alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Quirino PEREZ-MARTINEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-50198 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed January 3, 2018

Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Judy Fulmer Madewell, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Maureen Scott Franco, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellant

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Quirino Perez-Martinez appeals the sentence for his conviction of illegal reentry. *See*8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), (b). He maintains that the sentence violates due process because it was enhanced based on a conviction not alleged in the indictment, but he correctly concedes that his position is fore*829closed by *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 226-27, 235, 247, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). Accordingly, the government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, its alternative motion for an extension of time to file its brief is DENIED, and the judgment is AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R, 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
```

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 174 (Wednesday, September 9, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 54367]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-22635]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Revision of Advisory Circular 91-57 Model Aircraft Operating 
Standards

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of revised advisory 
circular (AC) 91-57, Model Aircraft Operating Standards. The revised AC 
may be viewed at http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/advisory_circulars/. The revised AC provides guidance to persons 
operating unmanned aircraft for hobby or recreation purposes meeting 
the statutory definition of ``model aircraft'' contained in Section 336 
of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Pub. L. 112-95). The 
FAA refers model aircraft users to section 336 of Public Law 112-95 for 
information regarding model aircraft operations.

DATES: Effective date September 9, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Randy Willis, Manager, Emerging 
Technologies Team, Federal Aviation Administration, 470 L'Enfant Plaza 
SW., Suite 7105, Washington, DC 20051; telephone (202) 267-8152; email: 
Randy.Willis@faa.gov or Dean E. Griffith, Attorney, International Law, 
Legislation and Regulations Division, Office of the Chief Counsel, 
Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., 
Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-3073; email: 
dean.griffith@faa.gov.

    Issued in Washington, DC on September 3, 2015.
Lirio Liu,
Director, Office of Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2015-22635 Filed 9-8-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ZERO MOTORCYCLES, INC., Plaintiff - Appellant,
v. PIRELLI TYRE S.P.A.; PIRELLI & C. S.P.A., Defendants - Appellees, and PIRELLI NORTH AMERICA, INC.; PIRELLI TIRE LLC, Defendants. No. 11-16984 D.C. No. 4:10-cv-01290-SBA
MEMORANDUM *

ZERO MOTORCYCLES, INC., Plaintiff - Appellant,
v. PIRELLI TYRE S.P.A.; PIRELLI & C. S.P.A.; PIRELLI NORTH AMERICA, INC.; PIRELLI TIRE LLC, No. 12-16187 D.C. No. 4:10-cv-01290-SBA 

# FILED
APR 26 2013 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Saundra B. Armstrong, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted April 19, 2013 San Francisco, California Before: SCHROEDER, SILVERMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges. Plaintiff-Appellant Zero Motorcycles (“ Zero”) appeals the district court’s order dismissing its action against Pirelli & C.S.p.A. and Pirelli Tyre S.p.A. (collectively, “Pirelli-Defendants”) for lack of personal jurisdiction. We reverse, because the district court erred in conc luding that it lacked specific jurisdiction over the Pirelli-Defendants. The district court held that the trademark proceedings the Pirelli-Defendants instituted before th e United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) were not “purposefully directed” at California. The PirelliDefendants, however, knew that Zero’s principal place of business was in California. See Washington Shoe Co. v. A–Z Sporting Goods Inc. , 704 F.3d 668, 679 (9th Cir. 2012); Bancroft & Masters, Inc. v. Augusta Nat’l Inc. , 223 F.3d 1082, 1087 (9th Cir. 2000). Any harm that Zero suffered from the allegedly improper USPTO proceedings would therefore be felt by Zero in California. See CollegeSource, Inc. v. AcademyOne Inc. , 653 F.3d 1066, 1079 (9th Cir. 2011)3 (“We have repeatedly held that a corporation incurs economic loss, for jurisdictional purposes, in the forum of its principal place of business.”). Because the Pirelli-Defendants should reasonably e xpect that any harm from the USPTO proceedings would occur in California, th ey can “reasonably anticipate being haled into court” in California. World–Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson , 444 U.S. 286, 297 (1980). We accordingly dismiss as moot Zero’s appeal of the district court’s order denying Zero’s motion for relief from j udgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60, and we do not consider Zero’s request for leave to amend its complaint to assert additional facts regarding jurisdiction. REVERSEDand REMANDED
.
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 06-3072

