oil rig.

An accomplice witness testified that, prior to the taking of the pipe, appellant had asked him if he wanted to join him in the enterprise. Appellant stated to him further that if they were apprehended he would assume the entire responsibility. He testified further that appellant told him that he thought they could sell the pipe for about $50. It was uncontroverted that the value of the stolen property was more than $50, and that appellant did not have the consent of the owner or of the party in charge of said property to remove it.

Appellant admitted going to the oil lease and taking possession of the pipe, but declared that he thought said pipe had been abandoned.

We have not undertaken to set out the testimony in detail. The opinion is expressed that the evidence is sufficient to support the conviction.

There were no exceptions to the charge of the court and no bills of exception are brought forward.

The judgment is affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the court.
#### AYDELOTT v. STATE.

No. 19582.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 30, 1938.

Ditzler H. Jones, of Uvalde, for appellant. V

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

MORROW, Presiding Judge.

The offense is burglary; penalty assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for 12 years.

The indictment appears regular. The record is before this court without statement of facts or bills of exception. Nothing has been presented for review justifying a reversal of the conviction.

The judgment is affirmed.
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-90,121-02

EX PARTE ANTONIO CHIMNEY, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 22-9640-W2 IN THE 12 DISTRICT COURT TH

FROM MADISON COUNTY

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Applicant was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. The Tenth Court

of Appeals affirmed his conviction. Chimney v. State, 6 S.W.3d 681 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999). 

Applicant filed this application for a writ of habeas corpus in the county of conviction, and the

district clerk forwarded it to this Court. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07.

Applicant contends that he is actually innocent and that trial counsel was ineffective because

he failed to investigate and present evidence of an alternate shooter. As part of the record in writ

number 90,121-01, which this Court dismissed as non-compliant in 2019, Applicant provided an

affidavit from Roshaan Perry stating that he was the person who shot the victims in this case and that

Applicant did not have a gun on the night of the incident. Applicant has alleged facts that, if true,
2

might entitle him to relief. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984). Accordingly, the record

should be developed. The trial court is the appropriate forum for findings of fact. TEX.CODE CRIM.

PROC. art. 11.07, § 3(d). The trial court shall order trial counsel to respond to Applicant’s claim. 

In developing the record, the trial court may use any means set out in Article 11.07, § 3(d). If the

trial court elects to hold a hearing, it shall determine whether Applicant is indigent. If Applicant is

indigent and wants to be represented by counsel, the trial court shall appoint counsel to represent him

at the hearing. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 26.04. If counsel is appointed or retained, the trial

court shall immediately notify this Court of counsel’s name.

The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law as to whether, considering

the totality of the circumstances, the common-law doctrine of laches bars equitable reliefin this case. 

Ex parte Perez, 398 S.W.3d 206 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013). The trial court shall also make findings

of fact and conclusions of law as to whether there is new evidence sufficient to show that Applicant

is actually innocent of this offense and whether trial counsel’s performance was deficient and

Applicant was prejudiced. The trial court maymake anyother findings and conclusions that it deems

appropriate in response to Applicant’s claims.

The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law within ninety days from

the date of this order. The district clerk shall then immediately forward to this Court the trial court’s

findings and conclusions and the record developed on remand, including, among other things,

affidavits, motions, objections, proposed findings and conclusions, orders, and transcripts from

hearings and depositions. See TEX.R.APP. P. 73.4(b)(4). Any extensions of time must be requested

by the trial court and obtained from this Court.
3

Filed: OCTOBER 05, 2022

Do not publish
# C_2016324EN.01000101.xml

| 2.9.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 324/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.9.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 324/1

---

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

2015-2016 SESSION

Sitting of 25 March 2015

The Minutes of this session have been published in

  OJ C 152, 28.4.2016
  .

The Minutes of this session have been published in

OJ C 152, 28.4.2016

TEXTS ADOPTED

---
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.                  

###### General Services Administration

          - 48 CFR Part 552
          - [GSAR-TA-2024-01; Docket No. GSA-GSAR-2024-0018; Sequence No. 1]

# AGENCY:

Office of Acquisition Policy, General Services Administration (GSA).

# ACTION:

Final rule.

# SUMMARY:

The General Services Administration (GSA) is issuing this final rule to amend the General Services Administration Acquisition Regulation (GSAR) to make needed editorial changes.

