alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-50463 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus MIGUEL ANGEL VARGAS-VILLA, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. SA-97-CR-3

- - - - - - - - - - December 10, 1997 Before BARKSDALE, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Miguel Angel Vargas-Villa appeals his guilty-plea conviction and sentence for reentry after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Vargas-Villa has filed a motion to stay his appeal pending the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Almendarez-Torres , 113 F.3d 515 (5th Cir. 1996), cert. granted , 117 S. Ct. 1333 (1997). Vargas-Villa’s motion to stay his appeal is DENIED.No. 97-50463 -2- Vargas-Villa argues that he was charged with and pleaded guilty to simple reentry under § 1326(a) and that he could not be sentenced under § 1326(b) because the indictment did not allege that he had a prior aggravated felony conviction. His argument is foreclosed by this court’s decision in United States v. Vasquez-Olvera , 999 F.2d 943, 946-47 (5th Cir. 1993).
MOTION DENIED. AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 153 (Friday, August 8, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42664-42665]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-55509]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

17 CFR Part 240


General Rules and Regulations, Securities Exchange Act of 1934

CFR Correction

    In title 17 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 240 to end, 
revised as of April 1, 1997, on page 369, in Sec. 240.17a-5, paragraph 
(g)(1) is corrected to read as follows:

[[Page 42665]]

Sec. 240.17a-5  Reports to be made by certain brokers and dealers.

* * * * *
    (g) Audit objectives. (1) The audit shall be made in accordance 
with generally accepted auditing standards and shall include a review 
of the accounting system, the internal accounting control and 
procedures for safeguarding securitiesincluding appropriate tests 
thereof for the period since the prior examination date. The audit 
shall include all procedures necessary under the circumstances to 
enable the independent public accountant to express an opinion on the 
statement of financial condition, results of operations, cash flow, and 
the Computation of Net Capital under Sec. 240.15c3-1, the Computation 
for Determination of Reserve Requirements for Brokers or Dealers under 
Exhibit A of Sec. 240.15c3-3, and Information Relating to the Posession 
or Control Requirements under Sec. 240.15c3-3. The scope of the audit 
and review of the accounting system, the internal control and 
procedures for safeguarding securities shall be sufficient to provide 
reasonable assurance that any material inadequacies existing at the 
date of the examination in (a) the accounting system; (b) the internal 
accounting controls; (c) procedures for safeguarding securities; and 
(d) the practices and procedures whose review is specified in (i), 
(ii), (iii) and (iv) of this paragraph would be disclosed. 
Additionally, as specific objectives, the audit shall include reviews 
of the practices and procedures followed by the client:
    (i) In making the periodic computations of aggregate indebtedness 
and net capital under Sec. 240.17a-3(a)(11) and the reserve required by 
Sec.  240.15c3-3(e);
    (ii) In making the quarterly securities examinations, counts, 
verifications and comparisons and the recordation of differences 
required by Sec. 240.17a-13;
    (iii) In complying with the requirement for prompt payment for 
securities of section 4(c) of Regulation T (Sec. 220.4(c) of chapter II 
of title 12) of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System; 
and
    (iv) In obtaining and maintaining physical possession or control of 
all fully paid and excess margin securities of customers as required by 
Sec. 240.15c3-3. Such review shall include a determination as to the 
adequacy of the procedures described in the records required to be 
maintained pursuant to Sec. 240.15c3-3(d)(4).
* * * * *

[FR Doc. 97-55509 Filed 8-7-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
Exhibit 4.03
                                                               
              CERTIFICATE OF LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
                              OF
                 ENTERGY LONDON CAPITAL, L.P.


          THIS Certificate of Limited Partnership of Entergy
London Capital, L.P. (the "Partnership"), dated as of August 4,
1997, is being duly executed and filed by Entergy Power UK plc,
a public limited company organized under the laws of England
and Wales, as general partner, to form a limited partnership
under the Delaware Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act (6
Del.C. 17-101, et seq.) (the "Act").

          1.   Name.  The name of the limited partnership
formed hereby is Entergy London Capital, L.P.

          2.   Registered Office.  The address of the
registered office of the Partnership in the State of Delaware
is c/o The Corporation Trust Company, Corporation Trust Center,
1209 Orange Street, Wilmington, New Castle County, Delaware
19801.

          3.   Registered Agent.  The name and address of the
registered agent for service of process on the Partnership in
the State of Delaware is The Corporation Trust Company,
Corporation Trust Center, 1209 Orange Street, Wilmington, New
Castle County, Delaware 19801.

          4.   General Partner.  The name and the mailing
address of the sole general partner of the Partnership is:
Entergy Power UK plc, Templar House, 81-87 High, Holborn,
London WC1V 6NU England.

          IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this
Certificate of Limited Partnership as of the date first-above
written.


                         ENTERGY POWER UK PLC, as general partner
                         
                         
                         By:  /s/ Michael G. Thompson
                         Name: Michael G. Thompson
                         Title: Senior Vice President and
                                   Secretary
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8722 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 8722

   To authorize the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to make grants for 
repair and remodeling of community centers, clinics, and hospitals that 
                            serve veterans.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 30, 2020

  Ms. Waters introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To authorize the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to make grants for 
repair and remodeling of community centers, clinics, and hospitals that 
                            serve veterans.

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

SECTION 1. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS GRANTS FOR COMMUNITY CENTERS, 
              CLINICS, AND HOSPITALS.

    (a) In General.--The Secretary of Veterans Affairs may make grants 
to community centers, clinics, and hospitals that serve veterans for 
purposes of making structural repairs and remodeling buildings.
    (b) Eligibility.--To be eligible for a grant under this section, a 
community center, clinic, or hospital shall submit to the Secretary an 
application containing such information and assurances as the Secretary 
may require.
    (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be 
appropriated $10,000,000 to carry out this section.
                                 <all>
```
# C_2021338EN.01002701.xml

| 23.8.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 338/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.8.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 338/27

---

Action brought on 30 June 2021 — Unimax Stationery v EUIPO — Mitsubishi Pencil (uni)

(Case T-369/21)

(2021/C 338/35)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Unimax Stationery (Daman, India) (represented by: E. Amoah, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Mitsubishi Pencil Co. Ltd (Tokyo, Japan)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark uni — European Union trade mark No 6 920 615

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 April 2021 in Case R 1909/2020-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 59(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 7(1)(b) and (d) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council . |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 59(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 7(1)(b) and (d) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council .

---
2022 EAVS Data Brief: Vermont EAVS Jurisdictions:

247 

 Voter Registration 

Active Reg. Voters as of Nov. 8, 20221 

446,098 

Reg. Forms Received2* 

74,895 

Total Confirmation Notices Sent3* 

62,476 

Voters Removed from Reg. Rolls4* 

45,641 

Source of Registration Applications5 

Motor Vehicle Dept. 63.7% 

Online 17.4% 

In Person 10.0% 

Other 8.1% 

Mail, Email, Fax 0.8% 

 Voting and Turnout 

Voters Participating By Mode6 

7 Turnout 

55.2% In-Person 

Election Day 

91,637 

32.0% 

Mail 

193,618 

67.6% 

Other 

1,041 

0.4% 

Total Voting Locations8: 262 

Total Poll Workers9: --

Election Technology 

Percentage of Jurisdictions Using...10 

100.0% 

Ballot 

Marking 

Devices 

70.9% 

DREs w/o 

VVPAT 

29.6% 

Hand 

Counting 

0.0% 

DREs with

VVPAT 

0.0% 

Electronic

Poll 

Books 

0.0% 

Scanners 

 Mail Ballots 

• 422,603 mail ballots transmitted11 

• 45.9% of transmitted mail ballots returned by voters12 

• 99.9% of returned mail ballots counted13 

• 0.1% of returned mail ballots rejected14 

• Conducted all-mail election statewide15 

• Allowed drop boxes16 

• Allowed ballot curing17 

 Election Audits18 

-- Access audit 

-- Ballot design audit 

Ballot reconciliation -- audit 

Compliance/ -- procedural audit 

-- Eligibility audit 

-- Legal audit 

Logic and accuracy ✔ testing 

Post-election ✔ tabulation audit 

✔ Other 

Notes 

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

/research-and-data/datasets-codebooks-and-surveys. 

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 2020 

general election to close of 

registration for 2022 general 

election. 

1 A1b of EAVS. 

2 A3a of EAVS. 

3 A8a of EAVS. 

4 A9a of EAVS. 

5 Mail, Email, Fax is A4a/A3a. 

In Person is A4b/A3a. Online is 

A4c/A3a. Motor Vehicle Dept. is 

A4d/A3a. Other is the sum of 

A4e–A4l/A3a. May not sum to 

100% because of missing data. 

6 In-Person Election Day is F1b. 

Mail is F1d+F1g. In-Person Early 

is F1f. Other is F1c+F1e+F1h. 

7 F1a of EAVS divided by citizen 

voting age population (CVAP). 

8 D2a of EAVS. 

9 D7a of EAVS. 

10 F3a–f, F5a–F9a of EAVS; 

number of jurisdictions that 

responded “Yes” divided by

number of jurisdictions in 

state/territory. 

11 C1a of EAVS. 

12 C1b/C1a of EAVS. 

13 C8a/C1b of EAVS. 

14 C9a/C1b of EAVS. 

15 Q17 and Q17a of Policy 

Survey. 

16 Q19 of Policy Survey. 

17 Q20 of Policy Survey. 

18 Q36 of Policy Survey. See 

survey questionnaire for full 

definitions of each type of 

audit.
#### Jimmy Nathan MOODY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Eric ARNOLD, Acting Warden; California Dept. of Corrections, Ironwood State Prison, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 15-56768

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted October 6, 2017 Pasadena, California

Filed February 20, 2018

*686Lori-Ann C. Jones, Esquire, Law Office of Lori-Ann C. Jones, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner-Appellant

Kenneth Charles Byrne, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, Xiomara Costello, AGCA-Office of the California Attorney General, Los Angeles, CA, for Respondent-Appellee

Before: RAWLINSON and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges, and KORMAN,* District Judge.

*

 The Honorable Edward R. Korman, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of New York, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM **

Petitioner-Appellant Jimmy Nathan Moody (Moody) appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Following a jury trial, Moody was convicted of first-degree murder, attempted murder, and shooting at an inhabited dwelling. Moody asserts a claim of actual innocence. Moody’s claim is governed by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, and habeas relief may be granted only upon a finding that the last reasoned state court decision rejecting his claim “was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.” *Godoy v. Spearman,*861 F.3d 956, 962 (9th Cir. 2017) (citation omitted).

