alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2744 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2744

    To authorize the Administrator of the United States Agency for 
International Development to prescribe the manner in which programs of 
      the agency are identified overseas, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 15, 2019

 Mr. McCaul (for himself and Mr. Engel) introduced the following bill; 
         which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To authorize the Administrator of the United States Agency for 
International Development to prescribe the manner in which programs of 
      the agency are identified overseas, and for other purposes.

    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 ``USAID Branding Modernization Act''.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR BRANDING.

    (a) In General.--The Administrator of the United States Agency for 
International Development (USAID) is authorized to prescribe, as 
appropriate, the use of logos or other insignia of the USAID Identity, 
or the use of additional or substitute markings including the United 
States flag, to appropriately identify, including as required by 
section 641 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2401), 
overseas programs administered by the Agency.
    (b) Audit.--Not later than one year after the date of the enactment 
of this Act, the Inspector General of the United States Agency for 
International Development shall submit to Congress an audit of 
compliance with relevant branding and marketing requirements of the 
Agency by implementing partners funded by the USAID, including any 
requirements prescribed pursuant to the authorization under subsection 
(a).
                                 <all>
```
#### J.E.E. v. M.P.E.

04/26/2016

743, 744 MAL (2015)

Denied

Pa.Super., 122 A.3d 1133
STEAM ELECTRIC CBI REPLACEMENT PAGE

EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0819

DCN: SE03533

THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN REMOVED BECAUSE IT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION (CBI) PER 40 CFR PART 2, SUBPART B.
# C_2015389EN.01006602.xml

| 23.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 389/66 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.11.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 389/66

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 15 October 2015 — Drakeford v EMA

(Case F-29/13 RENV)

(2015/C 389/76)

Language of the case: French

The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---
# C_2015381EN.01000402.xml

| 16.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 381/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.11.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 381/4

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 1 October 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék — Hungary) — ERSTE Bank Hungary Zrt v Attila Sugár

(Case C-32/14) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 93/13/EEC - Unfair terms in consumer contracts concluded between a seller or supplier and a consumer - Mortgage loan agreement - Article 7(1) - Stopping the use of unfair terms - Adequate and effective means - Acknowledgement of the debt - Notarised instrument - Affixation of the enforcement clause by a notary - Enforceable order - Notary’s obligations - Examination by the national court of its own motion of unfair terms - Judicial review - Principles of equivalence and effectiveness))

(2015/C 381/04)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Referring court

Fővárosi Törvényszék

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: ERSTE Bank Hungary Zrt

Applicant:

Defendant: Attila Sugár

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 6(1) and 7(1) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts must be interpreted as meaning that they do not preclude national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which allows a notary who drew up, in due form, an authentic instrument concerning a contract concluded between a seller or supplier and a consumer, to affix the enforcement clause to that instrument or to refuse to cancel it when no review of the unfairness of the contractual terms has been performed at any stage.

---

(1)  OJ C 102, 7.4.2014.

1

---
# C_2014212EN.01003201.xml

| 7.7.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 212/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.7.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 212/32

---

Order of the General Court of 7 May 2014 — Sharp v OHIM (BIG PAD)

(Case T-567/13) (1)

1

((Community trademark - Application for Community figurative mark BIG PAD - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive nature - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Action in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law))

2014/C 212/40

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Sharp KK (Osaka, Japan) (represented by: G. Macias Bonilla, G. Marín Raigal, P. López Ronda and E. Armero, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: O. Mondéjar Ortuño, Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 5 August 2013 (Case R 2131/2012-2) concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign BIG PAD as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

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

1.

The action is dismissed.

| 2. | Sharp KK is ordered to pay to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Sharp KK is ordered to pay to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 24, 25.1.2014.

1

---
:aq_lplan 

Name of contact, owner, facility, etc: 

!Infrastructure SIP 2010 N02 1-hr Standard 

Description of notice: 

Certification that 80 Is implementing the 2010 N02 1-hr Standard 

191 

Date to post on website: Date comment period ends: 

iS/2312013 !9/23/2013 

City, county or geographic location: 

!statewide 

Note: Rule proceedings remain on the website until the rules go into effect. Therefore, choose a "Date no longer on website" beyond when 

the rules become effective, later the date can be edited to reflect the effective date of the rules. 

