Given a paragraph, generate a claim that is supported by the given paragraph. 1) The claim must contain information from within the paragraph. 2) A sentence within the paragraph can be used as a claim. 3) The claim should not have contradictions within the paragraph. 4) The claim should be at most one sentence long.

Lawyers for the 85-year-old fugitive director petitioned Los Angeles Superior Court to compel the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences to make him a member in good standing again. In May, the academy made the rare move of expelling Polanski and Bill Cosby, months after ending the membership of disgraced movie mogul Harvey Weinstein. Polanski appealed the decision, and in January the academy rejected his appeal. Friday’s five-page filing states that by not giving Polanski sufficient notice of his expulsion, and not giving he or his lawyer to argue his case in person during the appeal, the academy “failed to comply with its own rules, policies and regulations.” The academy responded with a brief statement saying, “The procedures taken to expel Mr. Polanski were fair and reasonable. The Academy stands behind its decision as appropriate.” The filing also alleges that the expulsion violated a California law that requires corporations to give a fair hearing before removing a member, calling it a “prejudicial abuse of discretion.” Polanski’s attorney Harland Braun said at the time that Polanski was “blindsided” by his removal, and learned of it through media reports. The filing says that the academy’s decision is final and the director has no recourse for reconsideration outside of the courts. Polanski, who won a best director Oscar for “The Pianist” in 2003, remains a fugitive after pleading guilty to unlawful sex with a minor in 1977 and fleeing the United States the following year. He has been living in Europe since. He had been an academy member for nearly 50 years at the time of his expulsion, and his films had been nominated for 28 Oscars. But he had long been one of the organization’s more divisive members. At the 2003 ceremony, Polanski’s win — his first — received a standing ovation. He was not in attendance. He’d previously been nominated for writing his adaptation of “Rosemary’s Baby,” and directing “Chinatown” and “Tess.” Polanski’s ouster from the group means he can no longer vote for nominees and winners, but he and his films can still win Oscars. After expelling Weinstein, the academy implemented revised standards of conduct for its over 8,400 members. The standards said the organization is no place for “people who abuse their status, power or influence in a manner that violates standards of decency.” The code allowed the academy’s board to suspend or expel those who violate the code of conduct or who “compromise the integrity” of the academy. There have been no reports of Weinstein or Cosby appealing their expulsions from the academy. Before Weinstein, only one person is thought to have been expelled from the academy: Carmine Caridi, a character actor who had his membership revoked in 2004 for lending DVD screeners of films in contention for Oscars. ___ AP Film Writer Jake Coyle contributed to this report from New York. ___ Follow AP Entertainment Writer Andrew Dalton on Twitter: https://twitter.com/andyjamesdalton .
Polanski asks court to restore his film academy membership.