The last reasoned decision addressing Moody’s actual innocence claim was the California Superior Court decision denying habeas relief on this claim. In denying Moody’s habeas petition, the Superior Court of California held that Moody had failed to make a sufficient showing to warrant relief. Specifically, the Superior Court found that the declarations provided by Moody did not “point unerringly to the innocence of Petitioner.” *In re Richards,*55 Cal. 4th 948, 959, 150 Cal.Rptr.3d 84, 289 P.3d 860 (2012).

Assuming, without deciding, that a freestanding claim of actual innocence is cognizable in a federal habeas petition, *see Herrera v. Collins,*506 U.S. 390, 417, 113 S.Ct. 853, 122 L.Ed.2d 203 (1993), the Superior Court’s determination was not “contrary to” or “an unreasonable application” of clearly established federal law. *See id.*(observing that a successful actual innocence claim would have to meet an “extraordinarily high” “threshold showing”).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
# C_2022037EN.01004102.xml

| 24.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/41

---

Action brought on 3 November 2021 — Balaban v EUIPO (Stahlwerkstatt)

(Case T-706/21)

(2022/C 37/55)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Okan Balaban (Bornheim, Germany) (represented by: T. Schaaf, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘Stahlwerkstatt’ — Application for registration No 18 219 170

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 September 2021 in Case R 1987/2020-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | change the defendant’s refusal decision of 27 August 2020 and the contested decision and order the defendant to register the trade mark for education and training services in Class 41; |
| --- | --- |

—

change the defendant’s refusal decision of 27 August 2020 and the contested decision and order the defendant to register the trade mark for education and training services in Class 41;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
# C_2022294EN.01001402.xml

| 1.8.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 294/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.8.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 294/14

---

Appeal brought on 2 March 2022 by Legero Schuhfabrik GmbH against the order of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) delivered on 15 December 2021 in Case T-684/20, Legero Schuhfabrik GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office

(Case C-152/22 P)

(2022/C 294/20)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Appellant: Legero Schuhfabrik GmbH (represented by: M. Gail, Rechtsanwalt)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office, Rieker Schuh AG

By order of 22 June 2022, the Court of Justice of the European Union (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) decided that the appeal should not be allowed to proceed and ordered the appellant to bear its own costs.

---
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

October 3, 2016

No. 04-16-00545-CR

Dellie Boykin OXENDINE, Jr.,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 63rd Judicial District Court, Val Verde County, Texas

Trial Court No. 13342CR

Honorable Enrique Fernandez, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The trial court’s certification states “the defendant has waived the right of appeal.” We 

therefore ORDER the trial court clerk, Jo Ann Cervantes, to file, within ten days of the date of 

this order, an electronic clerk’s record containing the following documents:

1. All pre-trial motions and the orders on those motions, if any;

2. all documents relating to the defendant’s plea bargain, including the 

court’s admonishments, the defendant’s waiver and consent to stipulation 

of testimony, and any other stipulations;

3. the judgment;

4. all post-judgment motions and the orders on those motions, if any;

5. the notice(s) of appeal;

6. the trial court’s certification of defendant’s right of appeal; 

7. the criminal docket sheet; and

8. the bill of costs.
All other appellate deadlines are suspended pending further order of this court. The clerk 

of this court is ORDERED to send a copy of this order to the attorneys of record, the trial court 

clerk, and the court reporter(s) responsible for preparing the reporter’s record in this appeal.

_________________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

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

court on this 3rd day of October, 2016.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 878 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 878

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the deduction 
   for certain expenses of elementary and secondary school teachers.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 30, 2019

  Mr. Brown of Maryland (for himself, Ms. Barragan, Mrs. Beatty, Mr. 
 Brendan F. Boyle of Pennsylvania, Mr. Butterfield, Mr. Carbajal, Mr. 
 Carson of Indiana, Mr. Cicilline, Ms. Clarke of New York, Mr. Cohen, 
 Mr. Courtney, Ms. DeLauro, Mr. Gallego, Mr. Garamendi, Mr. Grijalva, 
 Mr. Hastings, Ms. Jackson Lee, Ms. Johnson of Texas, Ms. Kaptur, Mr. 
Khanna, Mr. Krishnamoorthi, Ms. Kuster of New Hampshire, Mr. Langevin, 
    Mr. Levin of Michigan, Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney of New York, Mr. 
 McEachin, Mr. Meeks, Ms. Moore, Mr. Nadler, Ms. Norton, Ms. Omar, Mr. 
  Pallone, Ms. Pingree, Mr. Pocan, Mr. Raskin, Ms. Roybal-Allard, Ms. 
  Titus, Mr. Tonko, Ms. Velazquez, Mrs. Watson Coleman, Ms. Wild, Mr. 
   Yarmuth, and Mr. Welch) introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the deduction 
   for certain expenses of elementary and secondary school teachers.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Educators Expense Deduction 
Modernization Act''.

SEC. 2. INCREASE IN DEDUCTION FOR CERTAIN EXPENSES OF ELEMENTARY AND 
              SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHERS.

    (a) In General.--Section 62(a)(2)(D) of the Internal Revenue Code 
of 1986 is amended by striking ``$250'' and inserting ``$500''.
    (b) Inflation Adjustment.--Section 62(d)(3) of such Code is amended 
to read as follows:
            ``(3) Inflation adjustment.--In the case of any taxable 
        year beginning after 2019, the $500 amount in subsection 
        (a)(2)(D) shall be increased by an amount equal to--
                    ``(A) such dollar amount, multiplied by
                    ``(B) the cost-of-living adjustment determined 
                under section 1(f)(3) for the calendar year in which 
                the taxable year begins, determined by substituting 
                `calendar year 2018' for `calendar year 2016' in 
                subparagraph (A)(ii) thereof.''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply with respect to taxable years beginning December 31, 2018.
                                 <all>
```
# Vocational Education

