alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2017178EN.01000601.xml

| 6.6.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 178/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.6.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 178/6

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France) lodged on 6 March 2017 — Administration des douanes et droits indirects, Établissement national des produits de l’agriculture et de la mer (FranceAgriMer) v Hubert Clergeau, Jean-Luc Labrousse, Jean-Jacques Berthellemy, Alain Bouchet, Jean-Pierre Dubois, Marcel Géry, Jean-Paul Matrat, Jean-Pierre Paziot, Patrice Raillot

(Case C-115/17)

(2017/C 178/06)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Referring court

Cour de cassation

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Administration des douanes et droits indirects, Établissement national des produits de l’agriculture et de la mer (FranceAgriMer)

Applicants:

Defendants: Hubert Clergeau, Jean-Luc Labrousse, Jean-Jacques Berthellemy, Alain Bouchet, Jean-Pierre Dubois, Marcel Géry, Jean-Paul Matrat, Jean-Pierre Paziot, Patrice Raillot

Defendants:

Question referred

Question referred

Is Article 49 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights to be interpreted as precluding a situation in which a person is convicted on the ground that he obtained export refunds, to which he was not entitled, by means of deceitful practices or the making of false declarations as to the nature of the goods in respect of which the refunds were requested, although, as a result of changes in the rules which occurred subsequent to the facts of the case, the goods that were in fact exported by that person have since become eligible for those refunds?

---
THF,ATTORNEYGENERAL 

OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN. TEXAS 78711 

JOaN L. arIz, 

Aw-rORNEY CfENERA& 

September 5, 1973 

Honorable Jimmy Morr,is Opinion No. H- 96 

Criminal District Attorney Re: Whether commissioners 

Navarro County court may pay district 

Corsicana, Texas 75110 judge an amount in excess 

of that specified in Article 

Dear Mr. Morris: 6819a-35 

You have requested our opinion on the following question: 

“Article 6819a-35 provides ‘Sec. 2. In addition 

to the compensation provided by law and paid by the 

state, the Commissioners Court of Navarro County 

shall pay the district judge of the 13th Judicial District, 

Four Thousand Do,llars ($4,000) per annum for performing the duties of judge of the juvenile court.’ 

“I respectfully request your opinion as to whether 

the Commissioners Court of Navarro County would be 

precluded from paying the district judge of Navarro 

County a sum in excess of $4,000.00 per annum under 

this statute. ” 

Article 5 $ 7 of the Constitution of the State of Texas provides that a 

district judge “shall receive for his services an annual salary to be fixed by 

the Legislature”. In our opinion this provision requires that salaries of 

district judges be established by the Legislature. Accordingly, $4,000 is 

established by the Legislature as the additional compensation for district 

judges in Navarro County (Article 6819a-35) for performing the duties of 

judge of the juvenile court. 

We believe that the statute establishes both a minimum and a maximum 

additional salary for performing such duties. Accordingly, your question is 

answered in the negative. 

p. 442 
The Honorable Jimmy Morris, page 2 (H-96) 

SUMMARY 

The commissioners court of Navarro County 

must pay the district judge no more and no less than 

$4,000 per annum as provided by § 2 of Article 6819a- 35, 

V. T. C. S., for performing the duties of judge of the 

juveriile court. 

Very truly yours, 

v Attorney General of Texas 

DAVID M. KENDALL, Chairman 

Opinion Committee 

p. 443
# C_2018022EN.01003101.xml

| 22.1.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 22/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.1.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 22/31

---

Action brought on 5 December 2017 — European Commission v Ireland

(Case C-678/17)

(2018/C 022/43)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: P.J. Loewenthal, A. Bouchagiar, Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Ireland

Defendant:

The applicant claims that the Court should:

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | declare that, by failing to take, within the prescribed period, all the measures necessary to recover from Apple Sales International and Apple Operations Europe the State aid declared illegal and incompatible with the internal market by Article 1 of Commission decision (EU) 2017/1283 of 30 August 2016 on State aid SA.38373 (2014/C)(ex 2014/NN)(ex 2014/CP) implemented by Ireland to Apple [...] (1), Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 2 and 3 of that decision as well as under Article 108(2) TFEU; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that, by failing to take, within the prescribed period, all the measures necessary to recover from Apple Sales International and Apple Operations Europe the State aid declared illegal and incompatible with the internal market by Article 1 of Commission decision (EU) 2017/1283 of 30 August 2016 on State aid SA.38373 (2014/C)(ex 2014/NN)(ex 2014/CP) implemented by Ireland to Apple [...] (1), Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 2 and 3 of that decision as well as under Article 108(2) TFEU;

1

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

—

order Ireland to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

According to the decision of the European Commission of 30 August 2016 in case SA.38373, Ireland should have recovered within four months the unlawful and incompatible State aid granted to Apple Sales International (‘ASI’) and Apple Operations Europe (‘AOE’). The aid resulted from two tax rulings issued by Ireland in favour of ASI and AOE on 29 January 1991 and 23 May 2007, which enabled those companies to determine their corporation tax liability in Ireland on a yearly basis until 2014.

Ireland did not recover the State aid within four months following the notification of the Commission’s decision, as it was obliged to do. Furthermore, Ireland has still not taken all the measures necessary to implement the Commission’s decision.

---

(1)  OJ 2017, L 187, p. 1.

1

---
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         January 16, 2025.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on January 8, 2025, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 593 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-1094, K2025-1093.                

Sean Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2025-00923 Filed 1-15-25; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
Case 5:04-cv-00056-C Document 15 Filed 10/20/04 Page 1 of 9 PageID 59
 

 Case 5:04-cv-00056-C Document 15 Filed 10/20/04 Page 2 of 9 PageID 60
 

 Case 5:04-cv-00056-C Document 15 Filed 10/20/04 Page 3 of 9 PageID 61
 

 Case 5:04-cv-00056-C Document 15 Filed 10/20/04 Page 4 of 9 PageID 62
 

 Case 5:04-cv-00056-C Document 15 Filed 10/20/04 Page 5 of 9 PageID 63
 

 Case 5:04-cv-00056-C Document 15 Filed 10/20/04 Page 6 of 9 PageID 64
 

 Case 5:04-cv-00056-C Document 15 Filed 10/20/04 Page 7 of 9 PageID 65
 

 Case 5:04-cv-00056-C Document 15 Filed 10/20/04 Page 8 of 9 PageID 66
 

 Case 5:04-cv-00056-C Document 15 Filed 10/20/04 Page 9 of 9 PageID 67
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 98-40027

Summary Calendar

 

DANIEL JOHN SHEEHAN,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

NUECES COUNTY ET AL.,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. C-97-CV-255

- - - - - - - - - -

December 8, 1998

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Daniel John Sheehan, Texas prisoner # 426771, appeals the

magistrate judge’s dismissal of his civil rights complaint

pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1915A for failure to state a claim. See

28 U.S.C. § 636(c). Sheehan argues that the magistrate judge

erred in not allowing Sheehan to dismiss his complaint

voluntarily, in determining that the sheriffs could not be held

responsible on a theory of respondeat superior, by dismissing the

false arrest and false imprisonment claims against the sheriffs 
No. 98-40027

-2-

 

** Spears v. McCotter, 766 F.2d 179 (5th Cir. 1985).

and the counties, by adding defendants to the case and adding

back into the case defendants who had been dismissed, and in

concluding that the complaint failed to state a claim regarding

the seizure of Sheehan’s legal materials, and abused her

discretion by dismissing the complaint prior to service or

discovery and without allowing Sheehan to amend his pleadings,

and in concluding that the complaint failed to state a claim

regarding the seizure of Sheehan’s legal materials.

We have reviewed throughly the record, briefs, and arguments

and find no reversible error. We AFFIRM the dismissal of

Sheehan’s complaint essentially for the reasons stated by the

magistrate judge in Sheehan v. County of Gregg et al., U.S.D.C.

C-97-255 (S.D. Tex. Dec. 15, 1997). We are able to dispose of

the appeal on the record before us, Sheehan’s motion for a

transcript of the Spears** hearing at government expense is

DENIED.

The appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. 5TH CIR. R. 42.2
Richard A. YEAGER v. STATE

CR-16-0961

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

November 20, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Reh. denied.
BTXN 104b/105b (rev. 09/11)

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

In Re: §

§

§

§

Highland Select Equity Master Fund, L.P. Case No.: 23−31037−swe7

 Chapter No.: 7

Debtor(s)

ORDER FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE

 The Court, having considered the Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice of JEREMY A ROOT, to represent

THE DUGABOY INVESTMENT TRUST, related to document #23, ORDERS this application be:

 Granted − The Clerk of the District Court for the Northern District of Texas shall deposit the application fee to

the account of the Non−Appropriated Fund.

 Denied − The Clerk of the District Court for the Northern District of Texas shall return the admission fee to the

applicant.

# # # End of Order # # #

United States Bankruptcy Judge

______________________________________________________________________

Signed July 14, 2023

The following constitutes the ruling of the court and has the force and effect therein described.

Case 23-31037-swe7 Doc 27 Filed 07/14/23 Entered 07/14/23 14:02:44 Desc

Page 1 of 1
Norris S. NELSON, BY AND THROUGH Janice BATEMAN as personal representative of the Estate of Norris S. Nelson v. Jaroslava Karusova NELSON

2160211

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

October 18, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
P.E.T., Sr. v. STATE

CR-16-0760

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 8, 2017

Affirmed.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

MELISSA L. OMERNIK §

 §

VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO.4:05-CV-436-Y

 §

JO ANNE B. BARNHART §

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S

FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION

On March 30, 2006, the United States magistrate judge issued his

proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation (“findings”) in the

above-styled and numbered cause. In his findings, the magistrate

judge recommended that the decision of the Commissioner of the Social

Security Administration of the United States (“the Commissioner”)

denying plaintiff Melissa L. Omernik’s claim for disability insurance

and supplemental security income benefits be affirmed. The magistrate

judge’s order gave all parties until April 20 to serve and file with

the Court written objections to his proposed findings. 

Subsequently, the plaintiff filed her objections, asking this

Court to reject the findings of the magistrate judge. The defendant

did not file a response.

After carefully reviewing the findings, record, case law, and

Plaintiff’s objections, the Court concludes that the findings should

be and are hereby ADOPTED as the findings and conclusions of this

Court for the reasons stated therein.

Therefore, the Commissioner’s decision is AFFIRMED. 

SIGNED May 3, 2006.

 

 Case 4:05-cv-00436-Y Document 20 Filed 05/03/06 Page 1 of 1 PageID 104
14574S TRUST LLC, Appellant, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., Appellee.

No. 3D17-2567

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed February 27, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
J.M. and T.B., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. DEPT. OF CHILDREN & FAMILIES, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-1716

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 08, 2019

BY ORDER OF THE COURT:

Petitioners' petition for writ of prohibition is denied. Petitioners' "Motion to Supplement Record" is denied.

LaROSE, C.J., and CASANUEVA and ATKINSON, JJ., Concur.
EX PARTE J.S.

(In re: the Adoption Petition of E.S.H. and S.M.H.)

2160867

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

August 18, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. dismissed.
EX PARTE Devaris Cornez BROWNING

1160900 (CR-15-1400)

Supreme Court of Alabama.

August 11, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Cert. denied.
#### The Hollywood Development and Harbor Company, a Florida Corporation, Appellant, v. Patrick B. Nugent, *Appellee.*

Division B.

Decision Filed July 22, 1927.

Petition for Rehearing Denied October 5, 1927.

*McCwne, Casey, Hiaasen & Fleming*and *Dudley A. Wilson,*for Appellant;

*Willard & Knight*and *A. C. Dressier,*for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the decree herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said decree; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said decree of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 21.1


SUBSIDIARIES OF TRAVELCENTERS OF AMERICA, INC.

Name                                               Jurisdiction of Incorporation
----                                               -----------------------------

TA Operating Corporation                           Delaware
d/b/a TravelCenters of America

TA Franchise Systems Inc.                          Delaware

SUBSIDIARIES OF TA OPERATING CORPORATION
Name                                               Jurisdiction of Incorporation
----                                               -----------------------------

TA Travel, L.L.C.                                  Delaware
TA Licensing, Inc.                                 Delaware
TravelCenters Realty, L.L.C.                       Delaware
TravelCenters Properties, L.P.                     Delaware
(TA Operating Corporation is the 1% General
Partner and TravelCenters Realty, Inc. is the
99% Limited Partner of TravelCenters Properties,
L.P.)

