alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2014465EN.01000502.xml

| 24.12.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 465/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.12.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 465/5

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7460 — Scholz Recycling/Thyssen Alfa Rohstoffhandel/Noris Metallrecycling JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2014/C 465/06)

On 16 December 2014, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in German language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7460. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7460. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

KEITH A. SMITH,

Petitioner

v.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF

PHILADELPHIA COUNTY,

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 134 EM 2019

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 5th day of February , 20 20

, the Application for Leave to File

Original Process is GRANTED, and the “Writ of Mandamas [sic] to Compel” is DENIED.
# C_2014232EN.01000202.xml

| 18.7.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 232/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.7.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 232/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7286 — CVC Capital Partners/Deoleo)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2014/C 232/04

On 10 July 2014, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in the Spanish language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7286. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7286. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
REF _ID:A67809 

, ............. 

u 

Coofidenfia1 

ROUTING and WOBl SHEET 

(To be used ~nder pro~isions of Par • 41 • 6 b ' Office Reiulations OC51 O . - I i I 1934) 

F1·om: ·O( ~ W, . To: ·wPT 

VGF~ -. . ~a.c... J: 14~ ltvi:. i"-1..eL~ . e-e4«<"1 · 

~~~ Vl ~~~t'd "t' %~ iL~?. 

r!J~ ~·
1Pursuant 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

For the Fifth Circuit

No. 98-30712

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

VERSUS

JAMES GORDON KELLER,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Louisiana

(97-CR-102-ALL-B-M2)

March 25, 1999

Before DAVIS, DUHÉ, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:1

James Gordon Keller appeals the denial of his habeas corpus

petition for failure to exhaust his administrative remedies.

Keller argues that he is not required to exhaust his administrative

remedies because doing so would be futile. Keller has not

demonstrated the futility of administrative review. See Fuller v.

Rich, 11 F.3d 61, 62 (5th Cir. 1994). Accordingly, the district

court did not abuse its discretion in denying Keller’s petition for

failure to exhaust his administrative remedies. See Fuller, 11

F.3d at 62; United States v. Dowling, 962 F.2d 390, 393 (5th Cir.

1992).
2

AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                       1,367,363
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  582,134
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      9,619
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,959,116
<PP&E>                                       2,361,176
<DEPRECIATION>                               (935,631)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,384,661
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          222,231
<BONDS>                                        171,549
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        30,747
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,960,134
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,384,661
<SALES>                                         60,961
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                89,592
<CGS>                                           28,233
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   64,089
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               103,344
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (77,841)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    29,579
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (48,262)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6524

AUDREL JACK WATSON, JR.,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

HAROLD CLARKE, Director Virginia Dept. of Corrections; 

WARDEN WRIGHT, Warden-Lawrenceville Corrections Center; MS. 

GOODE, Medical Administrator; MS. HIGHTOWER, Director of 

Nursing; G. BOWLES, Dr., Dentist; MS. MORELLE, Dental 

Assistant; UNKNOWN NURSE #1; UNKNOWN NURSE #2,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District 

Judge. (1:14-cv-01315-GBL-MSN)

Submitted: October 31, 2016 Decided: November 21, 2016

Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Audrel Jack Watson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Michael Gordon 

Matheson, THOMPSON MCMULLAN PC, Richmond, Virginia, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Audrel Jack Watson, Jr., appeals the district court’s 

orders dismissing several Defendants under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) 

(2012), denying reconsideration, and granting Defendant Bowles’ 

motion for summary judgment in Watson’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) 

complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible 

error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the 

district court. Watson v. Clarke, No. 1:14-cv-01315-GBL-MSN 

(E.D. Va. filed June 2, 2015, & entered June 3, 2015; July 1, 

2015; Mar. 24, 2016). We deny Watson’s motion for transcripts 

at government expense. We dispense with oral argument because 

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

AFFIRMED
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 50 (Monday, March 16, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 13517]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-05849]



COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Notice of Public Meeting of the Oklahoma Advisory Committee for a 
Meeting To Discuss and Vote Upon a Project Proposal Regarding the 
School to Prison Pipeline in Oklahoma; Correction

AGENCY: U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

ACTION: Notice of meeting; Correction.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights published a document in 
the Federal Register of March 9, 2015, concerning a meeting of the 
Oklahoma Advisory Committee to discuss and vote on a project proposal 
regarding the school to prison pipeline in Oklahoma. The document 
contained incorrect times and phone numbers.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Mussatt, 312-353-8311.

Correction

    In the Federal Register of March 9, 2015, 80 FR 12432, in the first 
column, correct the second sentence of the second paragraph in the 
``Summary'' caption to read:
    This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-
free call-in number: 888-811-5448, conference ID: 7610695.

Correction

    In the Federal Register of March 9, 2015, 80 FR 12432, in the third 
column, correct the ``Public Call Information'' caption to read:
    Dial: 888-811-5448.
    Conference ID: 7610695.

Correction

    In the Federal Register of March 9, 2015, 80 FR 12432, in the 
second column, correct the ``Agenda'' caption to read:

AGENDA

Welcome and Introductions

4:00 p.m. to 4:05 p.m.
Vicki Limas, Chair

Discussion of Proposal on School to Prison Pipeline in Oklahoma

4:05 p.m. to 4:35 p.m.
Oklahoma Advisory Committee

Planning Next Steps

4:35 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

Adjournment

5:00 p.m.

Correction

    In the Federal Register of March 9, 2015, 80 FR 12432, in the third 
column, correct the ``Date'' caption to read:
    Date: The meeting will be held on Friday, March 27, 2015, at 4:00 
p.m. CST.

    Dated: March 10, 2015.
David Mussatt,
Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
[FR Doc. 2015-05849 Filed 3-13-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, November 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, November 07, 2016

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A17I0054. BRITT ADAM STRICKLAND v. THE STATE.

Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby DENIED.

LC NUMBERS:

15CR001386
# C_2014396EN.01000102.xml

| 11.11.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 396/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.11.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 396/1

---

Initiation of proceedings

(Case M.7095 — SOCAR/DESFA)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2014/C 396/02

On 5 November 2014, the Commission decided to initiate proceedings in the above-mentioned case after finding that the notified concentration raises serious doubts as to its compatibility with the internal market. The initiation of proceedings opens a second phase investigation with regard to the notified concentration, and is without prejudice to the final decision on the case. The decision is based on Article 6(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).

1

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their observations on the proposed concentration to the Commission.

In order to be fully taken into account in the procedure, observations should reach the Commission not later than 15 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301) or by post, under reference M.7095 — SOCAR/DESFA, to the following address:

| European Commission |
| --- |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

1

---
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 02-2991

___________

Jiksa Feyessa, *

*

Petitioner, *

* Petition for Review of an 

v. * Order of the Immigration and

* Naturalization Service.

John D. Ashcroft, Attorney General *

of the United States, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Respondent. *

___________

 Submitted: September 5, 2003

 Filed: September 26, 2003

___________

Before RILEY, HANSEN, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Ethiopian citizen Jiksa Feyessa (Feyessa) petitions for review of an order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) summarily affirming an Immigration Judge’s

(IJ’s) denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal. For reversal,

Feyessa argues the BIA abused its discretion in denying his application, and the

summary affirmance violated his due process rights. After careful review, we deny

the petition.
-2-

We defer to the IJ’s adverse credibility findings, because they are supported by

“specific, cogent reason[s] for disbelief.” See Ghasemimehr v. INS, 7 F.3d 1389,

1391 (8th Cir. 1993) (per curiam). As the IJ noted, Feyessa did not offer any

evidence to corroborate his alleged political activities and mistreatment by

government forces. See Perinpanathan v. INS, 310 F.3d 594, 598 (8th Cir. 2002);

Ghasemimehr, 7 F.3d at 1391. In addition, Feyessa’s father continued to draw a

pension in Ethiopia and his mother continued to work there despite the family’s

alleged political activities. Feyessa had obtained an exit visa and renewal of his

passport in 1994, and over the next several years his parents were able to travel back

and forth between Ethiopia and the United States. A 1997 Department of State

profile of Ethiopia indicates members of Feyessa’s political party are being invited

to participate peacefully in the political process and most political prisoners have

been released. 

Because the only evidence of past or future persecution was Feyessa’s

