alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2009102EN.01001301.xml

| 1.5.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 102/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.5.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 102/13

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Commissione Tributaria Provinciale di Alessandria (Italy) lodged on 20 February 2009 — Agra Srl v Agenzia Dogane Ufficio delle Dogane di Alessandria

(Case C-75/09)

2009/C 102/20

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Commissione Tributaria Provinciale di Alessandria

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Agra Srl

Applicant:

Defendant: Agenzia Dogane Ufficio delle Dogane di Alessandria

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

In the light of Article 11 of Legislative Decree No 374/[1990], read in conjunction with Article 221(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2913/1992 and Article 221(4) thereof, regard being had to Article 84(3) of the Consolidated laws on customs matters (Presidential Decree No 43/1973), is the right of the Customs Authority to revise the assessment [of the customs debt] time-barred, and/or has it lapsed, on the expiry of the three-year period from the date of the customs declaration, or can those time-limits be interrupted and/or suspended pending the outcome of criminal proceedings for infringement of the customs rules in relation to the assessment?

---
# C_2010288EN.01006604.xml

| 23.10.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 288/66 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.10.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 288/66

---

Order of the General Court of 6 September 2010 — Carlyle v OHIM — MRP Consult (CAFE CARLYLE)

(Case T-505/09) (1)

()

(2010/C 288/121)

Language of the case: English

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

---

(1)  OJ C 51, 27.2.2010.

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-7823

MICHAEL G. OUTTERBRIDGE,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

RONALD ANGELONE,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CA-98-1541-AM)

Submitted: April 15, 1999 Decided: April 19, 1999

Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael G. Outterbridge, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998) petition as

time barred. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s

opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning

of the district court. See Outterbridge v. Angelone, No. CA-98-

1541-AM (E.D. Va. Nov. 3, 1998). We dispense with oral argument

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in

the materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

DISMISSED
H. Res. 175 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

October 22, 2009. 

Whereas in 1982, 1984, 1988, 1990, 1992, 1994, 1996, 

2000, 2006, and 2008, Congress declared that it deplored the religious persecution by the Government of 

Iran of the Baha’i community and would hold the Government of Iran responsible for upholding the rights of 

all Iranian nationals, including members of the Baha’i 

faith; 

Whereas in November 2007, the Iranian Ministry of Information in Shiraz jailed Baha’is Ms. Raha Sabet, 33, Mr. 

Sasan Taqva, 32, and Ms. Haleh Roohi, 29 for ostensibly 

‘‘indirectly teaching the Baha’i Faith’’ and ‘‘engaging in 

anti-government propaganda’’ while educating underprivileged children and gave them 4-year prison terms, which 

they are serving; 

Whereas Ms. Sabet, Mr. Taqva, and Ms. Rooshi were targeted solely on the basis of their religion; 

Whereas, on January 23, 2008, the United States Department of State released a statement urging the Iranian regime to release all individuals held without due process 

and a fair trial, including the 3 young Baha’is being held 

in an Iranian Ministry of Intelligence detention center in 

Shiraz; 
2 

•HRES 175 EH 

Whereas in March and May of 2008, Iranian intelligence officials in Mashhad and Tehran arrested and imprisoned 

Mrs. Fariba Kamalabadi, Mr. Jamaloddin Khanjani, Mr. 

Afif Naeimi, Mr. Saeid Rezaie, Mr. Behrouz Tavakkoli, 

Mrs. Mahvash Sabet, and Mr. Vahid Tizfahm, the members of the coordinating group for the Baha’i community 

in Iran; 

Whereas these seven leaders have been imprisoned for well 

over a year and are yet to stand trial, the trial having 

been delayed multiple times; 

Whereas official Iranian media has announced they will face 

charges of ‘‘espionage for Israel, insulting religious sanctities and propaganda against the Islamic Republic’’; 

Whereas these seven Baha’i leaders were targeted solely on 

the basis of their religion; and 

Whereas the Government of Iran is party to the International 

Covenants on Human Rights: Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

(1) condemns the Government of Iran for its statesponsored persecution of its Baha’i minority and its continued violation of the International Covenants on 

Human Rights; 

(2) calls on the Government of Iran to immediately 

release the seven leaders and all other prisoners held 

solely on account of their religion, including: Mrs. Fariba 

Kamalabadi, Mr. Jamaloddin Khanjani, Mr. Afif 

Naeimi, Mr. Saeid Rezaie, Mr. Behrouz Tavakkoli, Mrs. 
3 

•HRES 175 EH 

Mahvash Sabet, Mr. Vahid Tizfahm, Ms. Raha Sabet, 

Mr. Sasan Taqva, and Ms. Haleh Roohi; and 

(3) calls on the President and Secretary of State, 

in cooperation with responsible nations, to immediately 

condemn Iran’s continued violation of human rights and 

demand the immediate release of prisoners held solely on 

account of their religion, including Mrs. Fariba 

Kamalabadi, Mr. Jamaloddin Khanjani, Mr. Afif 

Naeimi, Mr. Saeid Rezaie, Mr. Behrouz Tavakkoli, Mrs. 

Mahvash Sabet, Mr. Vahid Tizfahm, Ms. Raha Sabet, 

Mr. Sasan Taqva, and Ms. Haleh Roohi. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 190 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 190

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                     February 26, 2009.
    Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker 
may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 1106) to prevent mortgage foreclosures and enhance mortgage credit 
availability. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points 
of order against consideration of the bill are waived except those arising under 
clause 9 of rule XXI. General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not 
exceed one hour equally divided among and controlled by the chair and ranking 
minority member of the Committee on Financial Services and the chair and ranking 
minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary. After general debate the bill 
shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. The bill shall be 
considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill are 
waived. Notwithstanding clause 11 of rule XVIII, no amendment to the bill shall 
be in order except those printed in the report of the Committee on Rules 
accompanying this resolution. Each such amendment may be offered only in the 
order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the 
report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified 
in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, 
shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for 
division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. All 
points of order against such amendments are waived except those arising under 
clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for 
amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with such 
amendments as may have been adopted. The previous question shall be considered 
as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without 
intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
Deondre Cordell HIGGINS, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-6066.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for rehearing denied.
II-O0811

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Ava Venturelli <syrn8y@gmail.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 11:09 AM

dfadefinitions <dfadefinitions@CFTC.gov>

Re: No loopholes in Dodd-Frank

1) Securities and Exchange Commission/Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Commercial Risk (CFTC RIN

3235-AK6! SEC File Number $7-12-10)

Dear Commissioners Shapiro and Gensler: Don’t let the American Bankers Association (ABA) redefine important terms like

"commercial risk" to keep banks that engage in risky derivatives trading from complying with transparency and business

conduct requirements. Commercial risk should not be expanded to include financial risk. Accepting the ABA argument

would open the door for exemptions for risky hedge funds and insurance companies.

2) Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Position Limits (RIN 3038-AD 17 )

Dear Commissioner Gensler: The CFTC needs to set strong position limits to crack down on the energy and food commodity

speculation that serves no productive purpose. I urge the Commission to define limits that will address not only manipulation,

but also excessive speculation, which will require a stricter approach.

3) U.S. Department of the Treasury, Re: FX Swaps (75 FR 66426 Document Number 2010-27274)

Dear Secretary Geithner: Just say "no" to foreign exchange traders who want to exempt foreign currency derivatives from the

clearing and transparency requirements of the

Dodd-Frank Act. $4 trillion dollars a day is traded in these highly-leveraged swaps and this number may increase to over $10

trillion in a decade. As the head of the Financial

Stability Oversight Board your job is to decrease risk in the system, not encourage off-book trading and opaque markets.

Ava Venturelli

507 n frederic st

burbank, CA 91505
Mickey RANDLE, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-7049.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
II-00209

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Jennifer Scott <jscott9@comcast.net>

Friday, December 3, 2010 5:29 PM

dfadefinitions <dfadefinitions@CFTC.gov>

Re: No loopholes in Dodd-Frank

1) Securities and Exchange Commission/Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Commercial Risk (CFTC RIN

3235-AK65, SEC File Number $7-12-10)

Dear Commissioners Shapiro and Gensler: Don’t let the American Bankers Association (ABA) redefine important terms like

"commercial risk" to keep banks that engage in risky derivatives trading from complying with transparency and business

conduct requirements. Commercial risk should not be expanded to include financial risk. Accepting the ABA argument

would open the door for exemptions for risky hedge funds and insurance companies.

2) Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Position Limits (RIN 3038-AD 17 )

Dear Commissioner Gensler: The CFTC needs to set strong position limits to crack down on the energy and food commodity

speculation that serves no productive purpose. I urge the Commission to define limits that will address not only manipulation,

but also excessive speculation, which will require a stricter approach.

3) U.S. Department of the Treasury, Re: FX Swaps (75 FR 66426 Document Number 2010-27274)

Dear Secretary Geithner: Just say "no" to foreign exchange traders who want to exempt foreign currency derivatives from the

clearing and transparency requirements of the

Dodd-Frank Act. $4 trillion dollars a day is traded in these highly-leveraged swaps and this number may increase to over $10

trillion in a decade. As the head of the Financial

Stability Oversight Board your job is to decrease risk in the system, not encourage off-book trading and opaque markets.

Jennifer Scott

16100 Dublin Circle #1

Fort Myers, FL 33908
Dante SMALL, petitioner, v. ILLINOIS.

No. 15-9397.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 3, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, denied.
Willie J. CLARK, petitioner, v. LAFAYETTE PLACE LOFTS, et al.

No. 17M84.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 20, 2018.

Motion to direct the Clerk to file a petition for writ of certiorari out of time denied.
Billy Ray SNEED, petitioner, v. Harold W. CLARKE, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections.

No. 17-7292.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 19, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
John M. VUKSICH, petitioner, v. IMAGING3, INC.

No. 15-1334.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 28, 2016.

Petition for rehearing denied.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 121 (Friday, June 22, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33547-33548]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-15757]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; Notice 
of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Child Health and Human 
Development Special Emphasis Panel Workgroup.
    Date: June 27, 2001.
    Time: 1 p.m. to 3 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.
    Place: 6100 Executive Blvd., Room 5E01, Rockville, MD 20852, 
(Telephone Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Hameed Khan, Scientific Review Administrator, 
Division of Scientific Review, National Institute of Child Health 
and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, 6100 Executive 
Blvd., Room 5E01, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 496-1485.
    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and 
funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.209, 
Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program; 93.864, 
Population Research; 93.865; Research for Mothers and Children; 
93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research, National 
Institutes of Health, HHS)


[[Page 33548]]


    Dated: June 18, 2001.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 01-15757 Filed 6-21-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
Motion Granted and Order filed June 11, 2021.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-21-00320-CV

IN RE MICHAELS STORES, INC. D/BA MICHAELS ART & CRAFTS 

#2719, Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

WRIT OF MANDAMUS

157th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2019-23106

ORDER

On June 11, 2021, relator In re Michaels Stores, Inc. d/b/a Michaels Art & 

Crafts #2719 filed a petition for writ of mandamus and an emergency motion for 

temporary relief in this Court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221; see also Tex. 

R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this Court to compel the Honorable 
2

Tanya Garrison, presiding judge of the 157th District Court of Harris County, to 

vacate her Findings and Order on Plaintiff’s Motion for Sanctions dated June 8, 

2021, in trial court cause number 2019-23106, styled Vaculik v. Micahel’s Stores, 

Inc. Relator claims the trial court abused its discretion in granting spoliation 

sanctions. In its emergency motion for temporary relief, relator seeks an order

staying the commencement of trial set for June 14, 2021, while the merits of 

relator’s petition are under consideration by this Court. 

It appears from the facts stated in the petition that relator’s request for relief 

requires further consideration and that relator will be prejudiced unless immediate 

temporary relief is granted. See Tex. R. App. p. 52.8(b), 52.10.

We therefore ORDER that the proceedings, including the commencement of 

trial set for June 14, 2021, of the court below be stayed in trial court cause number 

2019-23106, styled Vaculik v. Michael’s Stores, Inc. Such proceedings are stayed 

until final decision by this Court of relator’s petition for writ of mandamus, or until 

further orders of this Court.

The Court requests a response from the real parties in interest to the petition 

for writ of mandamus on or before 4:00 p.m., on June 16, 2021.

PER CURIAM

Order filed June 11, 2021.
3

Panel consists of Justices Wise, Jewell, and Spain. (J. Spain dissents to the granting 

of the stay.).
# C_2009153EN.01002801.xml

| 4.7.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 153/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.7.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 153/28

---

Action brought on 4 May 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Portuguese Republic

(Case C-154/09)

2009/C 153/52

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: P. Guerra e Andrade and A. Nijenhuis, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Portuguese Republic

Defendant:

Forms of order sought

Forms of order sought

| — | Declare that, by failing to transpose correctly into national law the rules of Community law governing the designation of the universal service provider or providers, and, in any event, by failing to ensure in practice that those rules are applied, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 3(2) and 8(2) of Directive 2002/22/EC. (1) |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare that, by failing to transpose correctly into national law the rules of Community law governing the designation of the universal service provider or providers, and, in any event, by failing to ensure in practice that those rules are applied, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 3(2) and 8(2) of Directive 2002/22/EC. (1)

1

| — | Order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Article 121 of the Portuguese Law on Electronic Communications (Law No 5/2004 of 10 February) retains the public service, the exclusive public service concession and the corresponding rights and obligations until 2025, with PT Comunicações SA holding the concession for the public telecommunications service.

The Commission submits that, in terms of designating the companies responsible for providing the universal service, the Portuguese Law on Electronic Communications is confused, incoherent and inconsistent.

Consequently, the Portuguese State has failed to designate, by means of an efficient, objective, transparent and non-discriminatory procedure, the company or companies responsible for providing the universal service, as laid down by Article 8(2) in conjunction with Article 3(2) of Directive 2002/22.

---

(1)  Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services (Universal Service Directive) (OJ 2002 L 108, p. 51).

1

---
Brandon Scott LaVERGNE, petitioner, v. Trent BRIGNAC, et al.

No. 17-957.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 19, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
# C_2011030EN.01003901.xml

| 29.1.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 30/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.1.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 30/39

---

Order of the President of the General Court of 25 November 2010 — United Phosphorus v Commission

(Case T-95/09 R III)

(Application for interim measures - Directive 91/414/EEC - Decision concerning the non-inclusion of napropamide in Annex I to Directive 91/414 - Extension of suspension of operation)

2011/C 30/70

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: United Phosphorus Ltd (Warrington, Cheshire, United Kingdom) (represented by: C. Mereu and K. Van Maldegem, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Parpala and F. Wilman, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for the extension of the suspension of operation of Commission Decision 2008/902/EC of 7 November 2008 concerning the non-inclusion of napropamide in Annex I to Council Directive 91/414/EEC and the withdrawal of authorisations for plant protection products containing that substance (OJ 2008 L 326, p. 35)

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The suspension of operation granted in paragraph 1 of the operative part of the order of the President of the Court of 28 April 2009 in Case T-95/09 R United Phosphorus v Commission (not published in the ECR) is extended until 31 December 2011 or until the date of adoption of the decision in the main proceedings at the latest, if that decision is adopted earlier. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The suspension of operation granted in paragraph 1 of the operative part of the order of the President of the Court of 28 April 2009 in Case T-95/09 R United Phosphorus v Commission (not published in the ECR) is extended until 31 December 2011 or until the date of adoption of the decision in the main proceedings at the latest, if that decision is adopted earlier.

| 2. | The costs shall be reserved. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The costs shall be reserved.

---
Avinash B. KULKARNI, petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF STATE.

No. 17-7208.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 20, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Rajesh PATEL, petitioner, v. GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF BEHAVIOR HEALTH.

No. 16-717.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

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