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

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2052 

To amend section 242 of title 18, United States Code, to forbid the use 

of chokeholds by persons subject to that provision’s prohibitions, and 

for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 28, 2015 

Mr. JEFFRIES (for himself, Ms. BASS, Ms. CLARKE of New York, Mr. CARSON

of Indiana, Mr. RANGEL, Mr. MEEKS, Mr. RICHMOND, Mr. DANNY K. 

DAVIS of Illinois, Ms. NORTON, Mr. CLAY, Mr. DAVID SCOTT of Georgia, 

Ms. WILSON of Florida, Ms. BROWN of Florida, Mr. HASTINGS, Ms. 

FUDGE, Ms. KELLY of Illinois, Mr. LEWIS, Ms. SEWELL of Alabama, Ms. 

LEE, Mr. SERRANO, and Mr. PAYNE) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend section 242 of title 18, United States Code, to 

forbid the use of chokeholds by persons subject to that 

provision’s prohibitions, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Excessive Use of Force 

5 Prevention Act of 2015’’. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2052 IH

1 SEC. 2. CHOKEHOLDS AS CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS. 

2 Section 242 of title 18, United States Code, is 

3 amended by adding at the end the following: ‘‘For the pur4 poses of this section, the application of any pressure to 

5 the throat or windpipe which may prevent or hinder 

6 breathing or reduce intake of air is a punishment, pain, 

7 or penalty’’. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Douglas E. Lee, Appellant.

(Appeal No. 2.)

[946 NYS2d 525]

Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (Alex R. Renzi, J.), rendered October 5, 2005. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted burglary in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Same memorandum as in *People v Lee*(96 AD3d 1522 [2012]). Present — Scudder, P.J., Centra, Peradotto, Lindley and Martoche, JJ.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, March 31, 2016.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of

the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, March 31, 2016

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A16D0293. DAVID COHEN v. JOSEPH ROGERS, JR..

Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be

hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of this

order. The Clerk of State Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record

transmitted to the Court of Appeals.

LC NUMBERS:

12EV015804
**Exhibit 8.1**

 

List of Subsidiaries*

 

Mega Retail Ltd.

 

Dor Alon Energy in Israel (1988) Ltd.

 

Blue Square Real Estate Ltd.

 

Eden Briut Teva Market Ltd.

 

Bee Group Retail Ltd.

 

Naaman Group (N.V.) Ltd.

 

Diners Club Israel Ltd.

 

Dor Alon Gas Technology Ltd.

 

Dor Alon Retail Sites Management Ltd.

 

Alon Cellular Ltd.

 

Kfar Hasha'ashuim Toy Chain Stores Ltd.

 

*All of our subsidiaries are incorporatedin Israel
#### STONE, Appellant, v. STONE et al., Respondents.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

November 13, 1896.)

Action by Andros B. Stone against Georgiana C. Stone and another.

G. C. Lay, for appellant.

A. Jaretzki, for respondents.

No opinion. Order reversed, without costs, and motion granted so far as to allow the appellant to serve a new case within 20 days after the entry of the order hereon; subsequent proceedings to be as though no case except this particular case had ever been served. See 39 N. Y. Supp. 1133, and 40 N. Y. Supp. 1150.
EXHIBIT 32.1




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 the Quarterly Report of Power Sports Factory, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Shawn Landgraf, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge: (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.




/s/ Shawn LandgrafShawn LandgrafChief Executive Officer





June 23, 2010
### NUMBER 13
- 1 4 - 00 601 - CV 

## COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI
- EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________ AGUA SPECIAL UTILITY DISTRICT , A ppellant ,

v.
JUAN M. VILLARREAL A ND GLORICA VILLARREAL , A ppellee s .

____________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 8

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________



## MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Garza

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam Appellant filed an appeal from a judgment entered by the County Court at Law No.
8 of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number CCD

- 0122

- H . Appellant has filed a n

am ended motion to dismiss the appeal on grounds it no longer wishes to pursue the appeal

. The certificate of conference reflects that appellant was unable to confer with2

appellee s because appellant does not have a valid phone number or electronic mail
addre ss or facsimile number for appellee s

. The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant ’ s motion to dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 42.1(a). Appellant ’ s motion to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is hereby
DISMISSED. There being no agreement in the motion regarding costs, pursuant to Rule 42.1(d) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, all costs are taxed against appellant.
See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 42. 1(d) ("Absent agreement of the parties, the court will tax costs against the appellant."). Having dismissed the appeal at appellant's request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith.

PER CURIAM
D elivered a nd filed t he 12th day of February , 20 15

.
34.810(3). Appellant did not attempt to demonstrate good cause to excuse 

the procedural default on the face of the petition. Further, his claim that 

he is actually innocent of his crimes lacks merit because that claim is 

grounded in legal rather than factual innocence. See Bousley v. United 

States, 523 U.S. 614, 623-24 (1998) (observing that actual innocence 

exception to excusing procedural default is grounded in factual rather 

than legal innocence); Mitchell v. State, 122 Nev. 1269, 1273-74, 149 P.3d 

33, 36 (2006) (observing that lajctual innocence means factual innocence, 

not mere legal insufficiency" (internal quotation marks omitted)). 

Therefore, we conclude that the district court did not err by denying 

appellant's petition as procedurally barred. Accordingly, we 

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 

, C.J. 

Parraguirre 

J. 

Douglas 

cc: Hon. Scott N. Freeman, District Judge 

Joe Tony Torres 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Washoe County District Attorney 

Washoe District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

2 

(0) 1947A
# L_2013032EN.01002301.xml

| 1.2.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 32/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.2.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 32/23

---

Corrigendum to Directive 2009/16/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on port State control

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 131 of 28 May 2009
  )

On page 87, Annex X, second sentence:

for:

‘Point 3 includes examples of deficiencies that may for themselves warrant detention of the ship involved (see Article 19(4)).’

read:

‘Point 3 includes examples of deficiencies that may for themselves warrant detention of the ship involved (see Article 19(3)).’.

---
953 S.W.2d 234 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997). 1

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. PD-0861-07

JASON EARL WOOLEY, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

ON APPELLANT’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

FROM THE FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

HARRIS COUNTY

MEYERS, J., filed a concurring opinion.

CONCURRING OPINION 

The factual-sufficiency review standard has been continuously criticized for being

virtually indistinguishable from the legal-sufficiency standard of review. See Marshall v.

State, 210 S.W.3d 618, 625 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). Now, the majority unnecessarily

muddles the waters even more by applying the Malik rule to factual sufficiency. I agree 1

with the statement in Judge Hedges’ concurring opinion that, “The reasoning in
Wooley Concurrence - 2

Wooley v. State, 223 S.W.3d 732, 740 (Tex. App.–Houston [14 Dist.] 2007). 2 th

Malik–that the issue in legal sufficiency review is whether the evidence establishes the

essential elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt–is a poor fit in factual

sufficiency analysis. . . .” Although we have never explicitly stated that the Malik rule 2

applied only to legal sufficiency, it seems obvious that a hypothetically correct jury

charge has no place in a factual-sufficiency review. When performing a factualsufficiency analysis, the reviewing court has already determined that the evidence is

legally sufficient as compared to a hypothetically correct jury charge, so there is no need

to examine the elements of the jury charge again. The reviewing court’s sole concern

when performing a factual-sufficiency review should be whether, when weighing all of

the evidence, the evidence supporting the verdict is so weak as to render the verdict

clearly wrong or manifestly unjust, or whether, considering conflicting evidence, the

jury’s verdict is against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence. Watson v.

State, 204 S.W.3d 404, 415 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). 

Although I disagree with adjusting the factual-sufficiency review standard once

again, I do agree that, after examining all of the evidence presented at trial and viewed in

a neutral light, the evidence was factually sufficient to support Appellant’s conviction. 

Therefore, I concur with the majority’s judgment, but not its reasoning.

Meyers, J.

Filed: June 25, 2008

Publish
# L_2009145EN.01001501.xml

| 10.6.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 145/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.6.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 145/15

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 481/2009

of 9 June 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 10 June 2009.

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

Done at Brussels, 9 June 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 | MA | 32,7 |
| MK | 43,9 |
| TR | 53,5 |
| ZZ | 43,4 |
| 0707 00 05 | JO | 162,3 |
| MK | 24,8 |
| TR | 118,1 |
| ZZ | 101,7 |
| 0709 90 70 | TR | 111,0 |
| ZZ | 111,0 |
| 0805 50 10 | AR | 69,4 |
| TR | 60,0 |
| ZA | 64,5 |
| ZZ | 64,6 |
| 0808 10 80 | AR | 81,1 |
| BR | 71,1 |
| CA | 69,7 |
| CL | 80,1 |
| CN | 88,3 |
| NA | 101,9 |
| NZ | 97,9 |
| US | 115,8 |
| ZA | 77,5 |
| ZZ | 87,0 |
| 0809 10 00 | TN | 161,5 |
| TR | 173,7 |
| ZZ | 167,6 |
| 0809 20 95 | TR | 177,9 |
| US | 453,6 |
| ZZ | 315,8 |

(EUR/100 kg)

CN code

Third country code (1)

Standard import value

0702 00 00

MA

32,7

MK

43,9

TR

53,5

ZZ

43,4

0707 00 05

JO

162,3

MK

24,8

TR

118,1

ZZ

101,7

0709 90 70

TR

111,0

ZZ

111,0

0805 50 10

AR

69,4

TR

60,0

ZA

64,5

ZZ

64,6

0808 10 80

AR

81,1

BR

71,1

CA

69,7

CL

80,1

CN

88,3

NA

101,9

NZ

97,9

US

115,8

ZA

77,5

ZZ

87,0

0809 10 00

TN

161,5

TR

173,7

ZZ

167,6

0809 20 95

TR

177,9

US

453,6

ZZ

315,8

---

(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’.

---
WILBORN LAW OFFICE, P.C. 

TIM WILBORN, Attorney at Law - OSB # 944644 

tim@wilbornlaw.com 

P.O. Box 370578 

Las Vegas, NV 89137 

Voice: (702) 240-0184 

Fax: (503) 926-9133 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

TONY SMITH, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF OREGON 

COMMISSIONER of Social Security, 

Defendant. 

Case No. 3:16-cv-00188-KI 

ORDER 

Attorney fees in the amount of$7,100.26 are hereby awarded to Plaintiff pursuant to the 

Equal Access To Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). Subject to any offset allowed under the Treasury 

Offset Program, payment of this award shall be made via check sent to Tim Wilborn's address: P.O. 

Box 370578, Las Vegas, NV 89137. In accordance with the fee assignment which Plaintiff has 

signed, payment shall be made in Tim Wilborn's name if no debt subject to offset exists. 

DATEDthis~dayof A=v1 VZj4- ,2017. 

Submitted on May 18, 2017 by: 

s/ Tim Wilborn 

TIM WILBORN, OSB # 944644 

(702) 240-0184 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

ORDER - Page 1
Order entered October 26, 2020

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05
- 20
- 00847
- CV IN THE INTEREST OF N.K.R.M., A CHILD On Appeal from the 256th Judicial District Court

Da llas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF
- 17
- 20137

ORDER Before the Court is appellant’s motion for extension of time to file his notice of appeal

. We GRANT the motion and deem the notice of appeal filed September 18, 2020 timely for jurisdictional pu rposes. We ORDER Glenda Finkley, Official Court Reporter for the 256 th Judicial District Court, to file the reporter’s record no later than November 30, 2020.
We DIRECT the Clerk of the Court to send a copy of this order to Ms. Finkley and the parties.
/s / ERIN A. NOWELL JUSTICE
RIO CHAMA BELOW EL VADO DAMLatitude: 36.58Longitude: -106.725Elevation: 6705

RIO CHAMA BELOW EL VADO DAM

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Chamita Site Page...



Chamita

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Cumbres Trestle Site Page...



Cumbres Trestle

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Hopewell Site Page...



Hopewell
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1825 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1825

      To direct the Administrator of the Transportation Security 
  Administration to prohibit certain employees of the Transportation 
 Security Administration from using the title of ``officer'' and from 
 wearing metal badges or uniforms resembling those of law enforcement 
                               officers.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 15, 2015

Mr. Rooney of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                 to the Committee on Homeland Security

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
      To direct the Administrator of the Transportation Security 
  Administration to prohibit certain employees of the Transportation 
 Security Administration from using the title of ``officer'' and from 
 wearing metal badges or uniforms resembling those of law enforcement 
                               officers.

