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

(2004/C 78 E/0821)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2962/03

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(8 October 2003)

Subject:   Damage to valuable works contained in the temple of St Sofia

According to the Turkish ‘Miliyet’ newspaper, around 550 invaluable religious paintings and relics (vestments, holy manuscripts, etc.) currently being stored in the temple of St Sofia in Istanbul, are in extremely poor condition since not even the basic minimum has been done by way of conservation. The temple became a repository for those works, which were brought in from disused churches in various regions of Turkey, when it was converted into a museum in 1935.

Is it possible to earmark funding for the conservation and restoration of these works in cooperation with the responsible authorities and from which programme?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(3 November 2003)

The Community's financial assistance programme for Turkey does not allow to provide support for conserving and restoring religious or cultural works, such as those stored in the Hagia Sofia. The programme is designed primarily to support Turkey's alignment with Union standards in the political, economic and legislative areas. Project proposals are prepared by the Turkish Government and are subject to approval by the Commission, which is given only for projects that contribute to meeting the priorities of the Accession Partnership, as adopted by the Council of Ministers on 15 May 2003.

----
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 22, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 136045 Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 136045 

 COA: 282557 

Wayne CC: 03-012730-FH

WILLIAM CHARLES MCCULLOCH,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 23, 2008 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

d0915 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

September 22, 2008 

 Clerk
# C_2008051EN.01003901.xml

| 23.2.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 51/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.2.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/39

---

Order of the President of the Court of 20 November 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic

(Case C-190/07) (1)

1

(2008/C 51/67)

Language of the case: Italian

Language of the case: Italian

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

---

(1)  OJ C 129, 9.6.2007.

1

---
Town of Beech Mountain v. Genesis Wildlife Sanctuary, Inc.

230A16-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 16, 2016

Mr. Patrick H. Flanagan, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, Ms. Meagan I. Kiser, Attorney at Law, Mr. Stacy C. Eggers, IV, Attorney at Law, Boone, Ms. Jaye E. Bingham-Hinch, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for Town of Beech Mountain.

Mr. Charles E. Clement, Attorney at Law, Boone, Mr. John J. Korzen, Attorney at Law, For Genesis Wildlife Sanctuary, Inc.

Mr. Charles A. Brady, III, Attorney at Law, Boone.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 10th of August 2016 by Plaintiff to Amend New Brief:

> "Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 16th of August 2016."
# CE2004070EN.01017001.xml

| 20.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 70/170 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 70/170

---

(2004/C 70 E/178)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2937/03

by Philip Claeys (NI) to the Commission

(6 October 2003)

Subject:   Commission communication on immigration, integration and employment — economic role of immigration

Subject:

In its communication on immigration, integration and employment (1) the Commission refers to studies from across the world confirming that immigration has a number of positive effects on the economy (p. 10).

1

Has Commission also consulted studies arriving at the opposite conclusion? For instance, the recent study on ‘Immigration and the Dutch economy’ carried out by the Central Planning Bureau (CPB) in the Netherlands, which concludes among other things that ‘for all entry ages, however, immigrants turn out to be a burden on the public budget if their social and economic characteristics correspond to those of the present average non-Western residents. Accordingly, budget balances are affected negatively’ (...) The results indicate that immigration can not offer a major contribution to alleviate public finances, and thus become a compensating factor for the rising costs for government due to the ageing of the population'.

At the request of the Senate, the Belgian Planning Bureau conducted a study in response to a note from United Nations advocating massive new waves of immigration into Europe. Here too it was pointed out that further immigration does not provide a solution to the ageing of Europe's population, not least because of the high cost of social security.

Is the Commission aware of these studies and will it take account of their findings when drafting new measures in this area?

---

(1)  COM(2003) 336.

1

---
# CE2004078EN.01041301.xml

| 27.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 78/413 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 78/413

---

(2004/C 78 E/0434)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2662/03

by Ian Hudghton (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(10 September 2003)

Subject:   Ozone-depleting substances

Subject:

With reference to your answer dated 22 March 2002 to written question P-0595/02 (1), when only two Member States had reported on the mechanisms they had in place for the recovery and destruction of ozone-depleting substances, and when the Commission committed itself to a comprehensive overview of the situation throughout the EU, can the Commission now provide an update of the situation in each of the Member States?

1

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(21 October 2003)

(21 October 2003)

To date all Member States except Ireland have responded.

Most Member States have reported on the following: safety and quality standards for equipment that contains ozone-depleting substances (ODS); inspection procedures for installations containing ODS, record keeping and reporting requirements; ODS recovery methods; mobile and fixed ODS destruction equipment; quantities of ODS recovered, recycled, reclaimed and destroyed during 1999, 2000 and 2001; the minimum qualification standards for technicians involved in ODS recovery, recycling, reclamation and destruction and efforts undertaken to make the public and industry aware of the requirements of the Regulation that include articles in the news media, workshops and information on official websites.

The Commission has undertaken evaluations and has, so far, identified four Member States that are not in compliance with Article 16(5) (2) and 16(6) (3) of Regulation (EC) No 2037/2000 of the Parliament and of the Council of 29 June 2000 on substances that deplete the ozone layer (4). Therefore, the Commission took a decision on 9 July 2003 to take Ireland to the Court of Justice for not reporting. In addition, three infringement procedures are under way against Greece, Spain and Portugal for insufficient reporting and implementation of the Regulation. For detailed overview of the state of play on recovery and destruction a table is sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.

2

3

4

---

(1)  OJ C 205 E, 29.8.2002, p. 168.

1

(2)  Member States shall take steps to promote the recovery, recycling, reclamation and destruction of controlled substances and shall assign to users, refrigeration technicians or other appropriate bodies responsibility for ensuring compliance with the provisions of paragraph 1.

2

(3)  Member States shall report to the Commission by 31 December 2001 on systems established to promote the recovery of used controlled substances, including the facilities available and the quantities of used controlled substances, recovered, recycled, reclaimed or destroyed.

3

(4)  OJ L 244, 29.9.2000.

4

---
# CE2004088EN.01003501.xml

| 8.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 88/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 88/35

---

(2004/C 88 E/0037)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1492/03

by Margrietus van den Berg (PSE) to the Commission

(2 May 2003)

Subject:   Coffee negotiations

Subject:

Would the Commission clarify the progress which is being made in the ongoing negotiations between the European Union and the European Coffee Federation on the setting up of an independent system to monitor the quality of coffee entering the European Union?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(5 June 2003)

(5 June 2003)

As the Honourable Member is aware, the Commission has supported the adoption of Resolution No 407 on minimum standards for exportable coffees by the International Coffee Council (ICO) at all levels of the negotiation.

For the proper implementation of the above Resolution, each member must make its best endeavour to support the objectives of the programme and co-operate in the field of data communication, particularly regarding those imports that do not correspond to the agreed standards. Therefore, with a view to ensuring comprehensive and transparent information, the Commission and the European Coffee Federation (ECF) agreed that the latter should inform the Commission on a quarterly basis about imports that do not conform to Resolution 407. On the basis of this, the Commission will forward the information to the ICO in London.

The Commission has reminded the ECF on several occasions of the need to provide data, drawn the attention of its Secretary General to the commitment it has assumed and the role that the private sector must play in this context.

The Commission notes with regret that no information has been provided since the end of the first quarterly period after the implementation of the Resolution.

The Commission is in constant contact with the ECF and still hopes that a satisfactory solution can be rapidly found on the side of the coffee industry. Should the present situation persist, the Commission wishes to reassure the Honourable Member that its services will act within the ICO in order to introduce a more binding system to achieve transparency and proper implementation of ICO Resolution 407.

---
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 the Interior

###### Bureau of Land Management 

          - [WY-920-1310-01; WYW146282] 

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Land Management, Interior. 

# ACTION:

Notice of proposed reinstatement of terminated oil and gas lease. 

