alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 18/2013Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 18/2013 of 14 January 2013 establishing the standard import values for determining            the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 18/2013                     

# of 14 January 2013

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

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

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 Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application                           of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors(2), and in particular Article 136(1) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 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 XVI, Part A thereto.

(2)The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU)                              No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its                              publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

The standard import values referred to in Article 136 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are fixed in the Annex to                     this Regulation.                  

# Article 2U.K.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of 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, 14 January 2013.

*For the Commission, On behalf of the President*,                           

José Manuel Silva Rodríguez                            

*Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development*                            

## ANNEXU.K.Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.                           

2

OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 18 (Friday, January 28, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 4126]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-1727]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THE UNITED STATES


Sunshine Act Meeting

ACTION: Notice of a partially open meeting of the Board of Directors of 
the Export-Import Bank of the United States.

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

Time and Place: Thursday, February 3, 2005 at 9:30 a.m. The meeting 
will be held at Ex-Im Bank in Room 1143, 811 Vermont Avenue, NW., 
Washington, DC 20571.

Open Agenda Item: Ex-Im Bank Sub-Saharan Africa Advisory Committee for 
2005.

Public Participation: The meeting will be open to public participation 
for Item No. 1 only.

Further Information: For further information, contact: Office of the 
Secretary, 811 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20571 (Tel. No. 
(202) 565-3957).

James K. Hess,
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer.
[FR Doc. 05-1727 Filed 1-26-05; 12:39 pm]
BILLING CODE 6690-01-M
Walter Lee COOK, Jr. v. Sec. of Corr. Theodis BECK Super. of L.C.I. George Kenworthy.

No. 296P07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 11, 2007.

Walter Leon Cook, Jr., pro se.

Joan M. Cunningham, Assistant Attorney General, for Beck.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Plaintiff on the 26th day of June 2007 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the orders of the Superior Court, Scotland County, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court of that County:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 11th day of October 2007."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Plaintiff on the 26th day of June 2007 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 11th day of October 2007."
##### 



EXHIBIT 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 Nos. 333-44562, 333-80931, 333-53083 and 333-92080) pertaining to (i)
the 1997 Equity Incentive Plan, (ii) the Employee Stock Purchase Plan, and
(iii) the 1997 Non-Employee Directors Stock Option Plan, and in the
Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-60135) and related Prospectus, of our
report dated February 7, 2003, except as to Note 13, as to which
the date is February 25, 2003, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements and schedule of Gene Logic Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the
year ended December 31, 2002.



| |  | /S/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP
| |  | ---------------------

Baltimore, Maryland
March 14, 2003
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion 

filed September 3, 2015.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-15-00541-CV

IN RE MATTHEW WALTER MAHONEY, Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

247th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2006-45711

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On June 23, 2015, relator Matthew Walter Mahoney filed a petition for writ 

of habeas corpus in this court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 (West 2004); 

see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this court to compel the 

Honorable John Schmude, presiding judge of the 247th District Court of Harris 

County, to set aside the underlying contempt order. The trial court suspended 

relator’s commitment and he is not confined.
2

We are unable to consider relator’s petition for writ of habeas corpus 

because our habeas jurisdiction extends solely to situations in which a relator’s 

restraint of liberty arises from a violation of an order, judgment, or decree of a 

court or judge in a civil case. See Tex. Gov’t Code § 22.221(d).

Therefore, we dismiss relator’s petition for writ of habeas corpus for lack of 

jurisdiction.

 PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Jamison and Busby.
MYERS v. BRYANT.

No. COA07-491.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed November 20, 2007.

Certification Date December 10, 2007.

Appeal from Lee (05CVS1092).

Cases reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v John Dexter, Appellant.

[799 NYS2d 807]

Appeal by the defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Molea, J.), dated August 3, 2004, which, after a hearing, designated him a level two sex offender pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C.

*404Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Utilization of the risk assessment instrument will generally “result in the proper classification in most cases so that departures will be the exception not the rule” (Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary, at 4; *see People v Williams,*19 AD3d 1186 [2005]; *People v Guaman,*8 AD3d 545 [2004]). A departure from the presumptive risk level is warranted only where “there exists an aggravating or mitigating factor of a kind, or to a degree, not otherwise adequately taken into account by the guidelines” (Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary, at 4 [1997 ed]). There must exist clear and convincing evidence of the existence of a special circumstance to warrant any departure *(see People v Valentine,*15 AD3d 463 [2005]; *People v Guaman, supra; People v Hampton,*300 AD2d 641 [2002]; *People v Bottisti,*285 AD2d 841 [2001]).

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in making an upward departure from the presumptive level one adjudication *(see People v Stevens, 4*AD3d 786 [2004]; *People v Moon,*3 AD3d 600 [2004]; *People v Bottisti, supra).*

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, by counsel, he expressly waived his 15-day notice rights pursuant to Corrections Law § 168-d (3) *(see People v Tilley,*305 AD2d 1041 [2003] ). On appeal, he asserts that his waiver was not knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily given, since he was not allocuted. This issue is unpreserved for appellate review *(see People v Girup,*9 AD3d 913 [2004]; *People v Angelo,*3 AD3d 482 [2004] ) and, in any event, the defendant cites no authority supporting his claim that there must be a personal allocution and waiver of this notice period. Moreover, the defendant was given time to submit written opposition and he availed himself of this opportunity. Accordingly, this contention is without merit.

The defendant’s challenge to the submission of certain transcripts for the Supreme Court’s review is unpreserved for appellate review *(People v Girup, supra; People v Angelo, supra; People v Baker,*303 AD2d 570 [2003]; *People v Roland,*98 NY2d 614 [2002]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Schmidt, J.P., S. Miller, Mastro and Rivera, JJ., concur.
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1051/2014Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1051/2014 of 2 October 2014 entering a name in the register of protected designations            of origin and protected geographical indications (Pomelo de Corse (PGI))         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1051/2014                     

# of 2 October 2014

# entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Pomelo de Corse                        (PGI))                     

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality                           schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs(1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, France's application to register the name ‘Pomelo de Corse’                              was published in the *Official Journal of the European Union* (2).

(2)As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name                              ‘Pomelo de Corse’ should therefore be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

The name ‘Pomelo de Corse’ (PGI) is hereby entered in the register.

The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.6. Fruit, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed,                     as listed in Annex XI to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014(3).                  

# Article 2U.K.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of 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, 2 October 2014.

*For the Commission,*                            

*On behalf of the President,*                            

Dacian Cioloș                            

*Member of the Commission*                            

1

OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.                           

2

OJ C 125, 26.4.2014, p. 15.                           

3

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU)                              No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-1063

CHARLES WILLIAM LEVY,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

MICHELE MCQUIGG; COUNTY OF PRINCE WILLIAM,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior

District Judge. (CA-96-1262-A)

Submitted: March 27, 1997 Decided: April 4, 1997

Before RUSSELL, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Charles William Levy, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Alexander MacIsaac,

COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, Prince William, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on

his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint. We have reviewed the record

and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Levy

v. McQuigg, No. CA-96-1262-A (E.D. Va. Nov. 22, 1996). 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.

AFFIRMED
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3485 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3485

  To require manufacturers to increase the percentage of automobiles 
  manufactured for sale within the United States that are capable of 
 operating on higher-level blends of renewable fuels, such as ethanol 
      and biodiesel, in combination with gasoline or diesel fuel.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 12, 2008

 Mr. Harkin (for himself and Mr. Lugar) introduced the following bill; 
    which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, 
                      Science, and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To require manufacturers to increase the percentage of automobiles 
  manufactured for sale within the United States that are capable of 
 operating on higher-level blends of renewable fuels, such as ethanol 
      and biodiesel, in combination with gasoline or diesel fuel.

