alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2010090EN.01S00301.xml

| 8.4.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 90/s3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 90/s3

---

NOTICE

On 8 April 2010, in Official Journal of the European Union C 90 A, the ‘Common catalogue of varieties of agricultural plant species — Third supplement to the 28th complete edition’ will be published.

Official Journal of the European Union

Subscribers to the Official Journal may obtain the same number of copies and language versions of this Official Journal as those to which they subscribe free of charge. They are requested to return the attached order form, duly completed and bearing their subscription registration number (code appearing on the left of each label and beginning with O/...). This Official Journal will remain available free of charge for one year from the date of its publication.

Non-subscribers can order this Official Journal against payment from one of our sales offices (see http://publications.europa.eu/others/agents/index_en.htm).

This Official Journal — like all Official Journals (L, C, CA, CE) — can be consulted free of charge online at http://eur-lex.europa.eu

Image

---
## State of N ew York Su p reme Cou rt, A p p ellate Division Third J u dicial Dep artment Decided and Entered: April 23, 2015 519141

________________________________ In the Matter of CHARLES WILLIAMS, Petitioner, v MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT THOMAS LAVALLEY, as Superintendent of Clinton Correctional Facility, Respondent.

________________________________ Calendar Date: February 24, 2015 Before: Peters, P.J., Garry, Rose and Clark, JJ.

__________ Charles Williams, Dannemora, petitioner pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Marcus J. Mastracco of counsel), for respondent.

__________ Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Clinton County) to review a determination of respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule. Determination confirmed. No opinion. Peters, P.J., Garry, Rose and Clark, JJ., concur.-2- 519141

ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger Clerk of the Court
Exhibit 10.2 - Acknowledgement Form






Exhibit 10.2


BIG LOTS EXECUTIVE SEVERANCE PLAN AND SUMMARY PLAN DESCRIPTION
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT & AGREEMENT


The undersigned employee (the “Employee”) of a subsidiary or an affiliate of Big Lots, Inc. (the “Employer”), in consideration for being offered eligibility to participate in the Big Lots Executive Severance Plan (the “Plan”) and Summary Plan Description, hereby acknowledges and agrees that:
		
	•
	The Employee has received a copy of the Plan;


		
	•
	The Employee agrees to be bound by the terms of the Plan, including, but not limited to, the restrictive covenants contained therein, which include both non-competition and non-solicitation restrictions; 


		
	•
	[The Employee agrees that Section IV.H of the Plan provides for no duplication of benefits and to the extent the Employee is eligible for benefits under the Plan and under the Employee’s Employment Agreement (as defined in the Plan), the Employee will be entitled to the greater of the benefits payable under the Plan or the Employment Agreement, subject in all respects to the eligibility requirements of the Plan and the restrictive covenants contained therein;]


		
	•
	For purposes of the Plan’s non-competition restriction, the Employee and Employer agree that, the term “Competitor” means any entity engaged in the same business as the Group Business (as defined in the Plan), including, without limitation, [●], and any successor, parent or subsidiary of any of the foregoing;


		
	•
	Except as otherwise provided in the CIC Agreements (as defined in the Plan) [and the Employment Agreements], the Employee and Employer agree that the Plan supersedes and replaces any and all prior arrangements, agreements, policies, plans, or understandings, whether written or oral, between the Employee and the Employer (or any predecessor thereto) regarding severance, separation, termination, change in control, or similar types of benefits or pay, including without limitation any employment agreement; 


		
	•
	The Employee agrees that the Employee’s entitlement (if any) to any of the types of benefits or pay described in the Plan shall be governed solely by the terms of the Plan; and


		
	•
	The Employee agrees that the Plan does not create a contractual guarantee of employment, either implied or expressed [, and that the Employee is an at-will employee, which means that either the Employer or the Employee can terminate the Employee’s employment at will, with or without Cause (as defined in the Plan), for any or no reason, at any time, with or without notice].




Agreed and Acknowledged By:


	
				
	 
	 
	 
	 

	Employee Signature
	 
	Employee Printed Name
	 

	 
	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 
	 

	Date
	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 
	 

	Employee Officer Signature
	 
	Employee Officer Printed Name
	 

	 
	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 
	 

	Date
	 
	Employee Officer Title
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

August 29, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

131025 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 131025 

 COA: 257684 

Wayne CC: 02-001170-01

TERRELL COUNTS, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 2, 2006 

judgment 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. 

p0821 

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. 