# SUMMARY:

Under the provisions of 30 U.S.C. 188(d) and (e), and 43 CFR 3108.2-3(a) and (b)(1), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) received a petition for reinstatement of oil and gas lease WYW146282 from Gulf Exploration LLC for lands in Converse County, Wyoming. The petition was filed on time and was accompanied by all the rentals due since the date the lease terminated under the law. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Bureau of Land Management, Pamela J. Lewis, Chief, Fluid Minerals Adjudication, at (307) 775-6176. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The lessee has agreed to the amended lease terms for rentals and royalties at rates of $10.00 per acre or fraction thereof, per year and 16                    2/3                     percent, respectively. The lessee has paid the required $500 administrative fee and $166 to reimburse the Department for the cost of this                     **Federal Register**                     notice. The lessee has met all the requirements for reinstatement of the lease as set out in Section 31(d) and (e) of the Mineral Lands Leasing Act of 1920 (30 U.S.C. 188), and the Bureau of Land Management is proposing to reinstate lease WYW146282 effective October 1, 2004, under the original terms and conditions of the lease and the increased rental and royalty rates cited above. BLM has not issued a valid lease affecting the lands.                 

Pamela J. Lewis, 

Chief, Fluid Minerals Adjudication. 

[FR Doc. 05-18455 Filed 9-15-05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310-22-P
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3797 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3797

To repeal an annual adjustment of retired pay and retainer pay amounts 
  for retired members of the Armed Forces under age 62, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 19, 2013

Mr. DesJarlais introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To repeal an annual adjustment of retired pay and retainer pay amounts 
  for retired members of the Armed Forces under age 62, and for other 
                               purposes.

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

SECTION 1. REPEAL OF ANNUAL ADJUSTMENT OF RETIRED PAY AND RETAINER PAY 
              AMOUNTS FOR RETIRED MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES UNDER AGE 
              62.

    Section 403 of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 is hereby 
repealed, and the provisions of law amended by such section are 
restored as if such section had never been enacted.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 8.1

SUBSIDIARIES OF RADICA GAMES LIMITED




                                                      State or Country
Name of Subsidiary                                    in Which Organized
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

UNITED STATES

Radica Enterprises Ltd                                Nevada
(Operates as Radica USA Ltd)
 - Leda Media Products Ltd (dormant)                  UK
 - Radica Canada Ltd                                  Canada

Disc, Inc.                                            Nevada
(Operates as Radica Innovations)
 - Radica Technology (Shenzhen) Co. Ltd.              People's Republic of China


INTERNATIONAL

Radica Limited                                        Hong Kong
 - RadMex S.A. de C.V. (dormant)                      Mexico

Radica Sales (H.K.) Limited (dormant)                 Hong Kong

Radica China Ltd                                      British Virgin Islands
 - Dongguan Radica Games Manufactory Co. Ltd          People's Republic of China

Radica (Macao Commercial Offshore) Limited            Macao

Radica Innovations (UK) Ltd  (dormant)                UK

Radica Europe Ltd                                     UK
 -  Radica UK Ltd                                     UK
Krawiec, et al. v. Manly, et al.

252A16-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

July 21, 2016

Nichole M. Hatcher, Attorney at Law, Erin B. Blackwell, Attorney at Law, for Krawiec, Michael et al.

*398Renner Jo St. John, Attorney at Law, for Bogosavac, Ranko, et al.

H. M. Whitesides, Jr., Attorney at Law, for Manly, Jim, et al.

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 19th of July 2016 by Plaintiff:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 21st of July 2016."

Plaintiff shall have up to and including the 14th day of November 2016 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3832 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3832

 To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to modify the surety 
 bond requirement applicable to home health agencies as a condition of 
                     participation under Medicare.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 9, 2014

Mr. McDermott introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy 
    and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 
  Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall 
           within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to modify the surety 
 bond requirement applicable to home health agencies as a condition of 
                     participation under Medicare.

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

SECTION 1. MODIFICATION OF MEDICARE HOME HEALTH SURETY BOND CONDITION 
              OF PARTICIPATION REQUIREMENT.