___________ Rodolfo Romero-Reyes, * * Petitioner, * * Petition for Review of an Order v. * of the Board of Immigration Appeals. * Alberto Gonzales, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Respondent. *

___________ Submitted: June 14, 2007 Filed: August 22, 2007

___________ Before MELLOY, SMITH, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM.
In 2000, immigration authorities charged Rodolfo Romero-Reyes as a removable alien. Romero-Reyes conceded removability and applied for cancellation of removal. An immigration judge deniedhis application for cancellation of removal because Romero-Reyes had not “estab lishe[d] that removal would result in exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” to Romero-Reyes or his family. 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(D). Counsel for Romero- Reyes filed a notice of appeal with the Board of Immigration Appeals (“the Board” ), but he did not pursue the case. The Board dismissed the appeal as aba ndoned on July 22, 2005. Romero-Reyes subsequently obtained new counsel and succe ssfully moved to reinstate his appeal.-2- On appeal to the Board, Romero-Reyes argued that his prior counsel’s ineffective assistance at his removal hearing denied hi m a full and fair opportunity to present his claim. The Board rejected this ar gument in a decision dated July 13, 2006.
Under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1), Romero-Reyes had thirty days in which to petition for judicial review of the Board decision. Romero-Reyes did not file the present petition for review until Tuesday, August 15, 2006. His petition for review was untimely, and we therefore lack ju risdiction to hear it. Stone v. INS , 514 U.S. 386, 405 (1995). Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for review.

______________________________
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 879 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 879

  To amend title 23, United States Code, to modify the percentages of 
  funds to be allocated to certain urbanized areas under the surface 
                  transportation block grant program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 30, 2019

  Ms. Brownley of California introduced the following bill; which was 
     referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend title 23, United States Code, to modify the percentages of 
  funds to be allocated to certain urbanized areas under the surface 
                  transportation block grant program.

    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 ``Support Local Transportation Act''.

SEC. 2. SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM.

    Section 133(d)(6) of title 23, United States Code, is amended by 
striking subparagraphs (D) and (E) and inserting the following:
                    ``(D) for fiscal year 2019, 62.5 percent; and
                    ``(E) for fiscal year 2020, 65 percent.''.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 2 (Friday, January 3, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 406]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-53]


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

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Ocean Freight Forwarder License; Revocations

    The Federal Maritime Commission hereby gives notice that the 
following fright forwarder licenses have been revoked pursuant to 
section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. app. 1718) and the 
regulations of the Commission pertaining to the licensing of ocean 
freight forwarders, effective on the corresponding revocation dates 
shown below:
    License Number: 3400.
    Name: European & General Shipping, Inc.
    Address: 8300 N.W. 53rd Street, Suite 308, Miami, FL 33166.
    Date Revoked: December 2, 1996.
    Reason: Failed to maintain a valid surety bond.

    License Number: 309.
    Name: Frederick Richards, Inc.
    Address: 321 East Bay Street, Charleston, SC 29402.
    Date Revoked: November 27, 1996.
    Reason: Surrendered license voluntarily.
Bryant L. VanBrakle,
Director, Bureau of Tariffs, Certification and Licensing.
[FR Doc. 97-53 Filed 1-2-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-M
• •

December 1.2014

No. 04-14-00574-CV

In the Interest of R.E.S. and R.K.S., Children

From the 407th Judicial District Court. Bexar County. Texas

Trial Court No. 2007-CI-04448

lonorable Gloria Saldana, Judge Presiding

ORDER

In this Court's Order of September 24. 2014, appellate deadlines in this case were

suspended until November 10, 2014, and the parties were ordered to mediation with Michael W.

Jackson. Appellant has filed letter asking for an abatement extension of fifteen to twenty days

to attempt to finalize the negotiations that are ongoing.

The request is granted. Appellate deadlines in this case are hereby suspended until

December 12, 2014. No further extensions will be grunted in this case.

It is so ORDERED on December 1, 2014.

Sandee Bryan Marlon, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, have hereunto set my hand and affixed the sej*l of the said

court on this 1st day of December, 2014.
```
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 47 (Tuesday, March 11, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 11216]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-6008]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of 
Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis 
Panel (SEP) meetings:

    Name of SEP: Expanded Research on Emerging Diseases (Telephone 
Conference Call).
    Date: March 27, 1997.
    Time: 10:00 a.m.
    Place: Teleconference, 6003 Executive Boulevard, Solar Bldg., 
Room 4C10, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 496-2550.
    Contact Person: Dr. Peter R. Jackson, Scientific Review Adm., 
6003 Executive Boulevard, Solar Bldg., Room 4C10, Bethesda, MD 20892 
(301) 496-2550.
    Purpose/Agenda: To evaluate a grant application.

    Name of SEP: Expanded Research on Emerging Diseases (Telephone 
Conference Call).
    Date: March 27, 1997.
    Time: 1:00 p.m.
    Place: Teleconference, 6003 Executive Boulevard, Solar Bldg., 
Room 4C10, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 496-2550.
    Contact Person: Dr. Peter R. Jackson, Scientific Review Adm., 
6003 Executive Boulevard, Solar Bldg., Room 4C10, Bethesda, MD 20892 
(301) 496-2550.
    Purpose/Agenda: To evaluate a grant application.

    Name of SEP: Expanded Research on Emerging Diseases (Telephone 
Conference Call).
    Date: March 27, 1997.
    Time: 2:30 p.m.
    Place: Teleconference, 6003 Executive Boulevard, Solar Bldg., 
Room 4C10, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 496-2550.
    Contact Person: Dr. Peter R. Jackson, Scientific Review Adm., 
6003 Executive Boulevard, Solar Bldg., Room 4C10, Bethesda, MD 20892 
(301) 496-2550.
    Purpose/Agenda: To evaluate a grant application.

    These meetings will be closed in accordance with the provisions 
set forth in secs. 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5, U.S.C. 
Applications and/or proposals and the discussions could reveal 
confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable 
material and personal information concerning individuals associated 
with the applications and/or proposals, the disclosure of which 
would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Programs Nos. 93.855, 
Immunology, Allergic and Immunologic Diseases Research; 93.856, 
Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes 
of Health.)

    Dated: March 5, 1997.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Committee Management Officer, NIH.
[FR Doc. 97-6008 Filed 3-10-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-03-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-02-1999
<CASH>                                             388
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   17,644
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,069
<INVENTORY>                                     34,764
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                58,813
<PP&E>                                          68,851
<DEPRECIATION>                                  23,500
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 135,197
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           30,169
<BONDS>                                         79,379
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             6
<OTHER-SE>                                      21,991
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   135,197
<SALES>                                         33,588
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                33,588
<CGS>                                           25,409
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   25,409
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,990
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,960
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,295
<INCOME-TAX>                                       492
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                803
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       803
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .14
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .14
        

</TABLE>
#### COM. v. BITTINGER, R.

1630 MDA 2016

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

09/26/2017

CP-22-MD-0000520-1985 (Dauphin)

Affirmed
# C_2022463EN.01004901.xml

| 5.12.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 463/49 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.12.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 463/49

---

Order of the General Court of 11 October 2022 — Fundacja Instytut na rzecz Kultury Prawnej Ordo Iuris v Parliament

(Case T-41/22) (1)

(Action for annulment - Parliament resolution on the first anniversary of the de facto abortion ban in Poland - Act not open to challenge - Inadmissibility)

(2022/C 463/71)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Fundacja Instytut na rzecz Kultury Prawnej Ordo Iuris (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: K. Koźmiński and T. Siemiński, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: J. Rodrigues and W. Kuzmienko, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the European Parliament resolution of 11 November 2021 on the first anniversary of the de facto abortion ban in Poland (2021/2925(RSP)).