# DATES:

Effective: September 27, 2024.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Mr. Thomas O'Linn, Procurement Analyst, at 202-445-0390 for clarification of content. For information pertaining to status or publication schedules, contact the Regulatory Secretariat Division at 202-501-4755 or                         *GSARegsec@gsa.gov.*                         Please cite GSAR-TA-2024-01.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This final rule amends the General Services Administration Acquisition Regulation (GSAR) to make needed technical amendments to update erroneous clause dates.

# List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 552

      - Government procurement

Jeffrey A. Koses

Senior Procurement Executive, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of Government-wide Policy, General Services Administration.

Therefore, GSA amends 48 CFR part 552 as set forth below:

# PART 552—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES

1. The authority citation for 48 CFR part 552 continues to read as follows:

Authority:40 U.S.C. 121(c).

552.219-18

2. Amend section 552.219-18 by removing from the date of the clause “(DATE)” and adding “(MAY 2024)” in its place. 

552.238-115

3. Amend section 552.238-115 by removing from the date of the clause “(AUG 24)” and adding “(SEP 2024)” in its place. 

552.238-120

4. Amend section 552.238-120 by removing from the date of the clause “(AUG 24)” and adding “(SEP 2024)” in its place. 

[FR Doc. 2024-22158 Filed 9-26-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6820-61-P
# C_2022412EN.01001301.xml

| 27.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 412/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 412/13

---

Commission information notice pursuant to Article 17(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community

Invitation to tender in respect of the operation of scheduled air services in accordance with public service obligations

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 412/10)

| Member State | France |
| --- | --- |
| Route concerned | Castres – Paris (Orly) |
| Period of validity of the contract | 1 June 2023 to 31 May 2027 |
| Deadline for the submission of applications and tenders | 6 January 2023, 17.00 Paris time |
| Address where the text of the invitation to tender and any relevant information and/or documentation relating to the public tender and the public service obligation can be obtained | Syndicat Mixte de l’aéroport régional de Castres-Mazamet





  CCI Tarn |
| 40 allée Alphonse Juin |
| 81 100 Castres |
| FRANCE |

Member State

France

Route concerned

Castres – Paris (Orly)

Period of validity of the contract

1 June 2023 to 31 May 2027

Deadline for the submission of applications and tenders

6 January 2023, 17.00 Paris time

Address where the text of the invitation to tender and any relevant information and/or documentation relating to the public tender and the public service obligation can be obtained

Syndicat Mixte de l’aéroport régional de Castres-Mazamet

CCI Tarn

40 allée Alphonse Juin

81 100 Castres

FRANCE

Tel. +33 563514614

Email: f.chambert@tarn.cci.fr

Or on the platform containing the buyer profile:

http://marches-publics.maires81.asso.fr/

---
#### CANTILLO v. STATE.

No. 17942.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 12, 1936.

T. B. Bartlett, of Marlin, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

HAWKINS, Judge.

Conviction is for manufacturing intoxicating liquor, punishment being assessed at one year in the penitentiary.

t Since the conviction the law upon which the prosecution was predicated has been repealed • without any saving clause. See Meadows v. State (Tex.Cr.App.) 88 S.W. (2d) 481.

The judgment is reversed, and the prosecution ordered dismissed.
# IMMC.EESC-2022-04541-AC.ENG.xhtml.EESC-2022-04541-00-00-AC-TRA-EN.docx

| OPINION |
| --- |
| European Economic and Social Committee |
| Decision repealing Directive 89/629/EEC |
| _____________ |
| Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council

  repealing Council Directive 89/629/EEC


  [COM(2022)465 final – 2022/0282(COD)] |
| |
| TEN/790 |
| |

OPINION

European Economic and Social Committee

Decision repealing Directive 89/629/EEC

_____________

Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council

  repealing Council Directive 89/629/EEC

[COM(2022)465 final – 2022/0282(COD)]

TEN/790

EN

Referral

| Referral | European Parliament, 03/10/2022


  Council of the European Union, 26/09/2022


  European Commission, 16/09/2022 |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Article 100.2 and 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union |
| Plenary Assembly decision | 26/10/2022 |
| Section responsible | Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society |
| - | - |
| Adopted at plenary | 26/10/2022 |
| Plenary session No | 573 |
| Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions) | 169/0/03 |