uncorroborated and discredited testimony, we conclude substantial evidence supports

the IJ’s finding that Feyessa did not show he suffered past persecution or had a wellfounded fear of future persecution. See Feleke v. INS, 118 F.3d 594, 598 (8th Cir.

1997). Further, we find no violation of Feyessa’s due process rights in this case. See

Dominguez v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d 678, 680 (8th Cir. 2003); Georgis v. Ashcroft, 328

F.3d 962, 967 (7th Cir. 2003).

Accordingly, we deny the petition.

______________________________
. ,. ..... - -:-. ·~""' 

'i.·E-LEPHONE EXECUTIVE 1940 RE..[, ID : A 71.., 63 I 

ta ..... ~ 

BRITISH JOINT SERVICES MISSION 

OFFICES OF THE COMBINED CHIEFS OF STAFF 

WASHINGTON 25, D. C. 

17th October, 1951. 

Dear Bill, 

I enclose copy or letter I received from at-ic 

Jones in reply to your query regarding our Boards and 

Committees. 

Mr. W.F. Friedman, N.s.s. 

Yours ~ 

eclassified and approved for release by NSA 

n 03-06-2014 ursuantto E.O. 13526 

I •, I> i 

\.~ ' - ... 

r • . ' I :Ii • 

\ ~ 1 0 ,"" • ~;"' ~; i: ~~ (I - -
From: 

To: 

Mr. Eric Jones, 

G.C.H.Q 

East cote: 

Brigadier J.H. Tiltman, 

S.L.O., Washingtmn. 

Ref: DGC/lm. 

9th October, 1951. 

Dear John, 

Your MOP.2381 of lat October passing on Friedman's r~quest for the 

composition and terms of reference of our various Bmrds: and 'Committees. 

2. A list of the Boards S:d Committees, their composition and names o£ 

representatives was sent by s.u.s.1.0. to the Co-ordinator under 000467 or 

19th October 1950. Apart :from a few changes in names or representatives, 

this list is correct except for the following :-

(i) L.S.I.B. has been expanded to include three more members -

(ii) 

.3. 

(i) 

(ii) 

... 

(iii) 

(iv) 

(v) 

(vi) 

. . ),• 

// 

The following is a precis or the terms of reference : 

EO 3.3(h) (2). 

PL 86-36/50 USC 

The Sigint organization operates under the general direction 

or the Chiefs ot Sta:ff a.nd the Foreign Of."fice. Subject to 

the above it is directed by the r;.s.I.B.wh1ch is responsible 

Yours ever, 

Sgd: ERJD JO.HJ!'B • 

.! 

i ' • • .,. :"~ !-' r , ," .J . J· I 

" ,L I/·'·'.· l~ ~ ... ·;\...i:· b_'::...: ~. J~--.... 1 • ,• 

.. 

'. 

.{ 

.,~ ., 

,, 

:·. 

·' .. 

. '• ~ I , ... , 

... 

I 

.\
# C_2014342EN.01000501.xml

| 1.10.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 342/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.10.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 342/5

---

Composition of the Chambers and attachment of the Judges to Chambers

2014/C 342/06

By decision of 30 November 2005 (1), the Tribunal decided to sit in three Chambers and as a full Court. By decision of 17 September 2014, for the period from 1 October 2014 to 30 September 2017, the Tribunal attached the Judges to the Chambers as follows:

1

First Chamber

First Chamber

R. BARENTS, President of Chamber,

E. PERILLO and J. SVENNINGSEN, Judges,

Second Chamber

Second Chamber

K. BRADLEY, President of Chamber,

H. KREPPEL and M.I. ROFES I PUJOL, Judges,

Third Chamber, sitting with three Judges

Third Chamber, sitting with three Judges

S. VAN RAEPENBUSCH, President of the Tribunal,

H. KREPPEL, M.I. ROFES I PUJOL, E. PERILLO and J. SVENNINGSEN, Judges.

In the Third Chamber, the President will sit, alternately, either with Judges M.I. ROFES I PUJOL and E. PERILLO or with Judges H. KREPPEL and J. SVENNINGSEN, subject always to connections between cases.

---

(1)  OJ C 322, 17.12.2005, p. 16.

1

---
REF ID:A42950 

LU~ ~ "W» ~M" \,_ Faulty Intelligence System ... ___ The incident involving General Grow and 

his diary indicates a need for something more 

than the l)roposed order banning the keeping 

of diaries by military personnel, including generals. There is need for further improvement 

in the system of selecting high-ranking officers 

for intelligence assignments. Apparently General Grow was picked for the key Moscow post 

of military attache chiefly because of his impressive combat record. The picking was done 

by the personnel branch of the Army, whii;h 

naturally judges officers by their records as 

fighters. If the post had called for a colonel 

instead of a general, the selection would have 

been made by the intelligence branch, G-2. 

The present theory seems to be that the more 

important the intelligence post-and there is no 

disguising the intelligence role of a military 

attache-the less need for giving 9-2 control of 

the selection. There is something wrong with 

a.system which deprives G-2 of a major role in 

the picking of generals who are to occupy ·vital 

intelligence posts abroad. One of the troubles 

is that intelligence has been looked upon as 

collateral duty, perμi.anent assignment to which 

would be 'tantamount to depriving an officer of 

promotion rights. It is a wonder that military 

intelligence has done as well as it has during 

the critical cold war period,
| 1.   | I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Insituform Technologies, Inc.; |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2.   | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 3.   | Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; |
|----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 4.   | The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have: |
|----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 5.   | The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): |
|----------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | /s/ J. Joseph Burgess                                                                     |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | J. Joseph BurgessPresident and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)  |