alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2010236EN.01000102.xml

| 1.9.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 236/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.9.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 236/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5931 — Banco Santander/German Retail Banking Business of Seb)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2010/C 236/02

On 26 June 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 32010M5931. 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 32010M5931. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
# C_2010096EN.01000102.xml

| 16.4.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 96/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.4.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 96/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5788 — Sharp/Enel Green Power/JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2010/C 96/02

On 7 April 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 32010M5788. 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 32010M5788. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
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 Agriculture

###### Forest Service

# AGENCY:

Forest Service, USDA.

# ACTION:

Notice; correction 

# SUMMARY:

                        The Forest Service published a document the                         **Federal Register**                         of November 9, 2007, concerning request for comments on the proposed action for the Roosevelt/Duchesne and Flaming Gorge Ranger Districts Travel Management Plan. The document identified a 45-day comment period from the date of publication. The closing date corresponds with December 24, 2007. In order to avoid, the scoping comment period closing during the holidays, we are extending the comment period to 60 days from the date of the original publication, which corresponds with January 8, 2008.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kris Rutledge, 435-781-5196.

                        In the                         **Federal Register**                         of November 9, 2007, in FR Doc. 72-217, on page 63551, in the second column the                         **DATES**                         caption to read:                    

# DATES:

                        The comment period on the proposed action will extend 60 days from the date the Notice of Intent is published in the                         **Federal Register**                        . The draft environmental impact statement is expected July 2009 and the final environmental impact statement is expected November 2009.                    

Dated: November 20, 2007.

Kevin B. Elliott,

Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 07-5875 Filed 11-28-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-P
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-7409

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

PAUL ALONZO EWING,

Defendant – Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, Senior 

District Judge. (2:09-cr-00083-JBF-TEM-1; 2:10-cv-00330-JBF)

Submitted: January 28, 2011 Decided: February 9, 2011

Before KING and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Lorraine Donner, Sr., HUBBARD, TERRY & BRITT, PC, 

Irvington, Virginia, for Appellant. Melissa Elaine O’Boyle, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Elizabeth Marie Yusi, OFFICE 

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Paul Alonzo Ewing seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2010) 

motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or 

judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1) (2006). 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) (2006). When the 

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional 

claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 

484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 

(2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural 

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive 

procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a 

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 

529 U.S. at 484-85. We have independently reviewed the record 

and conclude that Ewing 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
3

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

DISMISSED
EXHIBIT 23.1


                            KYLE L. TINGLE, CPA , LLC








To Whom It May Concern:                                             May 24, 2005



The firm of Kyle L. Tingle, Certified Public Accountant, LLC hereby consents to
the inclusion of his report of August 5, 2004, accompanying the audited
financial statements of Dazzling Investments, Inc., as at December 31, 2001 and
December 31, 2002, in the Form 10KSB.


Very truly yours,


/s/ KYLE L. TINGLE
____________________________
    Kyle L. Tingle, CPA, LLC

















P.O. Box 50141, Henderson, Nevada 89016, Phone: (702) 434-8452, Fax: (702)
436-4218, e-mail: ktingle@kyletinglecpa.com
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5334 

To repeal the funding authorization sunset and the total funding cap for 

the Essex National Heritage Area. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 19, 2018 

Mr. MOULTON (for himself and Ms. TSONGAS) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To repeal the funding authorization sunset and the total 

funding cap for the Essex National Heritage Area. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. ESSEX NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA. 

4 (a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the 

5 ‘‘Essex National Heritage Area Permanency Act’’. 

6 (b) REPEAL OF FUNDING AUTHORIZATION SUN7 SET.—Section 507 of division II of the Omnibus Parks 

8 and Public Lands Management Act of 1996 (Public Law 

9 104–333) is repealed. 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5334 IH

1 (c) REPEAL OF TOTAL FUNDING CAP.—Section 

2 508(a) of division II of the Omnibus Parks and Public 

3 Lands Management Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–333) 

4 is amended by striking the last sentence. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
*Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be

published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstancesset forth in LocalRule 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

For the Fifth Circuit

No. 96-60490

Summary Calendar

PASCUAL REN,

Petitioner,

VERSUS

IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE,

Respondent.

