alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2005200EN.01009101.xml

| 30.7.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 200/91 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.7.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 200/91

---

Notice concerning the entry into force of the Additional Protocol to the Europe Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and Romania, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Czech Republic, the Republic of Estonia, the Republic of Cyprus, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Republic of Hungary, the Republic of Malta, the Republic of Poland, the Republic of Slovenia and the Slovak Republic to the European Union

The Additional Protocol to the Europe Agreement with Romania, to take account of the accession of ten new Member States to the European Union, which the Council and the Commission decided to conclude on 25 April 2005
   (1), enters into force on 1 August 2005, the last notifications of the completion of procedures under Article 10 of that Protocol having been received on 14 July 2005.

1

---

(1)  
  OJ L 155, 17.6.2005, p. 26.

1

---
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED DECEMBER 31, 2014

NO. 03-14-00245-CR

Elias Shawn Bihl aka Elias Bihl, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 340TH DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE JONES, JUSTICES ROSE AND GOODWIN

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE GOODWIN

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the trial court. Having reviewed 

the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the 

trial court’s judgment of conviction. Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment of 

conviction. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of costs 

is made.
# C_2011063EN.01001701.xml

| 26.2.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 63/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.2.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 63/17

---

Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 6 December 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Dolj — Romania) — Adrian Băilă v Administrația Finanțelor Publice a Municipiului Craiova, Administrația Fondului pentru Mediu

(Case C-377/10) (1)

1

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Lack of relationship with the reality or the subject-matter of the case in the main proceedings - Inadmissibility)

2011/C 63/31

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Referring court

Tribunalul Dolj

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Adrian Băilă

Applicant:

Defendant: Administrația Finanțelor Publice a Municipiului Craiova, Administrația Fondului pentru Mediu

Defendant: Administrația Finanțelor Publice a Municipiului Craiova, Administrația Fondului pentru Mediu

Re:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunal Dolj — Registration of second-hand vehicles previously registered in another Member State — Environmental tax on vehicles on their first registration in a given Member State — Compatibility of the national rules with Article 110 TFEU — Temporary exemption for vehicles with certain characteristics

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

The reference for a preliminary ruling made by the Tribunalul Dolj by decision of 9 June 2010 is manifestly inadmissible.

---

(1)  OJ C 274, 9.10.2010.

1

---
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3980 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3980

 To amend title 18, United States Code, to require the impaneling of a 
new jury if a jury fails to recommend by unanimous vote a sentence for 
               conviction of a crime punishable by death.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 25, 2019

 Mr. Keller (for himself, Mr. Bost, and Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                             the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 18, United States Code, to require the impaneling of a 
new jury if a jury fails to recommend by unanimous vote a sentence for 
               conviction of a crime punishable by death.

    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 ``Eric's Law''.

SEC. 2. REQUIREMENT TO IMPANEL A NEW JURY IN CERTAIN CASES.

    (a) Additional Ground for Impaneling Jury.--Section 3593(b)(2) of 
title 18, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) by striking ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (C); and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
                    ``(E) a new special hearing is required pursuant to 
                subsection (g); or''.
    (b) Impaneling of New Jury When Jury Does Not Reach a Unanimous 
Recommendation.--Section 3593 of such title is amended by adding at the 
end the following:
    ``(g) Special Rule When Jury Does Not Return a Unanimous 
Recommendation.--
            ``(1) In general.--If a jury described in subsection (b)(1) 
        or subparagraphs (A) through (D) of subsection (b)(2) does not, 
        by unanimous vote, make a recommendation whether the defendant 
        should be sentenced to death, to life imprisonment without 
        possibility of release, or some other lesser sentence pursuant 
        to subsection (e), the court, upon motion of the attorney for 
        the government, shall order a new special hearing and impanel a 
        new jury pursuant to subsection (b).
            ``(2) Imposition of sentence.--If the jury impaneled 
        pursuant to paragraph (1) does not reach a unanimous 
        recommendation as to sentence, the court shall impose a 
        sentence other than death authorized by law.''.
                                 <all>
```
Jeremiah S. BERG, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-9544.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

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

###### Department of Commerce

###### Foreign-Trade Zones Board

          - [B-81-2021]

On December 9, 2021, Chang Chun (Arizona) LLC submitted a notification of proposed production activity to the FTZ Board for its facility within FTZ 75, in Casa Grande, Arizona.

                    The notification was processed in accordance with the regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR part 400), including notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     inviting public comment (86 FR 72576, December 22, 2021). On April 8, 2022, the applicant was notified of the FTZ Board's decision that no further review of the activity is warranted at this time. The production activity described in the notification was authorized, subject to the FTZ Act and the FTZ Board's regulations, including Section 400.14.                

Dated: April 8, 2022.

Elizabeth Whiteman,

Acting Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2022-07905 Filed 4-12-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
Exhibit 13.1

Certification of the Principal Executive and Financial Officers of

CEMEX, S.A.B. de C.V.

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 Annual Report on Form 20-F of CEMEX, S.A.B. de C.V. (the Company) for the year ended December 31,
2013, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Lorenzo H. Zambrano, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Fernando A. González, as Executive Vice President of Finance and
Administration and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, 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 his 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 results of operations of the Company as of the dates and periods set forth therein.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|       |  |                        
|------ |  | -----------------------
|       |  | /s/ Lorenzo H. Zambrano
|Name:  |  | Lorenzo H. Zambrano    
|Title: |  | Chief Executive Officer
|Date:  |  | April 28, 2014         



|       |  |                                                                                  
|------ |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|       |  | /s/ Fernando A. González                                                         
|Name:  |  | Fernando A. González                                                             
|Title: |  | Executive Vice President of Finance andAdministration and Chief Financial Officer
|Date:  |  | April 28, 2014                                                                   

This certification is furnished as an exhibit to the Report and accompanies the Report pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                  EXHIBIT 23.01


                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Form S-3 No. 333-52252) and the Registration Statements (Form S-8 Nos.
333-87815, 333-32120, 333-38480, 333-40206, 333-46652, and 333-52198) pertaining
to the Broadbase Software, Inc. 1996 Equity Incentive Plan, 1999 Equity
Incentive Plan, and 1999 Employee Stock Purchase Plan; Options and purchase
rights issued under the Rubric, Inc. 1997 Stock Option Plan and assumed by the
Registrant in connection with its acquisition of Rubric, Options granted
pursuant to stock option agreements entered into outside of the Rubric 1997
Stock Option Plan, the Broadbase Software, Inc. 1999 Equity Incentive Plan, the
Broadbase Software, Inc. 1999 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, and Options granted
pursuant to stock option agreements entered into outside of the Broadbase
Software, Inc. 1999 Equity Incentive Plan; Broadbase 2000 Stock Incentive Plan;
Options and purchase rights issued under the Aperio, Inc. 1998 Incentive and
Nonqualified Stock Option Plan and assumed by the Registrant in connection with
its acquisition of Aperio and Stock option agreements with David Milam and
William Wolfe; Options issued under the Panopticon, Inc. 1999 Stock Plan and
assumed by the Registrant in connection with its acquisition of Panopticon; 1994
Amended and Restated Stated Stock Option Plan 1999 Stock Option and Grant Plan,
and amendments thereto, 2000 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, and Grants pursuant
to additional Stock Option agreements of our report dated January 17, 2001, with
respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Broadbase
Software, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended
December 31, 2000.


                                                      /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

San Jose, California
March 20, 2001
In re Wilma PENNINGTON-THURMAN, petitioner.

No. 15-9470.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 3, 2016.

Petition for writ of mandamus denied.
#### LEVERS v. ANDERSON, District Supervisor, Alcohol Tax Unit.

No. 2939.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

Jan. 23, 1945.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 23, 1945.

Writ of Certiorari Granted May 7, 1945.

James J. McNamara, of Clovis, N. M., for peitioner.