370300 Nova Scotia Company                         Nova Scotia, Canada

SUBSIDIARIES OF 370300 NOVA SCOTIA COMPANY
Name                                               Jurisdiction of Incorporation
----                                               -----------------------------

TravelCentres Canada Inc.                          Ontario, Canada
TravelCentres Canada Limited Partnership           Ontario, Canada
(TravelCentres Canada Inc. is the 1% General
Partner and 370300 Nova Scotia Company is the
99% Limited Partner of TravelCentres Canada
Limited Partnership)
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Language Line Holdings, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Matthew T. Gibbs II, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|(iii) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
|----- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(iv) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Language Line Holdings, Inc.
|---- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: May 12, 2005



/s/ Matthew T. Gibbs IIMatthew T. Gibbs IIChief Financial Officer and Director(Principal Financial Officer)




The foregoing certification is
being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of this Report.



21
Case 2:05-cv-00234-J Document 6 Filed 09/14/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 17
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Department of Justice Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-1474]
 AGENCY: Drug Enforcement Administration, Justice.
 ACTION: Notice of application.
 SUMMARY: Invizyne Technologies, Inc. has applied to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of basic class(es) of controlled substance(s). Refer to Supplementary Information listed below for further drug information.
 DATES: Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic class(es), and applicants, therefore, may submit electronic comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration on or before March 24, 2025. Such persons may also file a written request for a hearing on the application on or before March 24, 2025.
 ADDRESSES: The Drug Enforcement Administration requires that all comments be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal, which provides the ability to type short comments directly into the comment field on the web page or attach a file for lengthier comments. Please go to 
                        *https://www.regulations.gov*
                         and follow the online instructions at that site for submitting comments. Upon submission of your comment, you will receive a Comment Tracking Number. Please be 
                        ( print page 7174)
                        aware that submitted comments are not instantaneously available for public view on 
                        *https://www.regulations.gov.*
                         If you have received a Comment Tracking Number, your comment has been successfully submitted and there is no need to resubmit the same comment.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33(a), this is notice that on November 14, 2024, Invizyne Technologies, Inc., 750 Royal Oaks Drive, Suite 106, Monrovia, California 91016-6357 applied to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of the following basic class(es) of controlled substance(s): Controlled substance
Drug code
ScheduleTetrahydrocannabinols
7370
I
 The company plans to bulk manufacture the listed controlled substance for the internal use intermediates or for sale to its customers. In reference to drug code 7370 (Tetrahydrocannabinols), the company plans to bulk manufacture this drug as synthetic. No other activity for this drug code is authorized for this registration. Matthew Strait, Deputy Assistant Administrator.


[FR Doc. 2025-01347 Filed 1-17-25; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
- /usr/local/bin/fax/tiff_tmp/als/304cv00625/00074001.tif
- /usr/local/bin/fax/tiff_tmp/als/304cv00625/00074002.tif
- /usr/local/bin/fax/tiff_tmp/als/304cv00625/00074003.tif
- /usr/local/bin/fax/tiff_tmp/als/304cv00625/00074004.tif
- /usr/local/bin/fax/tiff_tmp/als/304cv00625/00074005.tif
- /usr/local/bin/fax/tiff_tmp/als/304cv00625/00074006.tif
- /usr/local/bin/fax/tiff_tmp/als/304cv00625/00074007.tif
- /usr/local/bin/fax/tiff_tmp/als/304cv00625/00074008.tif
- /usr/local/bin/fax/tiff_tmp/als/304cv00625/00074009.tif
- /usr/local/bin/fax/tiff_tmp/als/304cv00625/00074010.tif
- /usr/local/bin/fax/tiff_tmp/als/304cv00625/00074011.tif
- /usr/local/bin/fax/tiff_tmp/als/304cv00625/00074012.tif
- /usr/local/bin/fax/tiff_tmp/als/304cv00625/00074013.tif