Date no longer on website: 

912412013 

Link to public notice: 

ihttp://denr.sd.gov/des/aq/aqnews/Finall SIP 1hr N02 8 2013 SD.pdf
# Troop Support provides food, helipad materials for Hurricane Matthew relief

/ Published Oct. 13, 2016
PHILADELPHIA, 
As the Navy hospital ship USNS Comfort deployed to support Hurricane Matthew relief efforts, it did so with a timely re-supply of food by the Defense Logistics Agency, including dairy items, bread, fresh fruit and vegetables, and Meals, Ready-to Eat.

The Comfort, stocked with medical supplies and a 1,000 bed treatment facility, moved from Norfolk, Virginia toward the Category 4 storm as it hammered Haiti Oct. 4.

DLA Troop Support’s Subsistence supply chain worked with its regional prime vendor to ensure the Comfort received the food in time.

“DLA Troop Support is uniquely positioned to respond to crises like Hurricane Matthew at a moment’s notice with world class logistics,” said Victor Harmon, deputy director of DLA Troop Support Customer Operations. “Troop Support’s extraordinary expertise coupled with strong relationships with our industry partners allows us to precisely support the joint task force commander or government partner with the right materiel to speed recovery in a disaster situation.”

The Subsistence supply chain also delivered 822 cases of water and 863 cases of MREs for relief efforts in Haiti.

The Construction and Equipment supply chain provided the materials for four helicopter pads to be built in Haiti, as well as materials to build 100 pallet skids for the loading and unloading of helicopters. C&E also delivered 6,000 gallons of non-potable water daily initially and is still delivering 3,000 gallons per day.

As military installations along the coast from Florida to Virginia prepared for Matthew’s arrival, nearly 6,000 Marine recruits were evacuated from Paris Island, South Carolina. Subsistence provided MREs, ice and fresh fruit and vegetables to the recruits at Marine Corps Logistics Base Albany, Georgia.

C&E also delivered two sand bagging machines to the South Carolina Army National Guard within 24 hours after the order was received.
No. 10-7297.

#### Alan Zaleski, Petitioner v. Ellen Bree Burns, et al.

562 U.S. 1102, 131 S. Ct. 805,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9537.

178 L. Ed. 2d 546,

December 6, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.

Justice Sotomayor took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

Same case below, 606 F.3d 51.
No. 10-6954.

#### Monclair Henderson-El, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1054, 131 S. Ct. 614,

178 L. Ed. 2d 454,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8915.

November 15, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.

Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
<PAGE>

                                                                  EXHIBIT 10-q-2

SCHEDULE IDENTIFYING AGREEMENTS SUBSTANTIALLY IDENTICAL TO THE FORM OF INDEMNITY
 AGREEMENT CONSTITUTING EXHIBIT 10-q-1 HERETO ENTERED INTO BY CONEXANT SYSTEMS,
                     INC. AND EACH OF THE FOLLOWING PERSONS

                                      Name

                                 Donald R. Beall

                               Steven J. Bilodeau

                                Ralph J. Cicerone

                                  Dipanjan Deb

                                Dwight W. Decker

                                F. Craig Farrill

                                  Armando Geday

                              Balakrishnan S. Iyer

                                 John W. Marren

                                 D. Scott Mercer

                                 Jerre L. Stead

                                Giuseppe P. Zocco

                                 J. Scott Blouin

                              Jasmina T. Boulanger

                                Lewis C. Brewster

                               Dennis E. O'Reilly

                                 Kerry K. Petry

                                C. Michael Powell

                                F. Matthew Rhodes

                               Michael J. Rispoli
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit ____________

No. 23-50099

Summary Calendar

____________

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Ochuko Sylvester Eruotor, 

Defendant—Appellant.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 1:16-CR-347-3

______________________________

Before Willett, Duncan, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Ochuko Sylvester Eruotor, federal prisoner #98555-380, appeals the 

denial of his motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. 

§ 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). He is serving a 168-month sentence for conspiracy to 

commit money laundering. On appeal, Eruotor argues that the district 

court’s consideration of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors was deficient because 

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

October 31, 2023

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 23-50099 Document: 00516950201 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/31/2023
No. 23-50099

2

it failed to consider (1) the disparity between Eruotor’s sentence and those 

of his codefendants and (2) Eruotor’s rehabilitation efforts in prison. With 

the benefit of liberal construction, he also argues that the district court failed 

to adequately explain its reason for denying his motion.

