alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
18 April 2014 *****************************

NSN: 8920-01-322-6894 (GBS) * MONOGRAPH NO: FPS/GP 07

 ***************************** 

Item: Granola bar 

Document: PCR-C-084, Compressed Bars, Packaged in a Flexible Pouch, Shelf Stable

Approximate Caloric Value Per Serving: 230 Component Classification: Primary

Estimated Shelf Life: 60 months at 80°F

Item Characteristics

Appearance:

Intact, dense and compact bar with a flat surface. Golden-brown, tan, and cream 

mottled color. Contains distinct oat flakes and a rough looking internal texture.

Rehydrated: Milky, cream or tan colored liquid with small pieces of granola.

Odor: Cooked flour and sweet toasted oat grain with slight cinnamon spice.

Flavor: Cooked flour and sweet toasted oat grain with slight cinnamon spice.

Texture: Easy to bite, moderately firm, chewy, flaky, crunchy and crumbles in mouth.

Possible Deteriorative Changes 

Appearance: Darkening, black/burnt spots, excessive crumbs, unidentifiable cornflakes, uneven 

surface, broken (more than three pieces).

Odor: Rancid, soapy, old grain, cardboard, stale, burnt, musty.

Flavor: Rancid, soapy, old grain, cardboard, musty, stale decreased sweetness, bitter, burnt.

Texture: Excessive crumble, increased firmness, hard bite, crystallized, dry, grainy.

Unique Examination/Test Procedures

Check odor on just opened package for best evaluation of quality. Check for vacuum packaging (full 

vacuum). Crumbling may occur during excess handling.

Special Notes

NA
No. 11-7100.

#### Juan Jose Oropeza, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 1072, 132 S. Ct. 793,

181 L. Ed. 2d 507,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8341.

November 28, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 09-3253

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Southern District of Iowa. Craig Arthur Schmacker, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: June 2, 2010 Filed: June 7, 2010

___________ Before WOLLMAN, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Pursuant to a written plea agreement contai ning a waiver of his right to appeal, Craig Schmacker pleaded guilty to unlawfully distributing child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(2) and (b)(1). The district court 1 sentenced Schmacker to 188 months in prison and 10 years of supervised release. On appeal, his counsel has moved to w ithdraw and has filed a brie f under Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the senten ce on various grounds, and arguing that the appeal waiver should be set aside because the government violated the plea

1 The Honorable John A. Jarvey, United Stat es District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa.agreement by agreeing with the presenten ce report that Schmacker should receive an enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2G2.2(b)(3)(E).
In the plea agreement, Schm acker waived his right to appeal all issues related to his plea agreement, his conviction, and his sentence, as long as the sentence was within the maximum statutory penalties. The maximum prison term for Schmacker’s offense is 240 months. See 18 U.S.C. § 2252(b)(1). We will enforce the appeal waiver in this case, because the appeal falls within the scope of the waiver, the record shows the requisite knowledge and voluntarin ess, and enforcing the appeal waiver would not constitute a miscarriage of justice. SeeUnited States v. Andis , 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (enfor ceability of appeal waiver); United States v. Sisco , 576 F.3d 791, 796 (8th Cir. 2009) (cons iderations for knowing and voluntary waiver); see also United States v. Estrada-Bahena , 201 F.3d 1070, 1071 (8th Cir. 2000) (per curiam) (enforcing appeal waiver in Anders case). We reject Schmacker’s argument that the government breached the plea agreement: the agreement explicitly indicated that the parties had not agreedon the enhancement’s applicability, and that the government could make whatever argumen t it deemed appropriate at sentencing. SeeUnited States v. Sanchez , 508 F.3d 456, 460 (8th Cir. 2007) (plea agreements are contractual in nature and should be in terpreted according to general contract principles).
Having reviewed the record i ndependently under Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues that are not covered by the appeal waiver. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we dismiss this appeal.

______________________________

-2-
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-14-0001302

27-JAN-2016

11:02 AM
# C_2016401EN.01000901.xml

| 29.10.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 401/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.10.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 401/9

---

Commission communication pursuant to Article 16(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community

Establishment of public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2016/C 401/05)

| Member State | United Kingdom |
| --- | --- |
| Concerned routes | Dundee Airport to Heathrow Airport
  Dundee Airport to Gatwick Airport
  Dundee Airport to Stansted Airport
  Dundee Airport to Luton Airport
  Dundee Airport to London City Airport
  Dundee Airport to Southend Airport |
| Date of entry into force of the public service obligations | 26 March 2017 |
| Address where the text and any relevant information and/or documentation related to the public service obligations can be obtained | For the attention of:





  Karen Lawson |
| Corporate Procurement Manager |
| Tel. +44 1382433860 |
| Email: karen.lawson@dundeecity.gov.uk |

Member State

United Kingdom

Concerned routes

Dundee Airport to Heathrow Airport

Dundee Airport to Gatwick Airport

Dundee Airport to Stansted Airport

Dundee Airport to Luton Airport

Dundee Airport to London City Airport

Dundee Airport to Southend Airport

Date of entry into force of the public service obligations

26 March 2017

Address where the text and any relevant information and/or documentation related to the public service obligations can be obtained

