alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-10550

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

RUBEN ALCORTA,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:08-CR-98-35

Before SMITH, ELROD, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Ruben Alcorta raises

arguments that he concedes are foreclosed by United States v. Brown, 920 F.2d

1212, 1216-17 (5th Cir. 1991), abrogated on other grounds by United States v.

Candia, 454 F.3d 468, 472-73 (5th Cir. 2006), which held that a district court has

the discretion under 18 U.S.C. § 3584 to order a federal sentence to run

consecutively to a yet-to-be-imposed state sentence. See Setser v. United States,

132 S. Ct. 1463, 1466-73 (2012). The Government’s motion for summary

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

August 21, 2012

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not *

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

Case: 11-10550 Document: 00511963491 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/21/2012
No. 11-10550

affirmance is GRANTED, the Government’s alternative motion for an extension

of time to file a brief is DENIED, and the judgment of the district court is

AFFIRMED.

2

Case: 11-10550 Document: 00511963491 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/21/2012
Exhibit 8.1




Subsidiaries
of Industrias Bachoco S.A.B. de C.V.




The
following chart lists each of our subsidiaries which we owned, directly or
indirectly, as of December 31, 2008, and April 30, 2009:




1.Acuícola
Bachoco, S.A. de C.V.




2.    Aviser,
S.A. de C.V.




3.    Bachoco,
S.A. de C.V. (“BSACV”)




4.    Bachoco
Comercial, S.A. de C.V.




5.    Campi
Alimentos, S.A. de C.V.




6.    Huevo
y Derivados, S.A. de C.V.




7.    Operadora
de Servicios de Personal, S.A. de C.V.




8.    Pecuarius
Laboratorios, S.A. de C.V.




9.    Secba,
S.A. de C.V.




10.  Sepetec,
S. A. de C.V.




11.  Servicios
de Personal Administrativo, S.A. de C.V.




12.  Induba
Pavos, S.A de C.V.




Each of
the Subsidiaries listed is incorporated under the laws of
México.
YADKIN VALLEY BANK AND TRUST COMPANY v. AF FINANCIAL GROUP.

No. 279P08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 26, 2008.

Michael C. Lord, Heather E. Bridgers, Raleigh, for Yadkin Valley Bank.

*464H. Landis Wade, Jr., Charlotte, for AF Financial.

Prior report: ___ N.C.App. ___, 661 S.E.2d 328.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 10th day of June 2008 by Plaintiff in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, 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 26th day of August 2008."
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**RECKSON OPERATING PARTNERSHIP, L. P.**

 

**Certification of Marc Holliday, President of WyomingAcquisition GP LLC, the sole general partner of the Registrant, pursuant to Section 1350of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code**

 

I, Marc Holliday,President of Wyoming Acquisition GP LLC, the sole general partner of RecksonOperating Partnership, L. P. (the “Company”), certify pursuant to section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

 

1)       TheQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly periodended June 30, 2008 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934(15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

 

2)       Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
|  Dated:   August 8, 2008 | By     | /s/ MARC HOLLIDAY                                |
|-----------------------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------------|
|                                    |   |  Marc Holliday                              |
|                                    |   |  President                                  |
|                                    |   |  of Wyoming Acquisition GP LLC,             |
|                                    |   |  the sole general partner of the Registrant |

 

----
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 222/2013Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 222/2013 of 6 March 2013 entering a name in the register of protected designations            of origin and protected geographical indications (Spargel aus Franken/Fränkischer Spargel/Franken-Spargel (PGI))         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 222/2013                     

# of 6 March 2013

# entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Spargel aus Franken/Fränkischer                        Spargel/Franken-Spargel (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)Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 entered into force on 3 January 2013. It repealed and replaced Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006                              of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs(2).

(2)Pursuant to Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, Germany’s application to register the name ‘Spargel aus Franken’                              or ‘Fränkischer Spargel’ or ‘Franken-Spargel’ was published in the *Official Journal of the European Union* (3).

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

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

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

# 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, 6 March 2013.

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

Dacian Cioloș                            

*Member of the Commission*                            

## ANNEXU.K.

Agricultural products intended for human consumption listed in Annex I to the Treaty:

### **Class 1.6.****Fruit, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed**U.K.

#### GERMANYU.K.

Spargel aus Franken/Fränkischer Spargel/Franken-Spargel (PGI)

1

OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.                           

2

OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12.                           