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

SECTION 1. ENSURING THE AVAILABILITY OF DUAL FUELED AUTOMOBILES.

    (a) In General.--Chapter 329 of title 49, United States Code, is 
amended by inserting after section 32902 the following:
``Sec. 32902A. Requirement to manufacture dual fueled automobiles
    ``(a) In General.--For each model year listed in the following 
table, each manufacturer shall ensure that the percentage of 
automobiles manufactured by the manufacturer for sale in the United 
States that are dual fueled automobiles is not less than the percentage 
set forth for that model year in the following table:

 
                   ``Model Year                                              Percentage
 
  Model years 2011 and 2012.......................  50 percent
  Model year 2013 and each subsequent model year..  90 percent
 

    ``(b) Exception.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to automobiles 
that operate only on electricity.''.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for chapter 329 of 
title 49, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the item 
relating to section 32902 the following:

``32902A. Requirement to manufacture dual fueled automobiles.''.
    (c) Rulemaking.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall prescribe 
regulations to carry out the amendments made by this Act.
                                 <all>
```
IN RE J.A.T.

No. COA07-1189.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed February 5, 2008.

Certification Date February 25, 2008.

Appeal from Jackson (04J56, 04J57, 04J58, 04J59).

Cases reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN T-NETIX, INC.'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE
THREE AND SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           1,922
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   17,214
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (2,766)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                17,989
<PP&E>                                          71,660
<DEPRECIATION>                                (37,269)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  71,991
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           37,196
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              127
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      30,174
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    71,991
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                17,746
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   10,945
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 8,187
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 633
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,019)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       810
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,209)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,209)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.10)


</TABLE>
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED MA RCH 6, 2019

NO. 03

- 18

- 00370

- CV

Jimmie Wade, III, Appellant

v.

TBF Financial, LLC, Appellee

APPEAL FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES GOODWIN, BA K ER, AND SMITH

AFFIRMED

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE BAKER

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the tr i a l court on Febr uary 27, 2018. Having

reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the C ourt holds that there was no reversible error

in the judgment . Therefore, the C ourt affirms the trial court’s judgment

. Because appellant is

indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of costs is made.
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 23-3431

___________________________

Janet Y. Taylor

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

v.

Janet L. Yellen, Secretary Department of the Treasury

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee

 ____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City

 ____________

 Submitted: August 5, 2024

Filed: August 7, 2024

[Unpublished]

____________

Before KELLY, GRASZ, and STRAS, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

In this employment discrimination action, Janet Y. Taylor appeals the district

court’s1

 adverse partial grant of summary judgment, subsequent adverse grant of

1The Honorable Gary A. Fenner, United States District Judge for the Western

District of Missouri.
judgment as a matter of law (JAML) on the remaining claims, and denial of her

motion for new trial. After careful review of the record and the parties’ arguments

on appeal, we conclude that the partial grant of summary judgment was proper. See

Collins v. Kansas City Mo. Pub. Sch. Dist., 92 F.4th 770, 771 (8th Cir. 2024)

(reviewing grant of summary judgment de novo). We further conclude the district

court did not err in its adverse grant of JAML on Taylor’s remaining claims, and did

not abuse its discretion in denying Taylor’s motion for new trial, see Jacobsen

Warehouse Co. v. Schnuck Mkts., Inc., 13 F.4th 659, 674 (8th Cir. 2021) (reviewing

grant of JAML de novo and denial of motion for new trial for clear abuse of

discretion). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. 

______________________________

-2-
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
Financial Data Schedule for 3rd quarter 10-Q
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                                OCT-1-1995
<CASH>                                           25229
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   168159
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      40738
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                292615
<PP&E>                                         3517341
<DEPRECIATION>                                  128421
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 3681535
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          3346506
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                            10
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   3681535
<SALES>                                        1284319
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               1284319
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  1044262
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 38620
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               61350
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 140087
<INCOME-TAX>                                     43427
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              96660
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     96660
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>