alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2009271EN.01000601.xml

| 16.10.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 271/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.10.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 271/6

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 964/2009

of 15 October 2009

entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Raviole du Dauphiné (PGI))

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 7(4) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, France’s application to register the name ‘Raviole du Dauphiné’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, France’s application to register the name ‘Raviole du Dauphiné’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

| (2) | As no statement of objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, this name should be entered in the register, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

As no statement of objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, this name should be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name contained in the Annex to this Regulation is hereby entered in the register.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20th day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 15 October 2009.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12.

1

(2)  
  OJ C 3, 8.1.2009, p. 17.

2

---

ANNEX

Foodstuffs listed in Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 510/2006:

Class 2.7.   Pasta

FRANCE

Raviole du Dauphiné (PGI)

---
CHIEF JUSTICE

ROGELIO VALDEZ

JUSTICES

NELDA V. RODRIGUEZ

DORI CONTRERAS GARZA

GINA M. BENAVIDES

GREGORY T. PERKES

NORA L. LONGORIA

CLERK

CECILE FOY GSANGER NUECES COUNTY COURTH OUSE

901 LEOPARD, 10TH FL OOR

CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS 78401

361

- 888

- 0416 (TEL)

361

- 888

- 0794 (FAX)

HIDALGO COUNTY

ADMINISTRATION BLDG.

100 E. CANO, 5TH FLO OR

EDINBURG, TEXAS 7853 9

956

- 318

- 2405 (TEL)

956

- 318

- 2403 (FAX)

www.txcourts.gov/13thcoa 

# Court of Appeals

Thirteenth District of Texas

August 5, 2015

Hon. Roberto D. Puente

Attorney at Law

1315 W. Polk, Ste. 24

Pharr, TX 78577

* DELIVERED VIA E

- MAIL * Hon. Ricardo P. Rodriguez

Hidalgo County District Attorney

100 N. Closner

Edinburg, TX 78539

* DELIVERED VIA E

- MAIL *

Re: Cause No. 13

- 15

- 00166

- CR

Tr.Ct.No. CR

- 3747

- 14

- H

Style: Jorge Luis Gonzalez v. The State of Texas

Appellant’s motion for leave to file brief in the above cause was this day

GRANTED by this Court. The brief has been ordered filed as of July 31, 201 5, the date

of receipt.

Very truly yours,

Cecile Foy Gsanger, Clerk

CFG:ch
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                           5,678
<SECURITIES>                                    10,009
<RECEIVABLES>                                    9,328
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      3,284
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                28,603
<PP&E>                                           2,951
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  32,343
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,938
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        26,171
<OTHER-SE>                                     (2,766)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    32,343
<SALES>                                          9,157
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 9,157
<CGS>                                            2,325
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    7,001
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (227)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     58
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 58
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        58
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .01
        

</TABLE>
# L_2009262EN.01003601.xml

| 6.10.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 262/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.10.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 262/36

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 927/2009

of 5 October 2009

establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 of 21 December 2007 laying down implementing rules for Council Regulations (EC) No 2200/96, (EC) No 2201/96 and (EC) No 1182/2007 in the fruit and vegetable sector (2), and in particular Article 138(1) thereof,

Whereas:

Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in Annex XV, Part A thereto,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The standard import values referred to in Article 138 of Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 are fixed in the Annex hereto.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 6 October 2009.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 5 October 2009.

For the Commission

Jean-Luc DEMARTY

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 350, 31.12.2007, p. 1.