Referral

European Parliament, 03/10/2022

European Parliament, 03/10/2022

Council of the European Union, 26/09/2022

Council of the European Union, 26/09/2022

European Commission, 16/09/2022

European Commission, 16/09/2022

Legal basis

Legal basis

Article 100.2 and 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Article 100.2 and 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Plenary Assembly decision

Plenary Assembly decision

26/10/2022

26/10/2022

Section responsible

Section responsible

Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society

Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society

-

-

-

-

Adopted at plenary

Adopted at plenary

26/10/2022

26/10/2022

Plenary session No

Plenary session No

573

573

Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions)

Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions)

169/0/03

169/0/03

Since the Committee endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Since the Committee endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 26 October 2022

Brussels, 26 October 2022

Christa SCHWENG

Christa SCHWENG

The president of the European Economic and Social Committee

The president of the European Economic and Social Committee

_____________

_____________
# Official Journal C 49/2017

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 49 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6016 February 2017 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 49

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6016 February 2017

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2017/C 49/01 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8240 — Dana/Brevini Fluid Power and Brevini Power Transmission) (
  1
  ) | 1 |
| 2017/C 49/02 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8216 — Allianz/Dalmore/BEL) (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2017/C 49/01

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8240 — Dana/Brevini Fluid Power and Brevini Power Transmission) (
  1
  )

1

1

2017/C 49/02

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8216 — Allianz/Dalmore/BEL) (
  1
  )

1

1

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2017/C 49/03 | Euro exchange rates | 2 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2017/C 49/03

Euro exchange rates

2

---

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

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

1

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

EN
* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

October 24, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-20016

Conference Calendar

MELVIN ALEXANDER PAYTON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

RISSIE OWENS, Chair-Woman, Board of Pardons and Paroles;

LINDA GARCIA, Board Member, Board of Pardons and Paroles;

LYNN RUZICKA, Board of Pardons and Paroles; CHARLES SPEIER,

Texas Parole Board Member, Individually and in their Official

Capacity,

Defendants-Appellees.

--------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:05-CV-993

--------------------

Before JOLLY, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Melvin Alexander Payton, Texas prisoner # 227125, appeals

the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint

with prejudice as frivolous. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1). 

Payton asserted that he had a liberty interest in his release on

parole, that the defendants refused to release him on parole, and

that the parole hearing was defective. 
No. 06-20016

-2-

The district court did not abuse its discretion in

dismissing Payton’s complaint on the bases (1) that all

defendants were immune from liability based on absolute immunity

or Eleventh Amendment immunity, and (2) that Payton has no

liberty interest in parole that is protected by the Due Process

Clause. See Will v. Michigan Dep’t of State Police, 491 U.S. 58,

71 (1989); Madison v. Parker, 104 F.3d 765, 768 (5th Cir. 1997);

Orellana v. Kyle, 65 F.3d 29, 31-32 (5th Cir. 1995); Hulsey v.

Owens, 63 F.3d 354, 356 (5th Cir. 1995).

This appeal is frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215,

220 (5th Cir. 1983). Accordingly, it is dismissed. 5TH CIR. R.

42.2. The dismissal of this appeal as frivolous and the district

court’s dismissal of Payton’s lawsuit as frivolous constitute two

strikes for purposes of the 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) bar. See

Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 388 (5th Cir. 1996). We

caution Payton that once he accumulates three strikes, he may not

proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed

while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is

under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(g). 

APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.
EXHIBIT 32.1

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 Spectra Energy Partners, LP on Form 10-Q for the period
ending June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Gregory J. Rizzo, President and Chief Executive Officer of Spectra Energy Partners GP, LLC, general partner of Spectra
Energy Partners (DE) GP, LP, general partner of Spectra Energy Partners, LP, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 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; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Spectra Energy Partners, LP.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |  |  |                                                                                                                                                                                             
|-------------------- |  |  |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: August 7, 2009 |  |  |  | /s/    GREGORY J. RIZZO                                                                                                                                                                     
|                     |  |  |  | Gregory J. Rizzo President and Chief Executive Officer Spectra Energy Partners GP, LLC General Partner of Spectra Energy Partners (DE) GP, LP General Partner of Spectra Energy Partners, LP