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

(A-70-671-591)

May 15, 1997

Before WISDOM, KING, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The appellant, Pascual Ren, petitions this court to review the decisio

Immigration Appeals upholding the Immigration Judge’s denial of his petitio

and withholding of deportation.

We will not reverse the findings of the Board of Immigration Appeals, 

Judge if the Board adopted his findings, if there is substantial evidence t
2

decision. Jukic v. I.N.S., 40 F.3d 747, 749 (5th Cir. 1994). Reversal is 

the evidence is “so compelling that no reasonable fact-finder could fail to 

fear of persecution”. I.N.S. v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 483-84 (1992

A review of the record indicates that Ren has not shown evidence of pa

fear of persecution because of one of the five statutory grounds in the def

at 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(a). Rather, Ren’s fear was one of conscription o

his refusal to be recruited. Hence, as the Immigration Judge found, any pe

experienced or fears he will experience is a result of his refusal to fight

abuse its discretion, therefore, in upholding the decision of the Immigrati

Ren contends that under international law he should be granted tempora

United States as a place of safe haven. That issue was not raised before t

not consider it. Ozdemir v. I.N.S., 46 F.3d 6, 8 (5th Cir. 1994). Further

international law controls only where there is no treaty and no controlling 

legislative act or judicial decision. Gisbert v. U.S. Attorney Gen., 988 F

Cir. 1993).

The petition for review is DENIED.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5269 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5269

    To require State or territorial approval of restriction by the 
Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce of recreational 
 or commercial fishing access to certain State or territorial waters, 
                             respectively.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 14, 2018

Mrs. Radewagen introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To require State or territorial approval of restriction by the 
Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce of recreational 
 or commercial fishing access to certain State or territorial waters, 
                             respectively.

    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 ``State and Territorial Approval for 
Restriction of Fishing Act'' or the ``STAR Fishing Act''.

SEC. 2. STATE OR TERRITORIAL APPROVAL OF RESTRICTION OF RECREATIONAL OR 
              COMMERCIAL FISHING ACCESS TO CERTAIN STATE OR TERRITORIAL 
              WATERS.

