alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2011240EN.01000101.xml

| 16.9.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 240/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.9.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 240/1

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 922/2011

of 15 September 2011

establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1),

Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors (2), and in particular Article 136(1) thereof,

Whereas:

Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in Annex XVI, Part A thereto,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The standard import values referred to in Article 136 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are fixed in the Annex hereto.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 16 September 2011.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 15 September 2011.

For the Commission, On behalf of the President,

José Manuel SILVA RODRÍGUEZ

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.

2

---

ANNEX

Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

| (EUR/100 kg) |
| --- |
| CN code | Third country code (1) | Standard import value |
| 0707 00 05 | EG | 135,3 |
| TR | 111,1 |
| ZZ | 123,2 |
| 0709 90 70 | TR | 123,8 |
| ZZ | 123,8 |
| 0805 50 10 | AR | 74,5 |
| CL | 83,5 |
| TR | 67,0 |
| UY | 59,0 |
| ZA | 81,1 |
| ZZ | 73,0 |
| 0806 10 10 | MK | 85,4 |
| TR | 103,7 |
| ZZ | 94,6 |
| 0808 10 80 | AR | 148,7 |
| CL | 150,0 |
| NZ | 110,7 |
| US | 185,1 |
| ZA | 99,8 |
| ZZ | 138,9 |
| 0808 20 50 | AR | 217,1 |
| CN | 74,4 |
| TR | 116,3 |
| ZA | 149,3 |
| ZZ | 139,3 |
| 0809 30 | TR | 139,6 |
| ZZ | 139,6 |

(EUR/100 kg)

CN code

Third country code (1)

Standard import value

0707 00 05

EG

135,3

TR

111,1

ZZ

123,2

0709 90 70

TR

123,8

ZZ

123,8

0805 50 10

AR

74,5

CL

83,5

TR

67,0

UY

59,0

ZA

81,1

ZZ

73,0

0806 10 10

MK

85,4

TR

103,7

ZZ

94,6

0808 10 80

AR

148,7

CL

150,0

NZ

110,7

US

185,1

ZA

99,8

ZZ

138,9

0808 20 50

AR

217,1

CN

74,4

TR

116,3

ZA

149,3

ZZ

139,3

0809 30

TR

139,6

ZZ

139,6

---

(1)  Nomenclature of countries laid down by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1833/2006 (OJ L 354, 14.12.2006, p. 19). Code ‘
  ZZ
  ’ stands for ‘of other origin’.

---
Exhibit 32.1

MF Global Ltd.

Certification of the Chief Executive Officer

As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of MF Global Ltd. (together with its subsidiaries, the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended
September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Bernard W. Dan, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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 the Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       
|-----------------------
|Date: November 12, 2008
|                       
|/s/ Bernard W. Dan     
|Bernard W. Dan         
|Chief Executive Officer

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.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, April 07, 2016.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of

the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, April 07, 2016

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A16A1229. IN THE INTEREST OF: A. D. G., A CHILD.

Upon consideration of the APPELLANT'S motion FOR PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW

THE APPEAL in the above styled case, it is ordered that the motion is hereby GRANTED.
# L_2011289EN.01001001.xml

| 8.11.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 289/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.11.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 289/10

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 1119/2011

of 31 October 2011

entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Brovada (PDO))

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 7(4) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, Italy's application to register the name ‧Brovada‧ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, Italy's application to register the name ‧Brovada‧ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

| (2) | As no statement of objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, that name should therefore be entered in the register, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

As no statement of objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, that name should therefore be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name contained in the Annex to this Regulation is hereby entered in the register.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20th day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 31 October 2011.

For the Commission, On behalf of the President,

Dacian CIOLOȘ

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12.

1

(2)  
  OJ C 35, 4.2.2011, p. 19.

2

---

ANNEX

Agricultural products intended for human consumption listed in Annex I to the Treaty:

Class 1.6.   Fruit, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed

ITALY

Brovada (PDO)

---
106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2865

AN ACT

To designate certain land of the National Forest System

located in the State of Virginia as wilderness.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Virginia Wilderness

5 Act of 2000’’.
2

S 2865 ES

1 SEC. 2. DESIGNATION OF WILDERNESS AREAS.

2 Section 1 of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act to designate

3 certain National Forest System lands in the States of Vir4 ginia and West Virginia as wilderness areas’’ (Public Law

5 100–326; 102 Stat. 584) is amended—

6 (1) in paragraph (5), by striking ‘‘and’’ at the

7 end;

8 (2) in paragraph (6), by striking the period and

9 inserting a semicolon; and

10 (3) by adding at the end the following:

11 ‘‘(7) certain land in the George Washington

12 National Forest, comprising approximately 6,500

13 acres, as generally depicted on a map entitled ‘The

14 Priest Wilderness Study Area’, dated June 6, 2000,

15 to be known as the ‘Priest Wilderness Area’; and

16 ‘‘(8) certain land in the George Washington

17 National Forest, comprising approximately 4,800

18 acres, as generally depicted on a map entitled ‘The

19 Three Ridges Wilderness Study Area’, dated June 6,
3

S 2865 ES

1 2000, to be known as the ‘Three Ridges Wilderness

2 Area.’’.

Passed the Senate October 5 (legislative day, September 22), 2000.

Attest:

Secretary.

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2865

AN ACT

To designate certain land of the National Forest

System located in the State of Virginia as wilderness.
Robert Teresa /s



# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

December 17, 2015

N o. 04

- 15

- 00436

- CV

Bryan SMITH d/b/a Vision Des ign and Build,

Appellant

v.

Robert OVERBY and Teresa Overby,

Appellee s

From the 438th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2008

- CI

- 02799

Honorable Gloria Saldana, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

The Appellant ’ s second motion for extension of time to file brief is hereby GRANTED.

Time is extended to January 13, 2016. NO MORE EXTENSIONS OF TIME WILL BE

ALLOWED

.

_________________________________ Jason Pulliam, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 17th day of December, 2015

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
#### PIERCE v. STATE.

No. 17761.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Dec. 4, 1935.

J. P. Cox, of Sherman, for appellant.

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

CHRISTIAN, Judge.

The offense is possession of spirituous liquor for the purpose of sale; the punishment, confinement in the penitentiary for 1 year.

Pending appeal, the law (Pen.Code 1925, art. 666 et seq., as amended) under which conviction was had has been repealed (Vernon’s Arin.P.C. art. 666—49). See Guy Meadows v. State (Tex.Cr.App.) 88 S.W.(2d) 481, delivered November 27, 1935.

The judgment is reversed and the prosecution ordered dismissed.

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.
II

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2897

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow the use of completed

contract method of accounting in the case of certain long-term naval

vessel construction contracts.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 20, 2000

Mr. ROBB (for himself Mr. BREAUX, Ms. LANDRIEU, Ms. SNOWE, and Mr.

WARNER) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow the

use of completed contract method of accounting in the

case of certain long-term naval vessel construction contracts.

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

3 SECTION 1. MODIFICATION OF ACCOUNTING RULES FOR

4 CERTAIN NAVAL LONG-TERM CONSTRUCTION

5 CONTRACTS.

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 460(e)(1) of the Internal

7 Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to exception for certain

8 construction contracts) is amended by striking ‘‘or’’ at the
2

•S 2897 IS

1 end of subparagraph (A), by striking the period at the

2 end of subparagraph (B) and inserting ‘‘, or’’, and by in3 serting after subparagraph (B) the following new subpara4 graph:

5 ‘‘(C) a qualified naval construction con6 tract for which an election is made under para7 graph (7).’’.

8 (b) QUALIFIED NAVAL CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT.—

9 Section 460(e) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is

10 amended by adding at the end the following new para11 graph:

12 ‘‘(7) QUALIFIED NAVAL CONSTRUCTION CON13 TRACT.—

14 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—A taxpayer may elect

15 to use the completed contract method of ac16 counting with respect to any qualified naval

17 construction contract.

18 ‘‘(B) DEFINITION.—For purposes of para19 graph (1), the term ‘qualified naval construc20 tion contract’ means a contract—

21 ‘‘(i) entered into by the taxpayer with

22 the Federal Government for the building,

23 construction, reconstruction, or rehabilita24 tion of a naval vessel, and
3

•S 2897 IS

1 ‘‘(ii) which the taxpayer estimates (at

2 the time such contract is entered into) will

3 be completed more than 24 months after

4 the contract commencement date of such

5 contract.

6 ‘‘(C) EFFECT OF ELECTION.—An election

7 under this paragraph shall apply to all con8 tracts of the taxpayer which are entered into

9 during the taxable year in which the election is

10 made or any subsequent taxable year.

11 ‘‘(D) SEPARATE CONTRACT.—For pur12 poses of applying this paragraph, in the case of

13 a qualified naval construction contract which

14 covers more than 1 vessel, each vessel covered

15 by the contract shall be treated as covered by

16 a separate contract.

17 ‘‘(E) EARNINGS AND PROFITS.—Section

18 312(n)(6) shall not apply to a taxpayer which

19 has made an election under this paragraph with

20 respect to a qualified naval construction con21 tract.’’.

22 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

23 this section shall apply with respect to contracts entered

24 into on or after January 1, 2000.

Æ
# L_2011341EN.01003801.xml

| 22.12.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 341/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.12.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 341/38

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 1369/2011

of 21 December 2011

amending Regulation (EC) No 952/2006 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 as regards the management of the Community market in sugar and the quota system

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1) and in particular Article 192(2), in conjunction with Article 4 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | After the introduction of the computerised system for transmitting sugar price information for the price recording system pursuant to Article 14 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 952/2006 (2), it is appropriate to increase the frequency at which the Commission submits such information to the Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

After the introduction of the computerised system for transmitting sugar price information for the price recording system pursuant to Article 14 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 952/2006 (2), it is appropriate to increase the frequency at which the Commission submits such information to the Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets.

| (2) | Regulation (EC) No 952/2006 should therefore be amended accordingly. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Regulation (EC) No 952/2006 should therefore be amended accordingly.

| (3) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The first paragraph of Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 952/2006 is replaced by the following:

‘Each month, the Commission shall inform the Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets of the average price for white sugar communicated during the month preceding the date of the information.’

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 21 December 2011.

For the Commission

The President

José Manuel BARROSO

---

(1)  
  OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 178, 1.7.2006, p. 39.

2

---
NUMBER 13-10-00058-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

IN THE INTEREST OF I.L.W., A CHILD

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 329th District Court 

of Wharton County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Rodriguez, Benavides, and Vela

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

This Court received an “Amended Notice of Appeal of the Order Confirming 

Non-Agreed Child Support Review Order” from the Wharton County District Clerk on 

February 5, 2010. Upon receiving the notice of appeal, the Clerk of the Court assigned 

an appellate cause number. On March 3, 2010, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant, 

in accordance with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3(c), that we would dismiss this 

appeal unless the $175.00 filing fee was paid. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c). 
2

The Wharton County District Clerk notified the Court by letter dated June 21, 2010 

that the notice of appeal had been mailed to the Court in error and should be disregarded 

because the appeal was to the 329th District Court, not the Thirteenth Court of Appeals. 

On June 24, 2010, the Court directed appellant to notify the Court whether appellant 

desires to appeal within ten days from the date of the letter. Appellant has not 

responded to the notices from the Clerk or paid the $175.00 filing fee. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 5, 12.1(b).

The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant=s failure to pay 

the filing fee, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed. See id. 42.3(b),(c). 

Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED for want of prosecution.

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the

31st day of August, 2010.
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

No. 20

- 50808

**In re: Charlie Lee Stewart, Sr.,**

Movant

**.**

Motion for an order authorizing the United States District Court for the

Western District of Texas to consider a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2254 application

Before **Jones, Elrod,** and **Higginson,** Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** * Charlie Lee Stewart, Sr., Texas prisoner # 01897620 , requests authorization to file a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2254 application challenging his conviction for continuous sexual abuse of a child. Stewart asserts that he is actually innocent based on new evidence, i.e., an affidavit from Esmeregilda Soliz sta ting that the victim recanted her trial testimony to Soliz. We will grant Stewart authorization to file a second or successive § 2254 application only if he makes a prima facie showing that his claim rel ies on either (1) “ a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court, that was previously unavailable, ” or