For the attention of:

Karen Lawson

Corporate Procurement Manager

Tel. +44 1382433860

Email: karen.lawson@dundeecity.gov.uk

---
#### DOR v. 8th Judicial District Court

OP 16-0591

11/15/16

Denied

Original Proceeding Supervisory Control
ID Descriptor L* a* b* c h dL* da* db* dEcmc*

Standard 20029 STANDARD 20.34 -0.25 -0.87

Tolerance

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Shade Number BLACK 3236 Piece/Roll Number 20029

DLA/NAVY SHADE TOLERANCE PROJECT April 6, 2020

Fabric Nomenclature LEATHER, COW

JACKET, OFFICER, SURFACE WARFARE MIL-DTL-32092

COMMENTS: NUMBERS ARE FOR REFERENCE ONLY 

Equipment Type HUNTER ULTRA SCAN PRO Setting Mode: Specular Included - Reflectance

UV Filter – OUT UV Lamp OFF
No. 11-7992.

#### Aaron Gaytan-Estrada, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 1184, 132 S. Ct. 1159,

181 L. Ed. 2d 1029,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 996.

January 23, 2012.

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

Same case below, 441 Fed. Appx. 241.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4764 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4764

   To amend section 1368 of title 18, United States Code, to include 
                     rescue dogs in its protection.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 15, 2006

  Mr. Simmons (for himself, Mr. Abercrombie, Mr. Shays, Mr. Weldon of 
  Pennsylvania, Mr. Farr, Mr. Delahunt, Mr. Grijalva, Mr. Olver, Mr. 
Peterson of Minnesota, and Mrs. Johnson of Connecticut) introduced the 
  following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend section 1368 of title 18, United States Code, to include 
                     rescue dogs in its protection.

    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 ``Canine Volunteer Protection Act of 
2006''.

SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF ``POLICE ANIMAL'' FOR THE PURPOSES OF SECTION 
              1368 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE.