    (a) Approval Required.--The Secretary of the Interior and the 
Secretary of Commerce shall not restrict recreational or commercial 
fishing access to any State or territorial marine waters or Great Lakes 
waters within the jurisdiction of the National Park Service or the 
Office of National Marine Sanctuaries, respectively, unless those 
restrictions are developed in coordination with, and approved by, the 
fish and wildlife management agency of the State or territory that has 
fisheries management authority over those waters.
    (b) Definition.--In this section, the term ``marine waters'' 
includes coastal waters and estuaries.
                                 <all>
```
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

                     Washington, D.C.  20549


                          FORM 10-K/A


     ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
                SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 
           For the fiscal year ended December 31, 1997


Purpose:  To supplement in part Part IV, Item 14(c) of Company's
          previously filed Form 10-K in order to file as an exhibit
          the Annual Servicing Report of Company's Independent
          Public Accountants. 


                  Commission File Nos. 0-21971


            REVOLVING HOME EQUITY LOAN TRUST 1996-2 
     (Exact name of Registrant as specified in Department
      of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service Form SS-4)

HOUSEHOLD FINANCE CORPORATION
(Servicer of the Trust)
(Exact name as specified in Servicer's charter)


            DELAWARE                      Not Applicable         
(State or other jurisdiction of   (I.R.S. Employer Identification
incorporation of Servicer)        Number of Registrant


 2700 SANDERS ROAD, PROSPECT HEIGHTS, ILLINOIS         60070     
(Address of principal executive offices of           (Zip Code)
Servicer)


Servicer's telephone number, including area code  (847) 564-5000 











<PAGE>








                           SIGNATURES




     Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Servicer has duly caused this
amendment to be signed on behalf of the Revolving Home Equity Loan
Trust 1996-2 by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.




                          HOUSEHOLD FINANCE CORPORATION,
                         as Servicer of and on behalf of the

                       REVOLVING HOME EQUITY LOAN TRUST 1996-2
                                    (Registrant)




Date:  May 1, 1998            By:/s/John W. Blenke              
                                 John W. Blenke
                                 Assistant Secretary
















U:\WP\HFS088\95-10K\RHEL96-2.AMD


<PAGE>






                           Exhibit Index


Exhibit No.    Exhibit                                      Page No.

99             Copy of Independent Public Accountants          4
               Annual Servicing Report dated January 21,
               1998.
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 Justice

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that, on September 4, 2007, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301,                     *et seq*. (“the Act”), Petroleum Environmental Research Forum (“PERF”) Project No. 2004-06 has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, ExxonMobil Research and Engineering Company, Fairfax, VA; and Shell Global Solutions (US) Inc., Houston, TX have been added as parties to this venture.                

No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and PERF Project No. 2004-06 intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all change in membership.

                    On March 15,  2007, PERF Project No. 2004-06 filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on November 7, 2007 (72 FR 62867).                

Patricia A. Brink,

Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 07-6122 Filed 12-19-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5272 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

<DOC>
115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5272

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 13, 2018

     Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, 
                     Education, Labor, and Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To provide additional guidance to grantees seeking funding to treat or 
           prevent mental health or substance use disorders.

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

SECTION 1. GUIDANCE FROM NATIONAL MENTAL HEALTH AND SUBSTANCE USE 
              POLICY LABORATORY.

    Section 501A(b) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 290aa-
0(b)) is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (5), by striking ``and'' at the end;
            (2) in paragraph (6), by striking the period at the end and 
        inserting ``; and''; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(7) issue and periodically update guidance for entities 
        applying for grants from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health 
        Services Administration in order to--
                    ``(A) encourage the funding of evidence-based 
                practices;
                    ``(B) encourage the replication of promising or 
                effective practices; and
                    ``(C) inform applicants on how to best articulate 
                the rationale for the funding of a program or 
                activity.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives June 12, 2018.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

SHAN ZIRLOTT,

Plaintiff,

vs. 5:10cv164/SPM/MD

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,

Commissioner of the Social Security

Administration,

Defendant.

______________________________________________________________________ 

 

O R D E R

Plaintiff has filed a complaint for judicial review of an adverse administrative

decision of the defendant and has filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (doc.

3). It affirmatively appears that leave to proceed in forma pauperis should be

granted. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. Leave to proceed in forma pauperis (doc. 3) is granted and this case

may be filed and the pleadings may be served without the prepayment of costs to the

plaintiff as provided in 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

2. The clerk of court is directed to send three certified copies of this order,

the service copies of the complaint, the summons, and the prepared USM 285 forms

to the United States Marshal.

3. The United States Marshal shall serve a copy of the complaint and

summons upon Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security, the Attorney

General of the United States by certified mail, and the office of the United States 
Page 2 of 2

Attorney for this District by regular mail or by hand delivery. All costs of service

shall be advanced by the United States.

4. After a response to the complaint has been filed by the defendant, the

plaintiff shall be required to mail to the attorney for the defendant a copy of every

pleading or other paper, including letters, submitted for consideration by the court. 

The plaintiff shall include with the original paper to be filed with the clerk of court

a certificate stating the date a correct copy of the paper was mailed to each

defendant or to the attorney representing each defendant. Any paper submitted for

filing after a response to the complaint has been filed by the defendant which does

not contain a certificate of service shall be returned by the clerk and disregarded by

the court.

DONE AND ORDERED this 16 day of August, 2010. th

 /s/ Miles Davis

MILES DAVIS 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case No: 5:10cv164/SPM/MD
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 3:09cv395/RV/EMT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,

Defendants.

_______________________________/

O R D E R

This cause is before the court upon Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Discovery Directed to

Defendant United States of America (Doc. 84). Before the court rules on this matter, Defendant

United States of America shall have an opportunity to respond.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

Defendant United States of America shall respond to Plaintiff’s motion on or before

THURSDAY, AUGUST 26, 2010. Prior to responding, Defendant United States of America shall

fully review this court’s “Order Concerning Discovery Disputes,” which will be issued by separate

order on today’s date.

DONE AND ORDERED this 23rd day of August 2010.

/s/ Elizabeth M. Timothy 

ELIZABETH M. TIMOTHY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE