alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2021368EN.01002401.xml

| 13.9.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 368/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.9.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 368/24

---

Action brought on 1 July 2021 — Di Taranto v European Public Prosecutor’s Office

(Case T-368/21)

(2021/C 368/40)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Alessandro Di Taranto (Rome, Italy) (represented by: G. Pellegrino, lawyer)

Defendant: European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the Decision of the College of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office of 3 May 2021 on the appointment of fifteen European Delegated Prosecutors of the EPPO in the Italian Republic, appointing the European Delegated Prosecutors of the Italian State; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the Decision of the College of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office of 3 May 2021 on the appointment of fifteen European Delegated Prosecutors of the EPPO in the Italian Republic, appointing the European Delegated Prosecutors of the Italian State;

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs incurred by the applicant in the present proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs incurred by the applicant in the present proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on a single plea in law alleging unlawfulness as a result of the unlawful nature of the preliminary and binding decision of 28 April 2021 adopted by the Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura (Supreme Council of the Judiciary), which is the competent authority in Italy for designating European Delegated Prosecutors (EDPs).

As an interim measure, the applicant challenges the decision of the College of the EPPO appointing the EDPs, claiming that it is vitiated as a result of the unlawfulness of the decision of 28 April 2021 by which the Supreme Council of the Judiciary approved the final determination in which Dottore Di Taranto, with regard to the three prosecutors to be appointed for the office in Rome, was classified after the other candidates.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from consolidated
financial statements and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          11,827
<SECURITIES>                                    19,103
<RECEIVABLES>                                   23,462
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,419
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                56,129
<PP&E>                                          28,622
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,421
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 145,099
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           15,910
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           439
<OTHER-SE>                                     114,448
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   145,099
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                71,273
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   49,598
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,617
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (1,935)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 23,610
<INCOME-TAX>                                     9,208
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             14,402
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    14,402
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .34
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .33


</TABLE>
The State of TexasAppellee/s



# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**

April 28, 2015

N o. 04

- 14

- 00879

- CR

Matt hew Douglas HAYES

, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

From the 437th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2013CR10842W Honorable Lori I. Valenzuela, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

Appellant, Matthew Hayes, entered into a plea agreement in two separate cause numbers whereby he pled guilty to two charges of aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon under each cause number (for a total of four counts). Hayes subsequently perfected two separate appeals under each of the two cause numbers : 04

- 14

- 878

- CR (878 appeal) and 04

- 14

- 879

- CR (879 appeal)

. On April 1, 2015, the State file d a notice and motion for correction in both appeals , in which it assert ed Hayes waived his right to appeal in th e 878 appeal as part of his plea bargain

. The State asserted that although the trial court admonished Hayes regarding waiver of his right to

a ppeal

, the form signed by the trial court is ambiguous, in that the trial court’s marking appears in the space between that granting permission to appeal and that stating there is no right to appeal . Th e State r equest ed this court obtain a corrected certi fication from the trial court indicating a ppellant has no right to appeal in the 878 appeal

. Appellant respon ded to the S tate’s motion on A pril 20, 2015 . In his response, appellant asserts the trial court granted permission to appeal in the 879 appeal, a nd thereby intended to and did grant permission to appeal in the 878 appeal as well

. Review of the Clerk’s Record in the 878 appeal reveals t he trial court’s form titled “Certification of Defendant’s Right to Appeal” is ambiguous as to Cause Number 2013

- CR

10841W

. As the State asserts, t his Court cannot determine which box the trial court intended to mark.For this reason, the State’s Motion for Correction and Motion to Abate filed in both appeals, the 878 appeal and the 879 appeal is GRANTED

. T he trial court is ORDERED to file a supplemental clerk = s record in this court in the 878 appeal , no later than May 12 , 2015 , which shall include a corrected “Certification of Defendant’s Right of Appeal” as to Cause Number 2013

- CR

- 10841W and which clearly indicates whether the trial court grants Hayes permission to appeal or whether there is no right to appeal

. All deadlines in the 878 appeal and the 879 appeal are abated until the supplemental clerk’s record is received in the 878 appeal

.

_________________________________ Jason Pulliam, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 28th day of April, 2015

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle Clerk of Court
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 862 

To amend the National Trails System Act to extend the Lewis and Clark 

National Historic Trail, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 30, 2019 

Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio (for himself and Mr. YARMUTH) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To amend the National Trails System Act to extend the 

Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail, and for other 

purposes. 

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 ‘‘Eastern Legacy Exten5 sion Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF LEWIS AND CLARK NATIONAL HIS7 TORIC TRAIL. 

8 (a) EXTENSION.—Section 5(a)(6) of the National 

9 Trails System Act (16 U.S.C. 1244(a)(6)) is amended, in 

10 the first sentence— 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 862 IH

1 (1) by striking ‘‘three thousand seven hundred’’ 

2 and inserting ‘‘4,900’’; 

3 (2) by striking ‘‘Wood River, Illinois,’’ and in4 serting ‘‘the Ohio River in Pittsburgh, Pennsyl5 vania,’’; and 

6 (3) by striking ‘‘maps identified as, ‘Vicinity 

7 Map, Lewis and Clark Trail’ study report dated 

8 April 1977’’ and inserting ‘‘the map entitled Lewis 

9 and Clark National Historic Trail Authorized Trail 

10 Including Proposed Eastern Legacy Extension, 

11 dated April 2018, and numbered 648/143721’’. 

12 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

13 subsection (a) take effect on the date that is 60 days after 

14 the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
Total Polling Locations:

Election Day:7 520 

Early Voting:8 520 

Mail Ballots Transmitted10 Mail Ballots Returned11

373,478 362,594 (97.1% of 

transmitted) 

Mail Ballots Counted12 Mail Ballots Rejected13

359,331 (99.1% of 

returned)

1,326 (0.4% of 

returned) 

Mail Voting Policies 

No excuse is required for mail voting14

Does not conduct all-mail elections15

No permanent absentee voting list16

EAVS Jurisdictions

497 

Total Registered Voters as of 

Nov. 3, 20201

1,138,576 

Registration Forms Received2*

337,136 

Total Confirmation Notices Sent3*

2,147 

2020 EAVS Data Brief: Maine

 Voter Registration

0.0%

4.9%

8.9%

13.6%

72.6%

Online

Motor Vehicle Dept.

Other

Mail, Email, Fax

In-Person

Source of Registration Applications4

 Voter Turnout  Election Technology

In-Person 

Election 

Day Voters 

311,560

37.6%

Mail Voters 

359,331

43.4%

In-Person 

Early Voters 

151,535

18.3%

Other Mode 

5,879

0.7%

Voters Participating By Mode5

496

309

187

0 0 0

Ballot

Marking

Device

Scanner Hand

Count

DRE w/o

VVPAT

DRE with

VVPAT

Electronic

Poll

Books

Technology Used by Jurisdictions9

 Mail Balloting

Notes 

EAVS data and reports may be downloaded at www.eac.gov. 

The data shown are certified as final by state election authorities

Responses of “Does not apply,” “Data not available, ” and “Valid 

skip” are shown as zeroes or dashes. Percentages may not sum 

to 100% because of missing data or rounding. 

. 

* Close of registration for 2018 

general election to close of 

registration for 2020 general 

election. 

1 A1a of EAVS. 

2 A3a of EAVS. 

3 A8a of EAVS. 

4 Mail, Email, Fax is A4a. InPerson is A4b. Online is A4c. 

Motor Vehicle Dept. is A4d. 

Other is the sum of A4e–A4l. 

Denominator is A3a. 

5 In-Person Election Day Voters 

is F1b. Mail Voters is F1d+F1g. 

In-Person Early Voters is F1f. 

Other Mode is F1c+F1e+F1h. 

Denominator is sum of F1b–

F1h. 

6 F1a of EAVS. Denominator 

is citizen voting age 

population (CVAP). 

7 D3a of EAVS. 

8 D4a of EAVS. 

9 F3a–d, F5a, F6a, F7a, F8a, 

and F11a of EAVS. 

10 C1a of EAVS. 

11 C1b of EAVS. 

12 C3a of EAVS. 

13 C4a of EAVS. 

14Q17 of Policy Survey. 

15 Q18 and Q18a of Policy 

Survey. 

16 Q19 of Policy Survey. 

Turnout6 

76.2%
#### LAFFERTY, H. v. FERRIS, T.

1619 MDA 2016

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

09/21/2017

Reargument Denied 12/1/2017

2008-01941

(Susquehanna)

Affirmed/Vacated
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 43 (Wednesday, March 5, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 10021]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-5332]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food Safety and Inspection Service
[Docket No. 97-005N]


User Fees To Cover On-site Inspection Costs of Meat, Poultry, and 
Egg Products

AGENCY: Food Safety and Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection 
Service (FSIS) will hold a public meeting on March 10, 1997, to discuss 
user fees for the inspection of meat, poultry, and egg products. The 
meeting will be an initial step in identifying the most equitable user 
fee system, and will enable the public to begin focusing on identifying 
criteria to be evaluated and options to be considered in establishing 
such a system.

DATES: The meeting will be held from 1:00 p..m. to 5:00 p.m. on March 
10, 1997, in the Patio in the Jamie A. Whitten Building, Department of 
Agriculture, 12th and Jefferson Drive, SW., Washington, DC 20250-3700.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To register for the meeting, contact 
Ms. Lisa Parks at (202) 501-7138, FAX (202) 501-7642, or E-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6b1e180f0a0d1802184418560804050d0e192b060318450a1f1f060a020745080406">usdafsis/<span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c2b1ffa1adaca4a7b082afaab1eca3b6b6afa3abaeeca1adaf">[email protected]</span></a>. For questions about the meeting or 
to obtain copies of a draft agenda, contact Mr. Charles Danner, FSIS, 
at (202) 501-7138.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Administration believes that the 
collection of user fees is essential to the successful long-term 
implementation of meat, poultry and egg inspection reforms. In 
Fiscal Year 1998, it is estimated that the new fees would generate 
$390 million for the Federal Government and result in savings to 
taxpayers. This March 10, 1997, public meeting will be convened for 
the purpose of identifying the criteria FSIS will use in 
considering available user fee options. Attendees will be asked to 
address (1) What criteria should be used in developing and 
evaluating user fee options? and (2) What user fees options FSIS 
should be considering?

    Done at Washington, DC, on February 27, 1997.
Thomas J. Billy,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 97-5332 Filed 2-27-97; 5:06 pm]
BILLING CODE 3410-DM-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
653.

OFFICEOFTHEA~ORNEYGENERALOFTEXAS **AUSTIN**

Homrabls Joseph r. Blah&8 City Attorney ior Cwldo Mills Ysdlaal Art8 Bullding Ureenville, Tax68 Dear Sir:

We 66lrmmledg6 date and quote trim yo letter of 

### reeent~

redto lasue 

### moh autL6r0t19D1 the 188uanoe of bonds 

### for the ng w6h **lndebtednee8?w** re that we undemtand your questloam do beliwe that weunderstand then newer themwlth referen to the e8 we onUer8tand them. The total **emouixt**

or 

### wanaatlslnrolved fe oalf #Z,OoO end for that rea8on no t6raalitisrrere reptrlr6d prelitaimary

to 

### their ltmmme. There epp6are to have bean a eufrlolent px levy at the time thewarrant8 w6r6 imsed.

### 6.52
Eonoreble JosephF. Riohols, Ootober 19.1939,page #2

Ir th6g wore Ieeued In paymmt or a valid debt, and It appear@ tbat theywere, then nith this tax levy, they were svidentlyvalid, because Item of indebtednessof $2,000 and less are exempt iron the other formlltles requiredby the Bona and ?:aW?3ot **bW** Of 19% The Bond **and** 

### Warrant**Law** 

### or i931, 

### Sectlon7, **Sub** neation (d),authorize8 ruch

### mrrantr to be iunded Inte bonds; but authority to fund auoh warrants 

### Intofunding warrants ssena to be absent tram the law.

Therefore, It app6ers thatthese warrants 8hould either 

### remainIn their original form or be funded **by** the Iemanae 

### or runding bonds. (Hot fundingwarrantr). Ii suoh fundding

bon&a am be lmmed, then theymuat **be** 1smed undtr Article 236sa, **Rerf86d** Civil ~atut.66 Or 1925, and your attention Is oalled to the threeweek0 publloetlon **0r** e SO-day notice a8 provIdeaby mbseotion (a)of Seation 7 of the abov6 **mentioned** law. 

### V6rytruly yours ATTORXEY UW **OF** TEXAS

COB-s
APPROVEDOCT 24, 1939 ATTQEWEy GENERAL OB TEXAS 

### APPROVED **CPINICN** 

# 0 COMMIITEI! &gL
```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 15 (Thursday, January 23, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 3913]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-01325]

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 8605]

Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``Fame and Friendship: Pope, Roubiliac, and the 
Portrait Bust in Eighteenth-Century Britain''

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, and Delegation of Authority No. 
236-3 of August 28, 2000 (and, as appropriate, Delegation of Authority 
No. 257 of April 15, 2003), I hereby determine that the objects to be 
included in the exhibition ``Fame and Friendship: Pope, Roubiliac, and 
the Portrait Bust in Eighteenth-Century Britain,'' imported from abroad 
for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of cultural 
significance. The objects are imported pursuant to loan agreements with 
the foreign owners or custodians. I also determine that the exhibition 
or display of the exhibit objects at the Yale Center for British Art, 
New Haven, Connecticut, from on or about February 20, 2014, until on or 
about May 19, 2014, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues 
yet to be determined, is in the national interest. I have ordered that 
Public Notice of these Determinations be published in the Federal 
Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
list of the exhibit objects, contact Paul W. Manning, Attorney-Adviser, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-
632-6469). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, SA-5, L/PD, 
Fifth Floor (Suite 5H03), Washington, DC 20522-0505.

    Dated: January 16, 2014.
Kelly Keiderling,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and 
Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2014-01325 Filed 1-22-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
```
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8649 

To amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to 

provide for a presumption of eligibility for benefits for certain public 

safety officers who died of exposure-related cancers, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 20, 2020 

Mrs. WALORSKI introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets 

Act of 1968 to provide for a presumption of eligibility 

for benefits for certain public safety officers who died 

of exposure-related cancers, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Joshua John Comeau 

5 First Responder Cancer Benefit Act of 2020’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 8649 IH

1 SEC. 2. EXPOSURE-RELATED CANCER. 

2 Section 1201 of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control 

3 and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (34 U.S.C. 10281) is amend4 ed by adding at the end the following: 

5 ‘‘(o)(1) As determined by the Bureau, an exposure6 related cancer resulting in the death of a public safety offi7 cer shall be presumed to constitute a personal injury with8 in the meaning of subsection (a), sustained in the line of 

9 duty by the officer and directly and proximately resulting 

10 in death, if that public safety officer was exposed to or 

11 in contact with any known carcinogen, or carcinogenic 

12 substance or condition while at the scene of an accident, 

13 a fire, or any other rescue or public safety operation. 

14 ‘‘(2) For purposes of this subsection, the term ‘expo15 sure-related cancer’ includes the following: 

16 ‘‘(A) Mesothelioma. 

17 ‘‘(B) Testicular cancer. 

18 ‘‘(C) Multiple myeloma. 

19 ‘‘(D) Leukemia. 

20 ‘‘(E) Non-Hodgkins lymphoma. 

21 ‘‘(F) Skin cancer. 

22 ‘‘(G) Malignant melanoma. 

23 ‘‘(H) Brain cancer. 

24 ‘‘(I) Prostate cancer. 

25 ‘‘(J) Colon cancer. 

26 ‘‘(K) Stomach cancer. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 8649 IH

1 ‘‘(L) Lung cancer. 

2 ‘‘(M) Esophagus cancer. 

3 ‘‘(N) Kidney cancer. 

4 ‘‘(O) Bladder cancer. 

5 ‘‘(P) Any other form of cancer that the Bureau 

6 may determine appropriate.’’. 

7 SEC. 3. APPLICABILITY. 

8 The amendment made by section 2 shall apply in the 

9 case of any public safety officer who died on or after Janu10 ary 1, 2018, as a result of an exposure-related cancer. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                               3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                           1,163
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,163
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   1,163
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           48,528
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       507,603
<OTHER-SE>                                   (554,968)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     1,163
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    6,095
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 807
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (6,902)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,902)
<EPS-BASIC>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0



</TABLE>
Exhibit 99.1

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                           SIMTEK CORPORATION

                                                  Computation of Per Share Earnings
                                                  ---------------------------------

                                    SHARES                                                                      WEIGHTED AVG
                                              BALANCE               DAYS FROM               SHARE                 SHARES OF
DATE ISSUED                 INCREASE        OUTSTANDING               1/1/96                DAYS                COMMON STOCK
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                          <C>              <C>                       <C>             <C>                       <C>

Jan 1, 1996                       -           26,978,311                215             5,800,336,865
Aug. 2, 1996                 10,000           26,988,311                 59             1,592,310,349
                             ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Balance 9/30/96              10,000           26,988,311                274             7,392,647,214             26,980,464
                             ===============================================================================================
</TABLE>