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

| 2. | Fundacja Instytut na rzecz Kultury Prawnej Ordo Iuris shall be ordered to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Fundacja Instytut na rzecz Kultury Prawnej Ordo Iuris shall be ordered to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 148, 4.4.2022.

---
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 January 2, 2020

p1216

Order 

Clerk

January 2, 2020

160217

MARK GOTTLEBER and ROSE GOTTLEBER,

Plaintiffs-Appellees,

v SC: 160217

COA: 336011

Bay CC: 12-003406-CZ

COUNTY OF SAGINAW,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 1, 2019 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
# C_2022424EN.01001601.xml

| 7.11.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 424/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.11.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 424/16

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil de Prud’hommes d’Agen (France) lodged on 21 April 2022 — XT v Keolis Agen SARL

(Case C-271/22)

(2022/C 424/17)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil de Prud’hommes d’Agen

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: XT

Defendant: Keolis Agen SARL

Questions referred

| 1. | Must Article 7(1) of Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time (1) be interpreted as being directly applicable in relations between a private transport operator, with a single public service delegation, and its employees, in the light, in particular, of the liberalisation of the rail passenger transport sector? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Must Article 7(1) of Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time (1) be interpreted as being directly applicable in relations between a private transport operator, with a single public service delegation, and its employees, in the light, in particular, of the liberalisation of the rail passenger transport sector?

| 2. | What is a reasonable carry-over period in respect of the acquired entitlement to four weeks’ paid annual leave within the meaning of Article 7(1) of Directive 2003/88, in so far as the time during which annual leave may be accrued is one year? |
| --- | --- |

2.

What is a reasonable carry-over period in respect of the acquired entitlement to four weeks’ paid annual leave within the meaning of Article 7(1) of Directive 2003/88, in so far as the time during which annual leave may be accrued is one year?

| 3. | Is the application of an unlimited carry-over period in the absence of a provision of national law, a regulation or convention governing that period contrary to Article 7(1) of Directive 2003/88/EC? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Is the application of an unlimited carry-over period in the absence of a provision of national law, a regulation or convention governing that period contrary to Article 7(1) of Directive 2003/88/EC?

---

(1)  OJ 2003 L 299, p. 9.

---
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 7 (Friday, January 10, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 1446]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-540]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. TQ97-3-23-001]


Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in 
FERC Gas Tariff

January 6, 1997.
    Take notice that on December 31, 1996 Eastern Shore Natural Gas 
Company (ESNG) tendered for filing certain revised tariff sheets in the 
above captioned docket as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised 
Volume No. 1, with a proposed effective date of January 1, 1997.
    On December 26, 1996, ESNG filed with the Commission revised rates 
to reflect an out-of-cycle purchased gas adjustment, proposed to be 
effective January 1, 1997. The instant filing is being made in 
compliance with a FERC Order dated December 20, 1996 which sited 
incorrect pagination of tariff sheets found in Docket Nos. TQ97-2-23-
000, et. al., and TM97-6-23-000, et. al. The incorrect pagination 
carried forward to Docket No. TQ97-3-23-000, et. al., and the sheets 
filed in the original docket ESNG is requesting to be withdrawn and the 
tariff sheets found in Appendix A of the instant filing be accepted in 
their place.
    ESNG states that copies of the filing have been served upon its 
jurisdictional customers and interested State Commissions.
    Any person desiring to protest said filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., 
Washington, D.C. 20426, in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's 
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR Section 385.211). All such 
protests must be filed in accordance with Section 154.210 of the 
Commission's Regulations. Protests will be considered by the Commission 
in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve 
to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Copies of this filing 
are on file with the Commission and are available for public 
inspection.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-540 Filed 1-9-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M