August 29, 2006 

 Clerk
# C_2010202EN.01000101.xml

| 24.7.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 202/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.7.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 202/1

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

23 July 2010

2010/C 202/01

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2897 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 112,48 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4520 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,83720 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,4410 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,3488 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,9660 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,180 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 287,17 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7091 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,0700 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,2648 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,9577 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4427 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3386 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,0200 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7741 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,7682 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 546,15 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 9,5756 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,7446 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,2450 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 11 668,20 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,1238 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 59,715 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 39,1430 |
| THB | Thai baht | 41,577 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,2686 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 16,4346 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 60,5320 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2897

JPY

Japanese yen

112,48

DKK

Danish krone

7,4520

GBP

Pound sterling

0,83720

SEK

Swedish krona

9,4410

CHF

Swiss franc

1,3488

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,9660

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,180

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

287,17

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7091

PLN

Polish zloty

4,0700

RON

Romanian leu

4,2648

TRY

Turkish lira

1,9577

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4427

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3386

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,0200

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7741

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,7682

KRW

South Korean won

1 546,15

ZAR

South African rand

9,5756

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,7446

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,2450

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

11 668,20

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,1238

PHP

Philippine peso

59,715

RUB

Russian rouble

39,1430

THB

Thai baht

41,577

BRL

Brazilian real

2,2686

MXN

Mexican peso

16,4346

INR

Indian rupee

60,5320

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
# C_2010129EN.01001501.xml

| 19.5.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 129/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.5.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 129/15

---

Call for proposals under the multi-annual work programme 2010 for grants in the field of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) for the period 2007-2013

(Commission Decision C(2010) 607 as amended by Commission Decision C(2010) 2681)

2010/C 129/07

The European Commission, Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport is hereby launching a call for proposals, under the multi-annual work programme for the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) for the period 2007-2013, in order to award grants to:

Field No 11: Projects in the field of River Information Services (RIS). The maximum total amount available for the selected proposals, for 2010, is EUR 10 million.

Field No 13: TEN-T Priority Project No 21 — Motorways of the Sea. The maximum total amount available for the selected proposals, for 2010, is EUR 85 million.

The deadline for the submission of proposals is 31 August 2010.

The complete text of the call for proposals is available on:

http://tentea.ec.europa.eu/en/apply_for_funding/follow_the_funding_process/calls_for_proposals_2010.htm

---
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

January 8, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 134994 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 134994 

 COA: 268804 

Calhoun CC: 2004-004501-FH 

NICHOLE TASHA JACOBY,

 Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 16, 2007 

judgment 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. 

d1217 

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. 

January 8, 2008 

Clerk
# C_2010082EN.01002402.xml

| 30.3.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 82/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.3.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 82/24

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5721 — Otto/Primondo Assets)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2010/C 82/04

On 16 February 2010, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32010M5721. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32010M5721. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
Household Finance Corporation                                   
Household Revolving Home Equity Loan Trust                      
1996-2
Revolving Home Equity Loan Asset Backed                         
Certificates - Series 1996-2
P & S Agreement Date:      November 1,                          
1996
Original Settlement Date:  November 26,                         
1996
Series Number of Class A-1 Certificates:                        
441919AK3
                                                                
Original Sale Balance:                                          
$776,373,000
                                                                
                                                                
                                             Sum of 1/20/98 -
                                                 12/21/98
1998 AGGREGATE PAYMENTS                     Distribution Dates
                                                                
Distribution Date                             Total 1998 (1)
                                                                
Class A-1 Interest Distributed                     32,024,215.16
Class A-1 Interest Pymt Factor (per 1,000)          41.248491588
                                                                
Investor Principal Distribution A-1               266,045,359.13
Class A-1 Principal Pymt Factor (per               342.677242936
1,000)
                                                                
                                                                
(1) These amounts represent cash                                
distributions paid by the trust during the
1998 calendar year.
As such, they do not represent the                              
economic accrual of interest for tax
purposes.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-6423

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus SHANNON DERRELL WILLIAMS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief District Judge. (3:02-cr-00085-JRS-AL; 3:05-cv-00100-JRS) Submitted: July 28, 2006 Decided: August 24, 2006 Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Shannon Derrell Williams, Appellant Pro Se. David T. Maguire, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Shannon Derrell Williams seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion and subsequent motion to reconsider pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 59. The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. SeeMiller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Williams has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
* Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED September 24, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-60922 Summary Calendar

JUAN DE LA CRUZ-PUENTE, Petitioner,

versus JOHN ASHCROFT, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent.