3

OJ C 125, 28.4.2012, p. 13.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM i3 MOBILE
INC. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF AND FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2000.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-2000
<CASH>                                          84,900
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      645
<ALLOWANCES>                                       109
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                89,201
<PP&E>                                          10,895
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,678
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  99,247
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,789
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           247
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    91,890
<SALES>                                          4,494
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 4,494
<CGS>                                            2,628
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,628
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                29,220
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (4,778)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (22,576)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (22,576)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.39)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.39)


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                              SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                        154,013
<SECURITIES>                                        0         
<RECEIVABLES>                                   3,978
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              381,634 
<PP&E>                                      8,680,312
<DEPRECIATION>                              (640,452)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              8,632,607
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         325,104
<BONDS>                                     3,942,488
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                 1,041,675
<COMMON>                                            0
<OTHER-SE>                                          0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                8,632,607
<SALES>                                       919,696 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              932,690
<CGS>                                               0         
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 354,576 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               15,598
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            172,105
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               182,017
<INCOME-TAX>                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           182,017
<DISCONTINUED>                                 12,717 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0 
<NET-INCOME>                                  129,659
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    1.22
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    1.21
        

</TABLE>
STATE v. Otis McDONALD, Jr.

No. 153P07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 23, 2007.

Derrick C. Mertz, Assistant Attorney General, R. Stuart Albright, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*373The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 27th day of March 2007 by Defendant for "Notice of Appeal":

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference this the 23rd day of August 2007."
J. Kamau CHRISTOPHER a/k/a Joseph Kamau Christopher Bey v. NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY.

No. 246P08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 26, 2008.

Joseph Kamau Christopher Bey, Pro Se.

Dahr Joseph Tanoury, Assistant Attorney General, for NC State University.

Prior report: ___ N.C.App. ___, 661 S.E.2d 36.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the notice of appeal from the North Carolina Court of Appeals, filed by the Plaintiff on the 30th day of May *4822008 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-30, and the motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question filed by the Defendant, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the motion to dismiss the appeal is

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 26th day of August 2008."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 30th day of May 2008 by Plaintiff in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, 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 26th day of August 2008."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Plaintiff on the 30th day of May 2008 for Writ of Supersedeas of the judgment of the 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 26th day of August 2008."
# C_2023252EN.01001402.xml

| 17.7.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 252/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.7.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 252/14

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny (Poland) lodged on 22 March 2023 — Dyrektor Krajowej Informacji Skarbowej v J.S.

(Case C-182/23, Makowit (1))

(2023/C 252/16)

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Dyrektor Krajowej Informacji Skarbowej

Defendant: J.S.

Question referred

Do the provisions of Article 9(1) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, (2) in conjunction with Article 14(2)(a) thereof, allow a farmer who is liable to pay VAT under general rules and who transfers the ownership of a plot of land to the State Treasury under an expropriation procedure in exchange for compensation related to the change of its intended use for non-agricultural purposes to be regarded as a taxpayer obliged to pay VAT on that compensation due solely to the fact that the plot was earlier used for agricultural activities subject to VAT?

---

(1)  A fictitious name has been given to this case which does not correspond to the actual name of any of the parties to the proceedings.

(2)  OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1.

---
# CE2004078EN.01006001.xml

| 27.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 78/60 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 78/60

---

(2004/C 78 E/0060)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1961/03

by Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(5 June 2003)

Subject:   Ispra meeting to discuss the Spanish National Hydrological Plan

Subject:

Further to Question No 39 by Alexander de Roo (H-0211/03), answered by the European Commission during Question Time on 8 April 2003, can the Commission give further details of the proposed meeting in Ispra with technical and scientific experts to discuss the Spanish National Hydrological Plan?

When will this meeting take place?

Which technical and scientific experts will be involved?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(24 July 2003)

(24 July 2003)

With regard to the expert meeting to discuss certain aspects of the proposed Ebro transfer, the Commission at the moment is planning to hold the meeting in September 2003 at a date to be finalised.

The Commission expects that objective and expert knowledge should be made available to this meeting.

Within this framework, the Commission invites the Spanish Authorities to send appropriate technical experts to the meeting. Invitations are also extended to the European Environmental Bureau (EEB), World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) (Brussels), WWF (Spain), and Foundation for a New Water Culture, Platform for the Defence of the Ebro and the Region of Aragon.

All participants in the meeting will be expected to have an appropriate technical background and a detailed knowledge of the Ebro river and its delta.

---
# CE2004084EN.01047701.xml

| 3.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 84/477 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 84/477

---

(2004/C 84 E/0552)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1736/03

by Jorge Hernández Mollar (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(26 May 2003)

Subject:   Commission presence at the Fifth World Avocado Congress

Subject:

Further to my Written Question No Ε-l154/02 (1) of 22 April 2002, and the answer received from the Commission, the organising committee of the Fifth World Avocado Congress is aware of the possibility that a Commission representative might attend the event.

1

Following the previous four congresses held in the United States, Mexico, South Africa and Israel, the holding of the forthcoming congress in Europe is particularly important for the sector and offers an excellent opportunity for the Commission, in its capacity as manager of the CAP, to gain first-hand knowledge of the findings of papers presented at the congress and consider how they might be applied to assist Community avocado producers.

Will the Commission therefore say whether it is able to accept the invitation from the organising committee of the conference concerned and play an active part in it, examining how the congress' findings can be put into practice and reviewing the position of avocado production within and outside the Community?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(1 July 2003)

(1 July 2003)

The organisers of the Fifth World Avocado Congress have sent us an invitation to the event without stating any specific wish for active participation. We are looking at the possibility of non-active participation given our work priorities and human and financial resources.

If the organisers wish active participation on our part in the event and in putting its findings into practice, they should make direct contact with the appropriate department within our organisation (Agriculture Directorate-General, Directorate for Markets in Crop Products, Unit for Fresh and Processed Fruit and Vegetables) so that their wishes can be ascertained and action agreed on.

---

(1)  OJ C 277 E, 14.11.2002, p. 154.

1

---
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

      Schedule of Year-To-Date Principal and Interest Distributions
                                  to 
                         Certificate Holders

                                                         Ending
Class        Interest         Principal       Losses     Balance
<S>          <C>              <C>             <C>        <C> 
A1              2,669,263.91        6,546.21       0.00   74,182,010.95
A10               879,663.60            0.00       0.00            0.00
A11               185,364.15            0.00       0.00            0.00
A12               467,200.88       49,594.20       0.00   14,675,405.81
A13               211,591.99            0.00       0.00            0.00
A2                468,000.00            0.00       0.00   17,280,000.00
A3              4,031,115.68   12,879,184.13       0.00  124,435,101.88
A4              2,076,078.46      240,056.11       0.00   71,034,943.90
A5                 86,897.25    6,898,192.00       0.00            0.00
A6                320,625.00            0.00       0.00   11,400,000.00
A7                656,726.90            0.00       0.00   22,516,350.00
A8                 41,946.40            0.00       0.00    1,388,571.00
A9              1,862,019.41    3,816,054.53       0.00   70,442,294.48
ALR                     0.64          100.00       0.00            0.00
AR                      0.64          100.00       0.00            0.00
B1                192,718.38       20,457.39       0.00    6,053,542.61
B2                 78,496.10        8,332.50       0.00    2,465,667.50
B3                 42,833.35        4,546.84       0.00    1,345,453.16
B4                 35,694.46        3,789.03       0.00    1,121,210.97
B5                 42,832.50        3,005.51   1,541.17    1,345,426.28
M                 199,857.27       21,215.20       0.00    6,277,784.80





</TABLE>
# C_2023189EN.01001701.xml

| 30.5.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 189/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.5.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 189/17

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel d’Aix-En-Provence (France) lodged on 1 March 2023 — Association Unedic délégation AGS de Marseille v V, W, X, Y, Z, liquidator of company K

(Case C-125/23, Unedic)

(2023/C 189/23)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour d’appel d’Aix-En-Provence

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Association Unedic délégation AGS de Marseille

Respondents: V, W, X, Y, Z, liquidator of company K

Questions referred

| 1. | Can Directive 2008/94/EC (1) be interpreted as allowing the guarantee institution to be precluded from taking over the guarantee of severance pay on termination of employment relationships where an employee declares the termination of his or her contract of employment after insolvency proceedings have been initiated? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Can Directive 2008/94/EC (1) be interpreted as allowing the guarantee institution to be precluded from taking over the guarantee of severance pay on termination of employment relationships where an employee declares the termination of his or her contract of employment after insolvency proceedings have been initiated?

| 2. | Is such an interpretation consistent with the wording and the purpose of that directive, and does it enable the results specified therein to be achieved? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Is such an interpretation consistent with the wording and the purpose of that directive, and does it enable the results specified therein to be achieved?

| 3. | Does such an interpretation, based on the person who terminated the contract of employment during the period of insolvency, entail a difference in treatment between employees? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Does such an interpretation, based on the person who terminated the contract of employment during the period of insolvency, entail a difference in treatment between employees?

| 4. | If such a difference in treatment exists, is it objectively justified? |
| --- | --- |

4.

If such a difference in treatment exists, is it objectively justified?

---

(1)  Directive 2008/94/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2008 on the protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer (OJ 2008 L 283, p. 36).

---