    Section 1368(b) of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) by inserting ``or commissioned'' after ``employed''; 
        and
            (2) by inserting ``or participating in search and rescue 
        missions'' after ``criminal offenders''.
                                 <all>
```
20 Jun 2011 **************************

NSN: 8905-00-753-6432 (SDD) * MONORAPH NO: BE-12

 *************************

 

Item: Shrimp, Dehydrated, Cooked

Document: PCR-S-024, Shrimp, Dehydrated, Cooked, Packaged in a No. 10 Metal Can, Shelf 

Stable

Approximate Caloric Value Per Serving: 60 Component Classification: Primary

Estimated Shelf Life: 36 months at 80°F

Item Characteristics

Appearance: Dehydrated product: Light orange-pink color.

Rehydrated product: Typical color of cooked shrimp.

Odor: Dehydrated product: Dehydrated cooked shrimp odor.

Rehydrated product: Cooked shrimp odor.

Flavor: Dehydrated product: Dehydrated cooked shrimp flavor. 

Rehydrated product: Cooked shrimp flavor.

Texture:

Rehydrated product: Tender and slightly fibrous texture.

Possible Deteriorative Changes 

Appearance: Dehydrated product: Very hard, tacky shrimp.

Rehydrated product: May become dark or lose color.

Odor: Product: Excessively fishy, rancid, oxidized, cardboard or other objectionable odors.

Flavor: Product: Excessively fishy, rancid, oxidized, cardboard or other objectionable odors.

Texture: Rehydrated product: may become tough, dry, chewy, soft or mushy.

Unique Examination/Test Procedures: 

Prepare as directed on label.

Special Notes: 

NA
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 23

- 00183

- CR

Luis DeLeon Jr. v. The State of Texas
On Appeal from the 454th Judicial District Court of Medina County , Texas Trial Court Cause No. 21

- 09

- 14171

- CR

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed

. The Court orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED

. We further order this decision certified below for observance. August 15, 2024
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          75,698
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,428,971
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,526,152
<PP&E>                                      16,480,089
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             118,003,618
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       17,062,720
<BONDS>                                    114,435,585
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                 41,253,908
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                 (56,704,944)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               118,003,618
<SALES>                                     11,081,249
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            11,081,249
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               48,359,283
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (47,049,735)
<INCOME-TAX>                               (47,049,735)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (47,049,735)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (499,927)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 (499,927)


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                       1,039,489
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                5,747,513
<ALLOWANCES>                                   257,009
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             7,376,611
<PP&E>                                      93,759,498
<DEPRECIATION>                               7,026,673
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             100,411,545
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,670,731
<BONDS>                                     61,021,715
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       13,888,140
<PREFERRED>                                    239,701
<COMMON>                                       463,689
<OTHER-SE>                                  20,127,569
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               100,411,545
<SALES>                                      5,277,582
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,277,582
<CGS>                                        4,055,374
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                6,556,321
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                69,830
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           3,996,005
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (6,885,488)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (6,885,488)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                            (2,384,931)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (9,270,419)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.26)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.26)


</TABLE>
No. 10-10875.

#### Shirley Williams, Petitioner v. Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security.

565 U.S. 1175, 132 S. Ct. 1140,

181 L. Ed. 2d 1013,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 648.

January 17, 2012.

Motion for leave to file a petition for rehearing denied.

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

Former decision, 565 U.S. 932, 132 S. Ct. 374, 181 L. Ed. 2d 237, 2011 U.S. LEXIS 6523.
No. 10-1333 (R46-004).

#### Sandy Creek Energy Associates, L.P., Petitioner v. Sierra Club, Inc., et al.

565 U.S. 1102, 132 S. Ct. 872,

181 L. Ed. 2d 569,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 9020.

December 16, 2011.

The petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in *570the above-entitled case was dismissed today pursuant to Rule 46.1 of the Rules of this Court.

Same case below, 627 F.3d 134.
No. 11-6734.

#### William Glenn Logan, Petitioner v. Georgia.

565 U.S. 1083, 132 S. Ct. 823,

181 L. Ed. 2d 533,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8734.

December 5, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Georgia denied.

Same case below, 309 Ga. App. 95, 709 S.E.2d 302.
Montana Seventh Judicial District Court. County of Dawson.

#### STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff, -vs- DONALD OLMSTEAD, Defendant.

CAUSE NO. DC-14-107

DECISION

On February 9, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to the Montana State Prison for twenty-five (25) years, with no time suspended for the offense of Sexual Intercourse Without Consent, a felony, in violation of §45-5-503, MCA. The sentence was ordered to run consecutively to Dawson County Cause No. DC-13-104. The Defendant was ordered to register as a Sexual Offender and was designated as a Tier III Sex Offender. Prior to parole, Defendant was ordered to complete Phases I and II of Sex Offender Treatment. The Defendant was not given credit for time served in jail prior to sentencing since he was already in jail for Cause No. DC-13-104. Defendant was ordered to pay $70 in court fees, $50 for preparation of PSI, and $800 for cost of assigned counsel.

On August 4, 2016, the Defendant’s Application for review of that sentence was heard by the Sentence Review Division of the Montana Supreme Court (hereafter “the Division”).

The Defendant was present and was represented by Peter Ohman of the Office of the State Public Defender. The State was not represented.

Before hearing the Application, the Defendant was advised that the Division has the authority not only to reduce the sentence or affirm it, but also increase it. The Defendant was further advised that there is no appeal from a decision of the Division. The Defendant acknowledged that he understood this and stated that he wished to proceed.

Rule 12, Rules of the Sentence Review Division of the Supreme Court of Montana, provides that, “The sentence imposed by the District Court is presumed correct. The sentence shall not be reduced or increased unless it is clearly inadequate or clearly excessive.” (Section 46-18-904(3), MCA).

The Division finds that the reasons advanced for modification are *79insufficient to hold that the sentence imposed by the District Court is clearly inadequate or clearly excessive.

Done in open Court this 4th day of August, 2016.

DATED this 24th day of August, 2016.

Therefore, it is the unanimous decision of the Division that the sentence is AFFIRMED.

Hon. Brenda Gilbert, Chairperson, Hon. Kathy Seeley, Member and Hon. Brad Newman, Member.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4690 Introduced in House (IH)]
```
No. 11-6858.

#### Terry Thorne-El, Petitioner v. North Carolina.

565 U.S. 1118, 132 S. Ct. 1009,

181 L. Ed. 2d 747,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 378.

January 9, 2012.

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

Same case below, 446 Fed. Appx. 578.
# C_2018307EN.01019101.xml

| 30.8.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 307/191 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.8.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 307/191

---

P8_TA(2017)0201

Protocol to the EU-Mongolia Framework Agreement on Partnership and Cooperation (accession of Croatia) ***

European Parliament legislative resolution of 16 May 2017 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the Union and its Member States, of the Protocol to the Framework Agreement on Partnership and Cooperation between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and Mongolia, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union (09264/2016 — C8-0455/2016 — 2015/0113(NLE))

(Consent)

(2018/C 307/32)

The European Parliament,

| — | having regard to the draft Council decision (09264/2016), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the draft Council decision (09264/2016),

| — | having regard to the draft Protocol to the Framework Agreement on Partnership and Cooperation between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and Mongolia, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union (08940/2016), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the draft Protocol to the Framework Agreement on Partnership and Cooperation between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and Mongolia, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union (08940/2016),

| — | having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Articles 207 and 209 and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C8-0455/2016), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Articles 207 and 209 and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C8-0455/2016),

| — | having regard to Rule 99(1) and (4) and Rule 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Rule 99(1) and (4) and Rule 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

| — | having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A8-0074/2017), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A8-0074/2017),

| 1. | Gives its consent to conclusion of the Protocol; |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of Mongolia. |
| --- | --- |

2.

---
No. 11-6523.

#### Anthony D. James, Petitioner v. Rick Thaler, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

565 U.S. 1065, 132 S. Ct. 771,

181 L. Ed. 2d 495,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8483.

November 28, 2011.

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