"In a press conference on May 5 in which Gov. Greg Abbott updated his reopening plan to add businesses such as hair salons and gyms, he recommended that at-risk populations ""remain at home if at all possible"" and avoid in-person gatherings, such as a church service, funeral or wedding. ""We strongly encourage at-risk populations to try to watch or participate remotely, remembering this very important point, and that is almost 75 percent of the deaths from COVID-19 in the state of Texas are a result of people contracting COVID-19 who are age 65 and older,"" Abbott said. Texas was among the first states to start reopening businesses and lifting restrictions put in place to curb the spread of the coronavirus, allowing retail stores and restaurants to open May 1 at 25 percent capacity. Abbott announced the latest set of reopenings Monday, expanding restaurant capacity to 50 percent and granting bars the ability to open at 25 percent capacity within the next couple weeks. This comes as the state continues to see its number of infections and deaths rise and clusters form mostly in rural parts of the state where meatpacking plants are located. Hospitalizations, however, have decreased since mid-April. With that in mind, we had to ask: Is Abbott right that almost 75% of coronavirus deaths in Texas are people older than 65? Looking at the numbers Abbott’s spokesman John Wittman said Abbott’s claim is based on figures from the Texas Department of Health Services, which publishes daily numbers on the state’s COVID-19 testing and cases. The data includes a breakdown of coronavirus deaths by age, race and gender, but only for those cases where the deaths have been investigated by the local and regional health departments. As of Wednesday, the majority, or 489, were still under investigation. ""The demographic data on cases and fatalities come from the case investigation forms submitted by local health departments and our regional offices,"" said DSHS spokesman Chris Van Deusen. The purpose of the investigation is to confirm that the person had COVID-19 but also to collect other details about them and the circumstances around their death, Van Deusen said. Wittman said the data showed that 75% of investigated deaths were people 65 and older when Abbott made this statement. ""It alternates almost daily, but it’s generally around that range,"" Wittman said. As of May 6, the day after the press conference, the death toll in Texas was 948. Fewer than half, or 433, had been investigated. Of those, about 71 percent were Texans 65 and older. It was still about 71 percent, or 345 out of 489 investigated cases, as of Wednesday. The age groups broke down like so: Ages 10 to 19 years old: 2 deaths, or 0.4% Ages 20-29: 10 deaths, or 2.04 % Ages 30-39: 9 deaths, or 1.8% Ages 40-49: 21 deaths, or 4.29% Ages 50-59: 54 deaths, or 11.04% Ages 60-64: 45 deaths, or 9.2% Ages 65-69: 59 deaths, or 12.06% Ages 70-74: 45 deaths, or 9.2% Ages 75-79: 45 deaths, or 9.2% Ages 80+: 196 deaths, or 40.08% Across the United States, about 79% of coronavirus deaths have been people 65 years and older, according to the National Center for Health Statistics data submitted between the beginning of February to the beginning of May. Like Texas’ statistics, the national numbers are also incomplete. The number of deaths represent only those entered between those dates and only include people with confirmed or presumed COVID-19. ""While 80% of deaths are electronically processed and coded by NCHS within minutes, most deaths from COVID-19 must be coded by a person, which takes an average of 7 days,"" the NCHS states on its website. The data is also always somewhat behind because of the lag time between when a death occurred and when a death certificate is completed, submitted to NCHS and processed for reporting purposes. The delay can last anywhere from one week to eight or more. Our ruling Abbott said almost ""75 percent of the deaths from COVID-19 in the state of Texas are a result of people contracting COVID-19 who are age 65 and older."" Of confirmed coronavirus deaths, close to 75% were people within the age group Abbott provided, but he failed to include the caveat that this statistic leaves out more than half of the total deaths that have not yet been investigated."
“Almost 75 percent of the deaths from COVID-19 in the state of Texas are a result of people contracting COVID-19 who are age 65 and older.”

While the story only touches on the costs of flu shots in passing, saying that they’re relatively cheap, we’ll give them the benefit of the doubt on this category. At least at two points in the story, the issue of costs are raised. We would have liked it even better had the story mentioned the actual range of possible costs for the flu vaccine. A quick web search shows the prices ranging from $10 to $30, based on information from the CDC. And free shots are regularly available at public health centers as well. The story does a good job of explaining what the actual benefits of the influenza vaccine really are. Just as a recent HealthNewsReview.org blog post did, the story goes way beyond the typical media version touting claims of X-percent effectiveness and explains what that means in terms of individual people escaping flu symptoms. This accuracy of interpretation does carry with it, however, one risk:  For a public so used to hearing that vaccines are, say, 60 percent effective, actually finding out that they’d only prevent one person from getting symptoms for every 33 people vaccinated may not sound good enough for the lay person. The story does mention that the risks of negative reactions to getting a flu shot usually center on inflammation at the site of the injection, a comparatively minor side effect. It emphasizes that given such a minimal risk, there are very few harms for getting this protection, minimal though it may be in some years. The story gives readers the results of numerous meta-studies that compile partial answers on the vaccine’s effectiveness. It also rightly points out the limitations of those studies, and the research they’re based on, in that ethics forbids the kind of control versus placebo trials that could show cause and effect. Nevertheless, the story is clear in pointing out the limitations of the data it presents, giving readers enough information to make their own decisions. The annual influenza outbreaks offer the possibility for disease-mongering but we feel that’s not the case with this story. The author of this story compiles ample evidence from reliable and respected independent sources concerning influenza. It does not, however, offer any information concerning conflicts of interest, but with this type of story, we’re hard pressed to see how there would be a conflict. The story does mention the meager alternatives to influenza vaccination — that is, proper hand washing hygiene and the isolation of flu patients from those free of the disease. The story offers answers to basic questions about the value of getting an annual flu shot. Those questions are obviously based on the fact that flu vaccines are usually readily available for those who want them. While some years present a possible shortage of vaccine, for most years, vaccination is determined by personal choice, rather than availability. The story appropriately explains that this vaccine has been around for decades. The story is taking a second look at the vaccine’s effectiveness, which as it explains varies from year to year and may not be as high as most people think. The story shows no indications that it was based on a news release.

How well do flu shots work? Here’s what the science says.