We review a district court’s order denying compassionate release for 

abuse of discretion. United States v. Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691, 693 (5th Cir. 

2020). The district court’s order demonstrates that it adequately considered 

and rejected Eruotor’s arguments. See Concepcion v. United States, 142 S. Ct. 

2389, 2405 (2022); United States v. Escajeda, 58 F.4th 184, 188 (5th Cir. 

2023); United States v. Evans, 587 F.3d 667, 673 (5th Cir. 2009). The district 

court stated that it conducted a complete review of the motion on the merits 

and concluded that the § 3553(a) factors did not weigh in favor of relief.

Eruotor “may disagree with how the district court balanced the § 3553(a) 

factors, [but] that is not a sufficient ground for reversal.”Chambliss, 948 F.3d 

at 694.

We also reject Eruotor’s attempt to challenge the district court’s 

imposition of the § 3B1.1(a) sentencing enhancement for his role as a “leader 

or organizer” of the conspiracy. U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(a). Eruotor “cannot use 

§ 3582(c) to challenge the legality or the duration of his sentence.” Escajeda, 

58 F.4th at 187.

Because the district court did not abuse its discretion in holding that 

relief was unwarranted under § 3553(a), we need not consider Eruotor’s 

argument that the district court erred in finding that Eruotor failed to show 

extraordinary and compelling reasons warranting relief. See United States v. 

Ward, 11 F.4th 354, 360–61 (5th Cir. 2021); Chambliss, 948 F.3d at 693. 

Accordingly, the judgment is AFFIRMED.

Case: 23-50099 Document: 00516950201 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/31/2023
# C_2013252EN.01003802.xml

| 31.8.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 252/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.8.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 252/38

---

Action brought on 2 July 2013 — Jordi Nogues v OHIM — Grupo Osborne (BADTORO)

(Case T-350/13)

2013/C 252/65

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Jordi Nogues SL (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: J.R. Fernández Castellanos, M. J. Sanmartín Sanmartín and E. López Pares, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Grupo Osborne, SA (El Puerto de Santa María, Spain)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

| — | annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 16 April 2013 in Case R 1446/2012-2; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 16 April 2013 in Case R 1446/2012-2;

| — | order OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay the applicant’s costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay the applicant’s costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Applicant

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark with word element ‘BADTORO’ for goods and services in Classes 25, 34 and 35 — Community trade mark application No 9 565 581

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Grupo Osborne, SA

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in opposition: National figurative mark with word element ‘TORO’, national word mark ‘EL TORO’ and Community word mark ‘TORO’, for goods and services in Classes 25, 34, 35

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law:

Pleas in law:

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009

| — | Incorrect departure from the general principle of comparison as a whole, without valid reason |
| --- | --- |

—

Incorrect departure from the general principle of comparison as a whole, without valid reason

---
No. 10-6287.

#### Dennis Lemke, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 973, 131 S. Ct. 489,

178 L. Ed. 2d 309,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7867.

October 12, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 377 Fed. Appx. 570.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 127 (Thursday, July 2, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 36212]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-17659]


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

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the California Advisory 
Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, that a meeting of 
the California Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene at 
9:00 a.m. and adjourn at 1:00 p.m. on Saturday, July 25, 1998, at the 
Holiday Inn at Union Square, 480 Sutter Street, San Francisco, 
California 94108. The purpose of the meeting is to review the Orange 
County and Sonoma transcripts and plan future activities.
    Persons desiring additional information, or planning a presentation 
to the Committee, should contact Philip Montez, Director of the Western 
Regional Office, 213-894-3437 (TDD 213-894-3435). Hearing-impaired 
persons who will attend the meeting and require the services of a sign 
language interpreter should contact the Regional Office at least ten 
(10) working days before the scheduled date of the meeting.
    The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the 
rules and regulations of the Commission.

    Dated at Washington, DC, June 23, 1998.
Carol-Lee Hurley,
Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.
[FR Doc. 98-17659 Filed 7-1-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
No. 10-6677.