2

---

ANNEX

Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

| (EUR/100 kg) |
| --- |
| CN code | Third country code (1) | Standard import value |
| 0702 00 00 | MK | 32,3 |
| ZZ | 32,3 |
| 0707 00 05 | TR | 114,4 |
| ZZ | 114,4 |
| 0709 90 70 | TR | 109,3 |
| ZZ | 109,3 |
| 0805 50 10 | AR | 71,1 |
| CL | 103,4 |
| TR | 84,6 |
| UY | 88,0 |
| ZA | 70,3 |
| ZZ | 83,5 |
| 0806 10 10 | BR | 235,1 |
| EG | 159,5 |
| TR | 94,4 |
| US | 152,0 |
| ZZ | 160,3 |
| 0808 10 80 | BR | 63,5 |
| CL | 85,7 |
| NZ | 44,5 |
| US | 80,9 |
| ZA | 66,2 |
| ZZ | 68,2 |
| 0808 20 50 | AR | 82,8 |
| CN | 51,8 |
| TR | 97,2 |
| ZA | 79,8 |
| ZZ | 77,9 |

(EUR/100 kg)

CN code

Third country code (1)

Standard import value

0702 00 00

MK

32,3

ZZ

32,3

0707 00 05

TR

114,4

ZZ

114,4

0709 90 70

TR

109,3

ZZ

109,3

0805 50 10

AR

71,1

CL

103,4

TR

84,6

UY

88,0

ZA

70,3

ZZ

83,5

0806 10 10

BR

235,1

EG

159,5

TR

94,4

US

152,0

ZZ

160,3

0808 10 80

BR

63,5

CL

85,7

NZ

44,5

US

80,9

ZA

66,2

ZZ

68,2

0808 20 50

AR

82,8

CN

51,8

TR

97,2

ZA

79,8

ZZ

77,9

---

(1)  Nomenclature of countries laid down by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1833/2006 (OJ L 354, 14.12.2006, p. 19). Code ‘
  ZZ
  ’ stands for ‘of other origin’.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1927 Reported in House (RH)]

<DOC>

                                                 Union Calendar No. 249
114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1927

                          [Report No. 114-328]

  To amend title 28, United States Code, to improve fairness in class 
                           action litigation.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 22, 2015

 Mr. Goodlatte (for himself and Mr. Franks of Arizona) introduced the 
  following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

                            November 5, 2015

  Reported with an amendment, committed to the Committee of the Whole 
       House on the State of the Union, and ordered to be printed
 [Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the part printed 
                               in italic]
 [For text of introduced bill, see copy of bill as introduced on April 
                               22, 2015]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend title 28, United States Code, to improve fairness in class 
                           action litigation.

 

    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 ``Fairness in Class Action Litigation 
Act of 2015''.

SEC. 2. CLASS MEMBER INJURY REQUIRED.

    (a) In General.--No Federal court shall certify any proposed class 
seeking monetary relief for personal injury or economic loss unless the 
party seeking to maintain such a class action affirmatively 
demonstrates that each proposed class member suffered the same type and 
scope of injury as the named class representative or representatives.
    (b) Certification Order.--An order issued under Rule 23(c)(1) of 
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that certifies a class seeking 
monetary relief for personal injury or economic loss shall include a 
determination, based on a rigorous analysis of the evidence presented, 
that the requirement in subsection (a) of this section is satisfied.
                                                 Union Calendar No. 249

114th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 1927

                          [Report No. 114-328]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

  To amend title 28, United States Code, to improve fairness in class 
                           action litigation.

_______________________________________________________________________

                            November 5, 2015

  Reported with an amendment, committed to the Committee of the Whole 
       House on the State of the Union, and ordered to be printed
```
#### Robert Kurz et al., Appellants, v John E. Nicolo, Respondent.

— Order unanimously affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: The court properly granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint in this action to recover damages for fraud. The complaint alleges that when the parties entered into a contract for the purchase by plaintiff of land owned by defendant, defendant misrepresented the boundary of the land and concealed from plaintiff the fact that a portion of the land had been appropriated by the State for widening of the adjacent highway. In support of the motion for summary judgment, defendant submitted proof in evidentiary form that he did not misrepresent the boundary of the land and that at the time the contract was signed he gave plaintiff a prior deed of the property containing a description of the land and setting forth, as an exception, the portion appropriated by the State. In opposition to the motion, plaintiff failed to meet his burden by submitting clear and convincing evidence of fraudulent misrepresentations by defendant *(see, Rudman v Cowles Communications,*30 NY2d 1, 10; *Cave v Green,*281 App Div 560, 562, *affd*308 NY 754).

The conclusory statement in plaintiff’s affidavit that defendant “showed me the north boundary along the highway” is not clear and convincing proof of false misrepresentation. Moreover, the facts allegedly misrepresented were not peculiarly within defendant’s knowledge and plaintiff had the means available to him of knowing, by the exercise of ordinary intelligence, the truth concerning the description and boundary of the land. Having failed to make use of such means, he will not be heard to complain that he was induced to enter into the purchase by misrepresentation *(see, Danann Realty Corp. v Harris,*5 NY2d 317, 322). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Yates County, Kennedy, J. — summary judgment.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Boomer, Green, Balio and Lawton, JJ.
## United States Court of Appeals **For the Eighth Circuit**

___________________________
No. 20

- 1196

___________________________
United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

v.
Troyce Allen Lewis

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant

____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Waterloo

____________
Submitted: August 17, 2020 Filed: August 20, 202 0 [Unpublished]

____________ Before ERICKSON, STRAS, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

After considering a number of factors, t he district court 1 decided not to reduce Troyce Lewis’s 240

- month prison sentence under the First Step Act

. S ee Pub. L.

1 The Honorable Linda R. Reade, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa.-2- No. 115

- 391, 132 Stat. 5194 (2018)

. Though he challenges the decision on a host of grounds, we affirm.

On the merits, w e conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion.
See United States v. McDonald , 944 F.3d 769, 771

– 72 (8th Cir. 2019) (discussing
the standard of review and outlining the two

- step analysis for motions under the First Step Act). The First Step Act did not require the court to reduce Lewis’s sentence

, even if he was eligible

. § 404(c) , 132 Stat. at 522 2 (“Nothing in this section shall be construed to require a court to reduce any sentence pursuant to this section.”). And
the co urt did its job by considering the statutory sentencing factors before making
its decision

. See 18 U.S.C. § 355 3(a).

We also conclude that Lewis’s remaining arguments lack merit

. District courts are not required to hold a hearing on sentence

- reduction motions

, s ee United
States v. Williams , 943 F.3d 841, 84 3– 44 (8th Cir. 2019), and there has been no
violation of Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000). Nor was the new statutory

- minimum sentence authorized by the First Step Act retroactively applicable to him

. See § 401(c) , 132 Stat. at 5221

.

We accordingly affirm the judgment of the district court and deny his pending
motion as moot

.

______________________________
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON 

MEDFORD DIVISION 

ENTERTAINMENT RADIO NETWORK, 

LLC; BENCHMARK ENTERTAINMENT, 

LLC; and ALAN MASTERS, a.k.a. ALAN 

TAYLOR, 

Plaintiffs, 

vs. 

TIME, INC., 

Defendant. 

AIKEN, Judge: 

No. 1:15-cv-01916-CL 

ORDER 

Magistrate Judge Clarke filed a Report and Recommendation on May 18, 2016. The matter 

is now before me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(C) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). Objections 

have been filed, so this Court makes a "de novo determination of those portions of the report ... to 

which objection is made." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(C); accord Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); Holder v. 

1 -ORDER 

Case 1:15-cv-01916-CL Document 47 Filed 09/05/16 Page 1 of 2
Holder, 392 FJd 1009, 1022 (9th Cir. 2004). 

I have reviewed this matter de novo and find no error. Accordingly, I ADOPT the Report and 

Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Clarke (doc. 39). Defendant's Motion to Dismiss for Lack 

of Jurisdiction (doc. 18) is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. . ~ 

Dated this5~ of~6. 

Ann Aiken 

United States District Judge 

2-0RDER 

Case 1:15-cv-01916-CL Document 47 Filed 09/05/16 Page 2 of 2
Flow Ad-Hoc Group

Charge to create a process to amend the HFE protocol

Sinjin Eberle, American Rivers Southwest Communications Director, Nam

With assistance from: Laura Dye, Mel Fegler, Cliff Barrett, Ted Rampton, Ben Reeder, Betsy Morgan, Shane 

Capron, Charlie Ferrantelli, Christina Noftsker, Colleen Cunningham, Craig Ellsworth, Dan Leavitt, Emily 

Higuera, Helen Fairley, Jim Strogen, Kelly Burke, Larry Stevens, Leslie James, Michelle Garrison, Rob Billerbeck, 

Ryan Mann, Seth Shanahan, Scott McGettigan, Shana Rapoport, Scott Vanderkooi, David Topping, Andrew 

Schultz, Paul Grams, Clarence Fullard, Craig Ellsworth, and Ted Kennedy
Our Charge

The FLAHG is charged with working with GCMRC to draft an outline and a full proposal 

for amending the HFE protocol. In doing so, the FLAHG should consider the information 

developed by GCMRC in response to the Secretary’s Designee’s August 18, 2022 

request to evaluate high-flow experiments under low-elevations/low-flows and any 

other pertinent information to evaluate the accounting window.

The proposal should consider the science, approach, and compliance elements that 

may be needed to make changes to the protocol. An outline of the proposal is 

requested by the Spring TWG meeting and the full proposal by the Summer TWG 

meeting.
Outline/Proposed Plan of Action

1. Develop problem/needs statement(s)

2. Literature review/compilation

3. Identify relevant sections of LTEMP for analysis/change

- Identify obstacles within LTEMP that could prevent HFE Implementation

- Outline proposed fixes from GCMRC to address the problem/needs

4. Identify areas of “unacceptable” impact.

5. Flag compliance potholes
Activities to date

• Scheduled and Conducted a 

Kickoff Call (Thank you, 24 attendees!)

• Set up central Google Drive 

Folder – document 

repository

• Distributed Notes from the 

Kickoff Call

• Consulted with Solicitor 

regarding the 

charge/compliance

• Set up (and conducted –

THX Rob B!) LTEMP Review 

meeting as requested by 

FLAHG sub-team (4/10)

SM
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

WILLIAM ESTRADA,

 

 Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

 State.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-15-00271-CR

Appeal from the

205th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas 

(TC# 20130D01284)

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the State’s third motion for extension of time within which to file 

the brief until August 3, 2016. NO FURTHER MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO 

FILE THE STATE’S BRIEF WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that the Hon. Jaime E. Esparza, the State’s attorney, prepare the 

State’s brief and forward the same to this Court on or before August 3, 2016.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 17th day of June, 2016.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez and Hughes, JJ.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1823 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1823

   To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow the mortgage 
 interest deduction with respect to boats only if the boat is used as 
                the principal residence of the taxpayer.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 15, 2015

  Mr. Quigley (for himself, Mr. Aguilar, and Mr. Ruiz) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow the mortgage 
 interest deduction with respect to boats only if the boat is used as 
                the principal residence of the taxpayer.

    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 ``Ending Taxpayer Subsidies for Yachts 
Act''.

SEC. 2. MORTGAGE INTEREST DEDUCTION ALLOWED WITH RESPECT TO BOATS ONLY 
              IF BOAT IS USED AS THE PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE OF THE 
              TAXPAYER.

    (a) In General.--Section 163(h)(4)(A)(i)(II) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting ``(other than a boat)'' 
after ``1 other residence of the taxpayer''.
    (b) Effective Date.--
            (1) In general.--The amendment made by this section shall 
        apply to indebtedness incurred after the date of the enactment 
        of this Act.
            (2) Special rule for refinancings.--For purposes of this 
        subsection, indebtedness resulting from the refinancing of 
        indebtedness shall be treated as incurred on the date the 
        refinanced indebtedness was incurred (taking into account the 
        application of this paragraph in the case of multiple 
        refinancings) but only to the extent the indebtedness resulting 
        from such refinancing does not exceed the refinanced 
        indebtedness.
                                 <all>
```