    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 ``Stop TSA Abuses Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON CERTAIN EMPLOYEES OF THE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY 
              ADMINISTRATION USING THE TITLE ``OFFICER'' AND WEARING 
              METAL BADGES OR UNIFORMS RESEMBLING THOSE OF LAW 
              ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS.

    (a) In General.--The Administrator of the Transportation Security 
Administration) shall prohibit any employee of the Transportation 
Security Administration described in subsection (b) who is not a sworn 
law enforcement officer with arresting authority and who has not 
successfully completed Federal, State, or local law enforcement 
training from--
            (1) using the official job title of ``officer''; or
            (2) wearing a metal badge resembling a police badge or a 
        uniform resembling the uniform of a Federal law enforcement 
        officer.
    (b) Employees Described.--An employee described in this subsection 
is any of the following:
            (1) Checkpoint Transportation Security Officer.
            (2) Checked Baggage Transportation Security Officer.
            (3) Travel Document Checker.
            (4) Behavior Detection Officer.
            (5) Transportation Security Specialist--Explosives.
            (6) Any other employee the Administrator of the 
        Transportation Security Administration determines appropriate.
                                 <all>
```
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D19-1554

_____________________________

DAVID EARL EALEY,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Linda F. McCallum, Judge.

October 17, 2019

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

RAY, C.J., and MAKAR and KELSEY, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________

David Earl Ealey, pro se, Appellant.
2

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Michael McDermott, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
<PAGE>

Exhibit 32.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Michael D. Dale, Chief Executive Officer of ATS Medical, Inc., certify,
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, that:

The Annual Report of Form 10-K of the Company for the annual period ended
December 31, 2003 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and

The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: March 15, 2004


       /s/ Michael D. Dale
       -----------------------
Name:  Michael D. Dale
Title: Chief Executive Officer
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.                  

###### Susquehanna River Basin Commission

# AGENCY:

Susquehanna River Basin Commission.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

                        This notice lists Grandfathering Registration for projects by the Susquehanna River Basin Commission during the period set forth in                         **DATES**                        .                    

# DATES:

August 1-31, 2021.

# ADDRESSES:

Susquehanna River Basin Commission, 4423 North Front Street, Harrisburg, PA 17110-1788.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Jason E. Oyler, General Counsel and Secretary to the Commission, telephone: (717) 238-0423, ext. 1312; fax: (717) 238-2436; email:                         *joyler@srbc.net.*                         Regular mail inquiries May be sent to the above address.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    This notice lists GF Registration for projects, described below, pursuant to 18 CFR 806, Subpart E for the time period specified above:                     *Grandfathering Registration Under 18 CFR part 806, Subpart E:*

1. ITG Cigars Inc.—McAdoo Facility, GF Certificate No. GF-202108180, Banks Township, Carbon County, Pa.; Wells 5 and 6 and consumptive use; Issue Date: August 6, 2021.

2. Bedford Elks Country Club, GF Certificate No. GF-202108181, Bedford Township, Bedford County, Pa.; consumptive use; Issue Date: August 6, 2021.

3. Wise Foods, Inc.—Berwick Facility, GF Certificate No. GF-202108182, Berwick Borough, Columbia County, Pa.; consumptive use; Issue Date: August 6, 2021.

Dated: September 9, 2021.

Jason E. Oyler,

General Counsel and Secretary to the Commission.

[FR Doc. 2021-19768 Filed 9-13-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7040-01-P
# C_2022117EN.01035001.xml

| 11.3.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 117/350 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.3.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 117/350

---

P9_TA(2021)0380

European Investigation Order in criminal matters: alignment with EU rules on the protection of personal data ***I

European Parliament decision of 16 September 2021 referring the matter to the committee responsible for interinstitutional negotiations on the basis of the unamended proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2014/41/EU, as regards its alignment with EU rules on the protection of personal data (COM(2021)0021 — C9-0006/2021 — 2021/0009(COD)) (1)

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

(2022/C 117/32)

---

(1)  Decision adopted under Rule 59(4), fourth subparagraph, of the Rules of Procedure (A9-0237/2021).

---