* Pursuant to **5th Circuit Rule** 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 Circuit Rule** 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED January 13, 2021

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 20-50808 Document: 00515704997 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/13/2021No. 20

- 50808

2 (2) facts that “ could not have been discovered previously through the exercise of due diligence

. . . [that] if proven and viewed in light of the evid ence as a whole, would be sufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that, but for constitutional error, no reasonable factfinder would have found the applicant guilty of the underlying offense. ” 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(2)(A), (B) ; see § 2244(b) (3)(C)

. Stewart presents actual innocence as a freestanding claim. We do not recognize freestanding claims of actual innocence on federal habeas review. See In re Swearingen , 556 F.3d 344, 348 (5th Cir. 2009). Accordingly, Stewart has not made the required prima facie showing under § 2244(b). See id

. ; In re Gentras , 666 F.3d 910, 911 (5th Cir. 2012)

. For the same reason, Stewart’s invocation of Schlup v. Delo , 513 U.S. 298, 327

- 29 (1995) , is unavailing

. See In re Swearingen , 556 F.3d at 348

. **IT IS ORDERED** that Stewart’s motion for authorization to file a successive § 2254 application is **DENIED**

. Case: 20-50808 Document: 00515704997 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/13/2021
United States Office of Personnel Management 

Healthcare and Insurance

Benefits Administration Letter

Number: 24-801 Date: February 22, 2024

Subject: The Federal Flexible Spending Account Program 

(FSAFEDS): 2024 Administrative Fees

Purpose

To notify agencies that the Federal Flexible Spending Account Program (FSAFEDS) 

administrative fees will change for 2024. The reserve account fee will remain the same 

for the 2024 benefit period. FSAFEDS fees are detailed in Benefit Administration Letter

21-801. 

Background

Administrative Fees

Agencies pay administrative fees to HealthEquity, the third-party administrator under 

contract with the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), on behalf of their 

employees enrolled in FSAFEDS. To maintain market competitiveness and retain an 

adequate Reserve Account, OPM determines annually if administrative fees will be 

discounted for participating agencies.

Dependent-Care Flexible Spending Account (DCFSA) Administrative Fee

The DCFSA administrative fee is $2.90 per DCFSA per month. For the entire 2024 

benefit period, OPM will discount that fee to $1.83 per DCFSA per month.

Health-Care Flexible Spending Account (HCFSA) Administrative Fee

The HCFSA administrative fee is $2.90 per HCFSA per month. For the entire 2024 

benefit period, OPM will discount that fee to $1.83 per HCFSA per month.
Benefits Administration Letter 24-801 

2 

Limited Expense Health Care Flexible Spending Account (LEX HCFSA) 

Administrative Fee

The LEX HCFSA administrative fee is $2.90 per LEX HCFSA per month. For the entire 

2024 benefit period, OPM will discount that fee to $1.83 per LEX HCFSA per month.

Reserve Account Fee

Agencies pay the reserve account fee to OPM on behalf of their employees enrolled in 

FSAFEDS. For 2024, the monthly reserve fee will remain unchanged at $0.25 per 

HCFSA per month.

The anticipated schedule for the task order and quarterly invoices is as follows:

• February 2024: Initial Task Order Request distributed 

• March 2024: Agencies submit fully executed task orders 

• April 2024: Q1 2024 (January-March) quarterly invoice distributed 

• July 2024: Q2 2024 (April-June) quarterly invoice distributed 

• October 2024: Q3 2024 (July-September) quarterly invoice distributed 

• November 2024: Q3 2024 (October-November) Task Order Catch-up Request 

distributed 

• December 2024: Agencies submit fully executed Task Order Modifications (as 

applicable) 

• January 2025: Q4 2024 (October-December) quarterly and Catch-up invoices 

distributed 

HealthEquity will send out the initial task order request in February. The agencies 

must submit an executed task order, to receive the first quarterly invoice in April 2024. 

Subsequent quarterly invoices will be sent accordingly. Thank you in advance for your 

prompt payment. Please ensure that all past due fees are also paid promptly.

Sincerely,

Laurie Bodenheimer

Associate Director

Healthcare and Insurance