    Section 1861(o)(7) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
1395x(o)(7)) is amended to read as follows:
            ``(7) provides the Secretary with a surety bond--
                    ``(A) in a form specified by the Secretary and in 
                an amount that is not less than $50,000; and
                    ``(B) that the Secretary determines is commensurate 
                with the volume of payments to the home health agency; 
                and''.
                                 <all>
```
John Mclean, Plaintiff, v. Baker Sand and Gravel, Employer, and NC Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance, Carrier, Defendants.

No. COA15-1377

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: September 6, 2016

AFFIRMED.
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-31177

Summary Calendar

LEE BARTHELEMY; AARON LILLER; CLAUDE CALLAGAN; DARLENE

WILLIAMSON, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated;

RESOURCE INDEPENDENT LIVING

Plaintiffs - Appellees

v.

LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HOSPITALS; FREDERICK

P CERISE, Secretary, Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals

Defendants - Appellants

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

No. 2:00-CV-1083

Before SMITH, STEWART, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

This appeal is from an award of attorneys’ fees after the State of Louisiana

entered into a settlement agreement with class counsel for the Plaintiffs.

Louisiana did not oppose class counsel’s motion for fees. After the district court

ordered Louisiana to pay the requested fees, Louisiana requested that the

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

September 24, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 07-31177

2

district court reconsider the award of fees, arguing that the Attorney General’s

office was the proper entity to litigate the matter and was never served the

motion for fees.

The district court denied the motion for reconsideration, finding that class

counsel had served notice on Louisiana’s attorney of record and, two days after

filing the motion for fees, also inquired whether the Attorney General’s office

needed to be served. There is evidence that Louisiana’s counsel of record

informed class counsel that an attorney for the Attorney General had already

been assigned to respond to the motion and that the Attorney General’s office

was already in possession of the relevant documentation. The district court

found that the initial motion for fees was unopposed and also had merit. Other

than being unintentional, the district court concluded that Louisiana failed to

provide any reason for its failure to respond to the motion.

The attorneys’ fees awarded here were requested pursuant to 29 U.S.C. §

794a(b) and 42 U.S.C. § 12205; both sections provide the district court with

discretion to award attorneys’ fees. The district court’s award of attorneys’ fees

and denial of Louisiana’s motion for reconsideration are reviewed for an abuse

of discretion. DP Solutions, Inc. v. Rollins, Inc., 353 F.3d 421, 433 (5th Cir.

2003) (attorneys’ fees); Lincoln Gen. Ins. Co. v. De La Luz Garcia, 501 F.3d 436,

442 (5th Cir. 2007) (reconsideration).

Class counsel’s motion for fees included documentation such as detailed

time and expense sheets, a survey of fee rates for Louisiana, a memorandum of

law, and declarations of counsel in support of the requested fees. The district

court did not abuse its discretion in awarding the requested fees nor in denying

the motion for reconsideration. 

The judgment is AFFIRMED.
DISMISS and Opinion Filed October 20, 2021 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-21-00031-CV 

DRISTI SHRESTHA, Appellant 

V. 

ENYA HERNANDEZ GONZALEZ, Appellee 

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 5 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. CC-19-02805-E 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Chief Justice Burns, Justice Molberg, and Justice Smith 

Opinion by Chief Justice Burns 

Seeking to appeal the trial court’s interlocutory summary judgment that 

granted Enya Gonzalez’s amended bill of review and set aside a no-answer default 

judgment against Gonzalez in a personal injury suit, Dristi Shrestha has filed a 

petition for permissive appeal. We deny the petition and dismiss the appeal for want 

of jurisdiction. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014(f); TEX. R. APP.
 –2– 

P. 42.3(a); Workers’ Comp. Sol. v. Tex. Health, L.L.C., No. 05-15-01504-CV, 2016 

WL 945571, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Mar. 14, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.). 

210031F.P05 

 

/Robert D. Burns, III/

ROBERT D. BURNS, III 

CHIEF JUSTICE 
 –3– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

DRISTI SHRESTHA, Appellant 

No. 05-21-00031-CV V. 

ENYA HERNANDEZ GONZALEZ, 

Appellee 

 On Appeal from the County Court at 

Law No. 5, Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. CC-19-02805-

E. 

Opinion delivered by Chief Justice 

Burns, Justices Molberg and Smith 

participating. 

 In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal. 

 We ORDER that appellee Enya Hernandez Gonzalez recover her costs, if 

any, of this appeal from appellant Dristi Shrestha. 

Judgment entered October 20, 2021.
Jacqueline Clark, Petitioner v. North Carolina Department of Public Safety, Respondent

No. COA15-624

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: September 6, 2016

AFFIRMED.