-------------------- Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A74 637 371

-------------------- Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * Juan de la Cruz-Puente (de la Cruz), represented by counsel, petitions this court for review of a final order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming the immigration judge’s
decis ion denying his application for cancellation of a removal
order entered against him. De la Cruz has failed to provide
citations to legal authorities in support of his allegations or to identify adequately any errors committed by the immigration judge

or the BIA and has raised different issues in the argumen t and2

summary of argument sections of his bri ef. See F E D . R. A PP . P. 28(a)(9); 5 TH C IR . R. 28.3( j); Brinkmann v. Dallas Cty. Deputy
Sheriff Abner , 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). Accordingly, de la Cruz’s petition is DENIED for failure to
brief his issues. S ee Soadjede v. Ashcroft , 324 F.3d 830, 833 (5th Cir. 2003).

PETITION DENIED.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5258 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5258

  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand eligibility to 
 receive refundable tax credits for coverage under a qualified health 
                                 plan.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 13, 2018

Mr. DeSaulnier introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand eligibility to 
 receive refundable tax credits for coverage under a qualified health 
                                 plan.

    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 the ``Affordable Health Insurance for the 
Middle Class Act''.

SEC. 2. EXPANSION OF ELIGIBILITY FOR REFUNDABLE CREDITS FOR COVERAGE 
              UNDER QUALIFIED HEALTH PLANS.

    (a) In General.--Section 36B(c)(1)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code 
of 1986 is amended by striking ``but does not exceed 400 percent''.
    (b) Conforming Amendment.--The table in section 36B(b)(3)(A)(i) of 
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``up to 400%'' 
and inserting ``or higher''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
# C_2010248EN.01000601.xml

| 15.9.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 248/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 248/6

---

NOTICE OF OPEN COMPETITIONS

2010/C 248/05

The European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) is organising the following open competitions:

| — | EPSO/AD/192/10 — Danish-language (DA) lawyer-linguists |
| --- | --- |

—

EPSO/AD/192/10 — Danish-language (DA) lawyer-linguists

EPSO/AD/192/10

| — | EPSO/AD/193/10 — German-language (DE) lawyer-linguists |
| --- | --- |

—

EPSO/AD/193/10 — German-language (DE) lawyer-linguists

EPSO/AD/193/10

| — | EPSO/AD/194/10 — English-language (EN) lawyer-linguists |
| --- | --- |

—

EPSO/AD/194/10 — English-language (EN) lawyer-linguists

EPSO/AD/194/10

| — | EPSO/AD/195/10 — Lithuanian-language (LT) lawyer-linguists |
| --- | --- |

—

EPSO/AD/195/10 — Lithuanian-language (LT) lawyer-linguists

EPSO/AD/195/10

| — | EPSO/AD/196/10 — Dutch-language (NL) lawyer-linguists |
| --- | --- |

—

EPSO/AD/196/10 — Dutch-language (NL) lawyer-linguists

EPSO/AD/196/10

| — | EPSO/AD/197/10 — Romanian-language (RO) lawyer-linguists |
| --- | --- |

—

EPSO/AD/197/10 — Romanian-language (RO) lawyer-linguists

EPSO/AD/197/10

The competition notice is published in Official Journal C 248 A of 15 September 2010
  in Danish, German, English, Lithuanian, Dutch and Romanian only.

C 248 A of 15 September 2010

Further details can be found on the EPSO website: http://eu-careers.eu

---
# C_2009296EN.01001501.xml

| 5.12.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 296/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.12.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 296/15

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5691 — Mubadala/Veolia Eau/Azaliya)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2009/C 296/03

On 1 December 2009, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32009M5691. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32009M5691. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

LEONARD GONZALEZ, SR.,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No. 3:10cv376/MCR/EMT

JAMES OWENS, et al.,

Defendants.

_____________________________/

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This matter is before the court on Plaintiff’s notice of voluntary dismissal of the instant civil

rights case (Doc. 8).

Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) provides that an action may be dismissed without an order of the court

by filing a notice of dismissal at any time before the adverse party serves an answer or files a motion

for summary judgment. Because Defendants have not yet been served in the instant case, it is clear

that Plaintiff is automatically entitled to a voluntary dismissal at this time.

Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED:

That Plaintiff’s notice of voluntary dismissal (Doc. 8) be GRANTED and this case be

DISMISSED without prejudice.

At Pensacola, Florida, this 3rd day of January 2011.

/s/ Elizabeth M. Timothy 

ELIZABETH M. TIMOTHY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Page 2 of 2

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

Objections to these proposed findings and recommendations may be filed within

fourteen (14) days after being served a copy thereof. Any different deadline that may appear

on the electronic docket is for the court’s internal use only. A copy of objections shall be

served upon the magistrate judge and all other parties. Failure to object may limit the scope

of appellate review of factual findings. See 28 U.S.C. § 636; United States v. Roberts, 858 F.2d

698, 701 (11th Cir. 1988).

Case No.: 3:10cv376/MCR/EMT