alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2012181EN.01020001.xml

| 21.6.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 181/200 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.6.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 181/200

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Amended proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 as regards information to the general public on medicinal products for human use subject to medical prescription’

COM(2012) 49 final — 2008/0255 (COD)

2012/C 181/36

On 27 February and 13 March 2012 respectively, the Council and the European Parliament decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Articles 114 and 168 (4)(c) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, on the

Amended proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 as regards information to the general public on medicinal products for human use subject to medical prescription

Amended proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 as regards information to the general public on medicinal products for human use subject to medical prescription

COM(2012) 49 final — 2008/0255 (COD).

Since the Committee had already set out its views on the contents of the proposal in question in opinion CESE 1025/2009, adopted on 10 June 2009 (1), it decided at its 479th plenary session, held on 28 and 29 March 2012 (meeting of 28 March), by 156 votes to 1 with 9 abstentions, not to draw up a new opinion on the subject, but to refer to the position it had taken in the above-mentioned document.

1

Brussels, 28 March 2012.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Staffan NILSSON

---

(1)  OJ C 306, 16.12.2009, p. 33.

1

---
Exhibit 4.1


 


Advisors Asset Management, Inc.

18925 Base Camp Road

Monument, Colorado 80132


April 14, 2020


 


Advisors Disciplined Trust 2008


c/o The Bank of New York Mellon, as Trustee


BNY Atlantic Terminal


2 Hanson Place, 12th Floor


Brooklyn, New York 11217


 


Re: Advisors Disciplined Trust 2008 (the “Fund”)


Ladies and Gentlemen:


We have examined
the Registration Statement File No. 333-236189 for the above captioned Fund. We hereby consent to the use in the Registration Statement
of the references to Advisors Asset Management, Inc. as evaluator.


You are hereby authorized
to file a copy of this letter with the Securities and Exchange Commission.


 


 


	 	Very truly yours,



	 	 
	 	Advisors Asset Management, Inc.



	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	By	/s/
    ALEX R. MEITZNER
	 	 	Alex R. Meitzner
	 	 	Senior Vice President
Exhibit 10.2

 

**STRAIGHTNOTE**

 

 
|   | $360,000 |   | South El Monte, California |   | February  22, 2002 |   |
|--------|----------|--------|----------------------------|--------|--------------------|--------|

 

For value received, Lee Pharmaceuticals promises to pay Mark DiSalvo ororder, at South El Monte, California the sum of THREE HUNDRED AND SIXTYTHOUSAND DOLLARS, with interest from February 22, 2002, on unpaid principal atthe rate of twenty four (24) per cent per annum; principal is payable monthly,commencing on March 15, 2002, with monthly principal payments of $15,000.  Interest shall be calculated on the basis ofthe unpaid principal balance daily, based on a 365-day year, actual day monthand payable monthly.  Principal andinterest shall be payable in lawful money of the United States.  If action were instituted on this note, Ipromise to pay such sum as the Court may fix as attorney’s fees.  This note is secured by the propertieslocated at 1444 Santa Anita Avenue and 1445 Lidcombe Avenue in So. El Monte,California.

 

 
|   | February  21, 2002 |   | RONALD G. LEE                             |   |
|--------|--------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Date               |   | Lee Pharmaceuticals - Ronald G.  Lee      |
|   |               |   |                                      |
|   |               |   |                                      |
|   | February  21, 2002 |   | MICHAEL L. AGRESTI                        |   |
|   | Date               |   | Lee Pharmaceuticals - Michael  L. Agresti |

 

----
# C_2011203EN.01001901.xml

| 9.7.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 203/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.7.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 203/19

---

Communication from the Ministry of the Environment of the Czech Republic pursuant to Article 3(2) of Directive 94/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the conditions for granting and using authorisations for the prospection, exploration and production of hydrocarbons

2011/C 203/10

The Ministry of the Environment of the Czech Republic wishes to announce that it has received an application for the establishment of an area for the prospection and exploration of hydrocarbons in the south-eastern part of the Czech Republic (Trutnovsko), as demarcated on the map which is attached as Annex 1.