- Secretary Cardona's Remarks on Career Pathways and Success Good afternoon. Isn't it great to hear the First Lady of the United States? Thank you, Dr. Biden, and thank you to Aon, and Greg Case, for welcoming us here today.
No. 11-10332.

#### Whetstone *v.*Ellers et al.

C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.
EX-10.7(a)



 Exhibit 10.7(a) 
 June 1, 2013 
 Eckhardt Trading Company 

1314 North Dearborn Parkway 
 The Carriage House

 Chicago, Illinois 60610 
 Attention:
Ms. Audrey L. Gale 
 Re: Management Agreement Renewal 
 Dear Ms. Gale: 
 We are writing with respect to your management agreement concerning the
commodity pool to which reference is made below (the “Management Agreement”). We are extending the term of the Management Agreement through June 30, 2014 and all other provisions of the Management Agreement will remain unchanged.

  

	 	•	 	 CMF Eckhardt Master Fund L.P. 


  

	 	•	 	 Diversified 2000 Futures Fund L.P. 


  

	 	•	 	 Diversified Multi-Advisor Futures Fund L.P. 


  

	 	•	 	 Diversified Multi-Advisor Futures Fund L.P. II 


 Please acknowledge receipt of this modification by signing one copy of this letter and returning it to the attention of Mr. Damian George at the address above or fax to 212-296-6868. If you have any
questions I can be reached at 212-296-1292. 
 Very truly yours, 

 

					
	CERES MANAGED FUTURES LLC	 	
			
	By:	 	 /s/ Damian George
	 	
		 	 Damian George 
	 	
		 	Chief Financial Officer and Director	 	
		
	ECKHARDT TRADING COMPANY	 	
			
	By:	 	 /s/ Audrey Gale
	 	
		 	Print Name: Audrey Gale	 	

 DG/sr