#### Michael Hickingbottom, Petitioner v. Alan Finnan, Superintendent, Wabash Valley Correctional Facility.

562 U.S. 1069, 131 S. Ct. 657,

178 L. Ed. 2d 492,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9437.

November 29, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
S91A1198.

#### WALKER v. THE STATE.

(410 SE2d 422)

Fletcher, Justice.

Upson County deputies executed a search warrant at appellant’s trailer and discovered a set of postal scales on the steps of the trailer and six bags of marijuana lying in the grass approximately six feet from where appellant had been standing when the deputies arrived. In November of 1988, appellant was indicted for possession of marijuana with intent to distribute and he was convicted of that offense on September 11, 1990. Appellant appeals from the conviction and we affirm.1

1. In his first enumeration of error, appellant contends that OCGA § 16-13-30 (j) (1) is vague and uncertain in violation of the due *740process clauses of both the United States and the Georgia constitutions.2 We disagree. The conduct prohibited by the subsection is sufficiently definite to provide “a person of ordinary intelligence fair notice that his contemplated conduct is forbidden by statute.” *Mixon v. State,*226 Ga. 869, 870 (178 SE2d 189) (1970).

Decided December 4, 1991.

*Richard T. Bridges,*for appellant.

*W. Fletcher Sams, District Attorney,*for appellee.

2. We have reviewed all of appellant’s remaining enumerations of error. We hold that the evidence was sufficient under *Jackson v. Virginia,*443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979); that there was no constitutional deprivation; and that there was no error in the trial court that warrants reversal or a new trial.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*

1

 This case was transferred by the Court of Appeals and is presently before this court only because appellant calls into question the constitutionality of OCGA § 16-13-30 (j) (1).

2

 As appellant was indicted prior to the 1990 amendment to OCGA § 16-13-30 (j) (1), the subsection at issue provided:

> It is unlawful for any person to possess, have under his control, manufacture, deliver, distribute, dispense, administer, sell, or possess with intent to distribute marijuana.
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We have issued our report dated March 15, 2011, with respect to the consolidated financial statements included in the Annual Report of Cobra Electronics Corporation and Subsidiaries on Form 10-Kfor the year ended December 31, 2010. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said report in the Registration Statements of Cobra Electronics Corporation and Subsidiaries on Form S-8 Nos. 333-32609 (effectiveAugust 1, 1997), 333-63501 (effective September 16, 1998), 333-42164 (effective July 25, 2000), 333-42166 (effective July 25, 2000), 333-91078 (effective June 24, 2002) and 333-170387 (effective November 5, 2010).

/s/ Grant Thornton LLP 

Chicago, Illinois 

March 15, 2011
No. 10-599.

#### Myriam Onyeabor, Petitioner v. Centennial Pointe Owner’s Association, et al.

562 U.S. 1138, 131 S. Ct. 936,

178 L. Ed. 2d 753,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 467,

January 10, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Utah denied.
The Alabama Court of Civil Appeals

 NATHAN P. WILSON 300 DEXTER AVENUE LYNN DEVAUGHN

 CLERK MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA 36104-3741 ASSISTANT CLERK

TELEPHONE 334-229-0733

July 19, 2024

CL-2024-0003

E.W. v. Houston County Department of Human Resources (Appeal from 

Houston Juvenile Court: JU-23-381.01).

ORDER

You are hereby notified that the following action was taken in the 

above cause by the Court of Civil Appeals: 

Application for Rehearing Overruled. No opinion written on 

rehearing.

Moore, P.J., and Edwards, Hanson, Fridy, and Lewis, JJ., concur.

Nathan P. Wilson, Clerk
No. D-2491.

#### In the Matter of Disbarment of Melissa Anne Shomber.

562 U.S. 999, 131 S. Ct. 555,

178 L. Ed. 2d 410,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8336.

November 1, 2010.

Disbarment entered.

Former order, 561 U.S. 1045, 131 S. Ct. 43, 177 L. Ed. 2d 1133, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 5612.
No. 10-18.

#### Webster M. Smith, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1061, 131 S. Ct. 639,

178 L. Ed. 2d 478,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9397.

November 29, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces denied.

Same case below, 68 M.J. 445.
No. 10-5923.

#### Anthony T. Alston, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1111, 131 S. Ct. 820,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9783.

178 L. Ed. 2d 561,

December 13, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.

Same case below, 380 Fed. Appx. 217.