Arthur A. Alexander, Atty., Alcohol Tax Division, Bureau of Internal Revenue, of Washington, D. C. (Herbert Borkland, Sp. Asst, to the Atty. Gen., on the brief), for respondent.

Before PHILLIPS, BRATTON, and LIUXMAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

This is a petition to review three orders issued by the District Supervisor in charge of the Denver, Colorado, office of the Alcohol Tax Unit. The orders were issued under authority of sections 4(b) and 4(e) (3) of the Federal Alcohol Administration Act, 27 U.S.C.A. §§ 201-211. The petition was filed under section 4(h) of the Act.

One order annulled a basic permit and the other two orders denied applications for basic permits.

Petitioner filed his petition for review without applying to the District Supervisor for a reconsideration of the orders or appealing from such orders to the Deputy Commissioner of Internal Revenue, both of which procedures are provided for in the regulations. A copy of the regulations was served on the petitioner prior to the hearing before the District Super*548visor and was called to petitioner’s attention when the orders were served on him.

Not having exhausted his -administrative remedies, this court may not entertain his petition for review. Peoria Braumeister Co. v. Yellowley, *7*Cir., 123 F.2d 637, 640; Leebern v. United States, 5 Cir., 124 F.2d 505, 507.

It is true that an appeal to the Deputy Commissioper of Internal Revenue may no longer be a condition precedent to judicial review in view of amended regulation, § 182.257,1 which in part provides: “Appeal to the Commissioner is not required. However, the Commissioner may, in his discretion, in order to insure uniformity of administrative action, entertain an appeal, after review and reconsideration as provided in section 182.255, from an order of revocation of a basic permit by a district supervisor, if filed with the Commissioner within 10 days of the date of the final order.”

But the amended regulations do not do away with the application for reconsideration, an administrative remedy not availed of by the petitioner. Petitioner cannot excuse his failure on the ground that his objections on an application for reconsideration would have been overruled and, therefore, such application would have been futile. Red River Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Commission, 69 App.D.C. 1, 98 F.2d 282, 288; Gilchrist v. Interborough Rapid Transit Co., 279 U.S. 159, 208, 209, 49 S.Ct. 282, 73 L.Ed. 652.

The petition is dismissed.

1

 Fed. Register, Vol. 7, No. 49, March 12, .1942, pp. 1889-1890.
Dale Wayne BASHAW, petitioner, v. Daniel PARAMO, Warden.

No. 15-9581.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for rehearing denied.
II-00399

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Slawomir Kozlowski <kozlowscy@usa.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 9:30 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.

Slawomir Kozlowski

22 Prescott Street

Edison, NJ 8817
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**Consent ofIndependent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

 

We consentto the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8Nos. 333-61036 and 333-89943) pertaining to the InsWeb Corporation 1995 StockOption Plan, 1997 Stock Option Plan, Senior Executive Nonstatutory Stock OptionPlan and 1999 Employee Stock Purchase Plan of our report dated March 31,2008, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule ofInsWeb Corporation included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the yearended December 31, 2007.

 

 

/s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Sacramento,California

March 31, 2008

 

----
John Robert MASSEY, Jr., petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-9591.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
Ruben BECERRADA, petitioner, v. CALIFORNIA.

No. 17-5287.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of California denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 232 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 232

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                          June 4, 2009.
Whereas, for more than 60 years, Toys for Tots has been bringing smiles to the 
        faces of less fortunate children through the gift of a new toy;
Whereas, after supporting Toys for Tots since 2005 and raising $1.3 million to 
        help brighten the lives of thousands of children nationwide, The UPS 
        Store and Mail Boxes Etc. network launched the Toys for Tots Literacy 
        Program in March 2008 to expand upon their existing partnership as an 
        example of what small businesses can do to help their community;
Whereas the mission of the Toys for Tots Literacy Program is to offer the 
        Nation's most economically disadvantaged children the ability to compete 
        academically and to succeed in life by providing them direct access to 
        resources that enhance their ability to read and to communicate 
        effectively;
Whereas this initiative maintains the Toys for Tots mission of delivering hope 
        while extending its reach and impact in a meaningful way by providing 
        less fortunate children with tools that can help them break the cycle of 
        poverty;
Whereas, in 2007, the National Center for Educational Statistics released its 
        annual Reading Report, which asserts that 33 percent of all fourth 
        graders in the United States still cannot read at even the basic level, 
        highlighting the need for a program like the Toys for Tots Literacy 
        Program;
Whereas every $1 donation helps the Marine Toys for Tots Foundation buy a book 
        for a deserving child within the community where it was donated;
Whereas since March 2008 more than $630,000 has been raised for the Toys for 
        Tots Literacy Program through a variety of activities, including 
        donation card campaigns, coin box collections, special events, and 
        sponsorships;
Whereas March 2009 marks the one-year anniversary of the Toys for Tots Literacy 
        Program; and
Whereas the Toys for Tots Literacy Program has created a literacy award, in 
        honor of Alferd Williams, a 71-year-old resident of St. Joseph, 
        Missouri, who, to combat illiteracy, enrolled in Alesia Hamilton's 
        first-grade class at Edison Elementary School in St. Joseph; Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) recognizes that the Toys for Tots Literacy Program has made 
        significant contributions in raising awareness of illiteracy and 
        promoting children's literacy; and
            (2) recognizes and commends the Toys for Tots Literacy Program for 
        its effort to battle poverty through the support of literacy.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```