With reference to the Directive mentioned in the title and to Article 11 of Act No 44/1988 on the protection and exploitation of mineral resources (Mining Act), as amended, and to Article 4d of Czech National Council Act No 62/1988 on geological works, as amended, the Ministry of the Environment invites natural or legal persons holding an authorisation to carry out mining activities (awarding entities) to submit a competing application to establish an area for the prospection and exploration of hydrocarbons in the south-eastern part of the Czech Republic (Trutnovsko).

The authority competent to take the decision is the Ministry of the Environment of the Czech Republic. The criteria, conditions and requirements in Article 5(1) and (2) and Article 6(2) of the above Directive are set out in full in Czech legislation in Czech National Council Act No 62/1988 on geological works, as amended.

Applications may be submitted during the 13 weeks following the publication of this notice in the Official Journal of the European Union and should be sent to:

Official Journal of the European Union

| Martin Holý |
| --- |
| Director of the Department for Protection of the Mineral and Soil Environment |
| Ministry of the Environment of the Czech Republic |
| Vršovická 65 |
| 100 10 Praha 10 |
| ČESKÁ REPUBLIKA |

Martin Holý

Director of the Department for Protection of the Mineral and Soil Environment

Ministry of the Environment of the Czech Republic

Vršovická 65

100 10 Praha 10

ČESKÁ REPUBLIKA

Applications received after the expiry of this period will not be considered. A decision on the applications will be taken not later than 12 months after this period has expired.

Further information is available on request from Jaroslav Česnek (Tel. +420 267122652).

---
#### STATE v. CARVER

No. 117 PC.

Case below: 54 N.C. App. 365.

Petition by defendant Carver for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 3 March 1982. Motion of Attorney General to dismiss appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question allowed 3 March 1982.
# C_2011359EN.01000101.xml

| 9.12.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 359/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.12.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 359/1

---

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

(Text with EEA relevance, except for products falling under Annex I to the Treaty)

2011/C 359/01

| Date of adoption of the decision | 29.6.2011 |
| --- | --- |
| Reference number of State Aid | SA.18760 (NN 10/10) |
| Member State | France |
| Region | — |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | Taxe pour financer un comité interprofessionnel national porcin (Inaporc) |
| Legal basis | Code rural, livre sixième, titre III (articles L. 631-1 à L. 632-13). Arrêtés interministériels relatifs à l’extension des accords interprofessionnels; accords interprofessionnels |
| Type of measure | Scheme | — |
| Objective | Advertising (AGRI), Encouraging quality products, Research and development, Technical support (AGRI) |
| Form of aid | Subsidised services |
| Budget | Overall budget: EUR 44,03 million |
| Intensity | 100 % |
| Duration (period) | 2.2.2004-9.12.2008 |
| Economic sectors | All economic sectors eligible to receive aid |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Inaporc |
| 149 rue de Bercy |
| 75595 Paris Cedex 12 |
| FRANCE |

Date of adoption of the decision

29.6.2011

Reference number of State Aid

SA.18760 (NN 10/10)

Member State

France

Region

—

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Taxe pour financer un comité interprofessionnel national porcin (Inaporc)

Legal basis

Code rural, livre sixième, titre III (articles L. 631-1 à L. 632-13). Arrêtés interministériels relatifs à l’extension des accords interprofessionnels; accords interprofessionnels

Type of measure

Scheme

—

Objective

Advertising (AGRI), Encouraging quality products, Research and development, Technical support (AGRI)

Form of aid

Subsidised services

Budget

Overall budget: EUR 44,03 million

Intensity

100 %

Duration (period)

2.2.2004-9.12.2008

Economic sectors

All economic sectors eligible to receive aid

Name and address of the granting authority

Inaporc

149 rue de Bercy

75595 Paris Cedex 12

FRANCE

Other information

—

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/state_aids/state_aids_texts_en.htm

---
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

ANTONIO WHITE,

Petitioner,

vs. Case No.: 3:10cv182/MCR/EMT

KENNETH S. TUCKER,

Respondent.

_________________________________/

O R D E R

This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge’s Report and

Recommendation dated May 17, 2012 (doc. 14). The parties have been furnished a copy

of the Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an opportunity to file

objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). The Petitioner filed

objections (doc. 16), which the court has reviewed and determined de novo.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and the timely filed objections,

the court determines that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and

incorporated by reference in this order.

2. The petition for writ of habeas corpus (doc. 1) is DENIED.

3. A certificate of appealability is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 23rd day of June, 2012.

s/ M. Casey Rodgers 

M. CASEY RODGERS

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:10-cv-00182-MCR-EMT Document 17 Filed 06/23/12 Page 1 of 1
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2251 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2251

To permanently extend the exemption for the aging process of distilled 
 spirits from the production period for purposes of capitalization of 
                            interest costs.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 24, 2019

Mr. McConnell (for himself and Mr. Paul) introduced the following bill; 
     which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To permanently extend the exemption for the aging process of distilled 
 spirits from the production period for purposes of capitalization of 
                            interest costs.

    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 ``Advancing Growth in the Economy 
through Distilled Spirits Act'' or the ``AGED Spirits Act''.

SEC. 2. PRODUCTION PERIOD OF DISTILLED SPIRITS.

    (a) In General.--Subparagraph (B) of section 263A(f)(4) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read as follows:
                    ``(B) Termination.--Clauses (i) and (ii) of 
                subparagraph (A) shall not apply to interest costs paid 
                or accrued after December 31, 2019.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to interest costs paid or accrued after December 31, 2019.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

PLANET BINGO, LLC, 

a California limited liability company,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO. 5:10-cv-64/RS-MD

WILD BILL’S BINGO, INC., 

A Florida corporation,

Defendant.

_________________________________________/

UORDER

Before me are Plaintiff Planet Bingo LLC’s Motion for Summary Judgment As To 

Count One of Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. 48), Motion to Reinstate Case for Further 

Proceedings to Enable Completion of Settlement (Doc. 61). Both Motions are not 

opposed by Defendant (Docs. 54 and 63). 

IT IS ORDERED: 

1. Plaintiff’s Motion For Summary Judgment (Doc. 48) as to Count I of the 

complaint is GRANTED. 

2. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant 

as to Count I of the Complaint in the principal amount of $682,907.00; attorneys’ 

fees in the amount of $90,000; prejudgment interest at the annual rate of 18% 

upon the principal amount from September 14, 2009 until the date of the 
judgment; and post-judgment interest at the annual rate of 18% upon the principal 

amount from the date of this judgment until the principal amount is paid. 

ORDERED on January 18, 2011

 /S/ Richard Smoak

 RICHARD SMOAK

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SANDEEP SINGH,

Petitioner,

v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 14

- 71724 Agency No. A200

- 945

- 577

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 14, 2016 **

Before: BEA, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Sandeep Singh, a native and citizen of India, seeks review of the Board of
Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration
judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and

relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

JUN 22 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 14

- 71724

8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual
findings , Wakkary v. Holder , 558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir. 2009) , and we review

for abuse of discretion the agency’s denial of humanitarian asylum, Belayneh v.

INS , 213 F.3d 488, 491 (9th Cir. 2000)

. We review de novo due process

con tentions. Sandova l

-

Luna v. Mukasey , 526 F.3d 1243, 1246 (9th Cir. 2008)

. We deny the petition for review.
The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Singh’s request for
humanitarian asylum based on his past mistreatment in India. See Belayneh , 213
F.3d at 491 (record lacked evidence of atrocious past persecution).
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that , even if he
credibly established past persecution, the presumption of future persecution was rebutted by evidence that he could relocate within India and it would be reasonable

for him to do so. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(b)(1)(i)(B) (asylum) ; 8 C.F.R.
§ 1208.16(b)(1)(i)(B) (withholding of removal) ; see also Gonzalez

– Hernandez v.
Ashcroft , 336 F.3d 995, 999

- 1000 (9th C ir. 2003) (noting “an individual who can
relocate safely within his home country ordinarily cannot qualify for asylum”)

. We reject Singh’s contention that the BIA improperly allocated the burden of proof

for internal relocation. Thus, we deny the petitio n as to Singh’s asylum and3 14

- 71724

withholding of removal claims.
Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of Singh’s CAT claim
because he failed to establish it is more likely than not he would be tortured by or

with the co nsent or acquiescence of the government if returned to India. See
Silaya v. Mukasey , 524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th Cir. 2008)

. Finally, we reject Singh’s contentions that the BIA ignored evidence , see

Fernandez v. Gonzale s , 439 F.3d 592, 603 (9 th Cir. 2006), or otherwise violated

his due process rights , s ee Lata v. INS , 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000)
(requiring error to prevail on a due process claim )

.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-40994

Summary Calendar

ODA GARCIA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

CITY OF LAREDO, A home Rule City; HECTOR GONZALEZ, Official 

Capacity; OSCAR PEREZ, Official Capacity; CYNTHIA COLLAZO, Official 

Capacity; MONICA FLORES, Official Capacity; RAUL CASSO, Official 

Capacity, 

 Defendants - Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:14-CV-140

Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

This appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction there being no 

appealable judgment.

 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

September 17, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 14-40994 Document: 00513197363 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/17/2015
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 Veterans Affairs

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under Public Law 92-463 (Federal Advisory Committee Act) that the National Research Advisory Council will hold a meeting on Monday, December 3, 2007, in Room 900 at the Greenhoot Cohen Building, 1722 Eve Street, NW., Washington, DC. The meeting will convene at 8 a.m. and end at 3 p.m. The meeting is open to the public.

The purpose of the Council is to provide external advice and review for VA's research mission. The December 3 meeting agenda will include a review of the VA research portfolio. The Council will also provide feedback on the direction/focus on VA's research initiatives.

                    Any member of the public who expects to attend the meeting or wants additional information should contact Jay A. Freedman, Ph.D., Designated Federal Officer, at (202) 254-0267. Oral comments from the public will not be accepted at the meeting. Written statements or comments should be transmitted electronically to                     *jay.freedman@va.gov*                     or mailed to Dr. Freedman at Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of Research and Development (12), 810 Vermont Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20420.                

Dated: November 2, 2007. 

By direction of the Secretary.

E. Philip Riggin,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 07-5578 Filed 11-7-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8320-01-M
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

IRA LEE McQUEEN

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 3:10cv85/MCR/CJK

DAVID MORGAN, et al.,

Defendants.

______________________________________/

ORDER AND REFERRAL TO SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

Pursuant to the court’s September 30, 2011, order on summary judgment (doc. 67),

this case is ready for trial. In order to assist the court in effectively managing its calendar,

counsel are directed to confer personally and notify the court in writing within five (5)

working days of the expected length of the trial and confirm whether this case is to be a

trial by judge or jury. All parties will be notified by separate order of the dates for the pretrial conference, if necessary, and trial.

Furthermore, the court notes the parties entered into a court ordered mediation on

February 16, 2011, which resulted in an impasse. (See doc. 41). Before this matter is set

for trial, it appears appropriate that the parties should further explore resolution of the

remaining claims. Accordingly, this matter is hereby referred to the assigned U.S.

Magistrate Judge for a settlement conference pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(A). 

SO ORDERED this 4th day of October, 2011.

 s/ M. Casey Rodgers 

 M. CASEY RODGERS

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:10-cv-00085-MCR-CJK Document 68 Filed 10/04/11 Page 1 of 1
Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 1 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 2 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 3 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 4 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 5 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 6 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 7 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 8 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 9 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 10 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 11 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 12 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 13 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 14 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 15 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 16 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 17 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 18 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 19 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 20 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 21 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 22 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 23 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 24 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 25 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 26 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 27 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 28 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 29 of 30Case 3:09-cv-00402-WS-MD Document 1 Filed 09/09/09 Page 30 of 30