alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2006310EN.01002501.xml

| 16.12.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 310/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 310/25

---

Action brought on 19 October 2006 — Dongguan Nanzha Leco Stationery v Council

(Case T-296/06)

(2006/C 310/47)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Dongguan Nanzha Leco Stationery Mfg. Co., Ltd (Dongguan City, China) (represented by: A. P. Bentley, QC)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | Annul Council Regulation (EC) No 1136/2006 in so far as it applies to the applicant; and |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul Council Regulation (EC) No 1136/2006 in so far as it applies to the applicant; and

| — | order the Council to bear the costs of the present proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Council to bear the costs of the present proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant, who is a Chinese producer of lever arch mechanisms, seeks the annulment of Council Regulation (EC) No 1136/2006 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of lever arch mechanisms originating in the People's Republic of China (1), in so far as the regulation affects the applicant.

1

In support of its application, the applicant invokes an infringement of Article 2(10) of the Basic Regulation (2) in that the Community institutions determined the applicant's export price at a level ex factory in China which did not include sales, general and administrative expenses, whereas the normal value did include such expenses.

2

The applicant further invokes an infringement of the principles of good administration and diligent investigation in that the Community institutions failed to verify data relating to the sales, general and administrative expenses of the sales company through which the applicant sells its products in order to determine whether the applicant's export price should be determined at the price level of this sales company instead of at the price level of the applicant's factory in China.

Finally, the applicant invokes an infringement of Article 2(7) of the Basic Regulation and the principles of good administration and objectivity in that the Community institutions changed their methodology for determining the normal value without any apparent objective justification.

---

(1)  OJ 2006 L 205, p. 1.

1

(2)  Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (OJ 1996 L 56, p. 1).

2

---
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE O F FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME E XPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED AL AN THOMAS , Appel lant ,
v. Case No. 5D 21

- 3132 LT Case No. 2020

- CF

- 003604

- A

- O STATE O F F LORIDA ,

Appellee

. ________________________________/ Decision filed November 29, 2022 Appeal f rom t he Circuit C ourt f or Orange County , Tarlika Teresa N unez - Navarro , Judg e. Matthew J. M etz, Public Defender, a nd George D. E

. B urden, A ssistant P ubli c Defender, D aytona B each, f or Appellant. Ashley Moody, A ttorney G eneral, Tallahassee, an d P amela J. Koller, Assistant Attorney General, D aytona Beach, f or Appellee. PER CUR IAM. AFFIRMED.

SASSO , NARDELLA and WOZNIAK , JJ. , co ncur.
### §949p–3. Protective orders

Upon motion of the trial counsel, the military judge shall issue an order to protect against the disclosure of any classified information that has been disclosed by the United States to any accused in any military commission under this chapter or that has otherwise been provided to, or obtained by, any such accused in any such military commission.

(Added Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title XVIII, §1802, Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2591.)
# C_2006326EN.01000301.xml

| 30.12.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 326/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 326/3

---

Appointment of the First Advocate General

(2006/C 326/06)

Under the third subparagraph of Article 10(1) of the Rules of Procedure, the Court of Justice appointed Ms Kokott as First Advocate General for a period of one year ending on 6 October 2007.

---
#### § 48.208 How does a Bureau-operated school process donated funds?

The Bureau will deposit all funds received as donations into the designated Treasury account. Once the Bureau deposits the funds, the Bureau will work with the Bureau-operated school to make the funds available for school purposes.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

________________ _________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,

v. SAMUEL SOTO-CAMPOS, Defendant - Appellan t

. No. 23-4007 (D.C. No. 2:20-CR-00184-DAK-1) (D. Utah)

________________ _________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

________________ _________________ Before PHILLIPS , KELLY , and ROSSMAN , Circuit Judges. **

_____

_______________ _____________ Defendant-Appellant Samuel Soto-Cam pos pled guilty to possession of methamphetamine with intent to distri bute, 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A) (Count I), and reentry of a previously re moved alien, 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (Count IV), and was sentenced to 132 months’ imprisonmen t and five years’ s upervised release. Count I carried a 10-year mandatory minimu m sentence of imprisonment. On appeal, he argues that the district court erred in not recognizing his eligibility for safety-

* This order and judgment is not bi nding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judica ta, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consiste nt with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.

** After examining the briefs and appellate record, th is panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not ma terially assist in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### March 27, 2024 Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court Appellate Case: 23-4007 Document: 010111022660 Date Filed: 03/27/2024 Page: 12 valve relief from the mandato ry minimum on Count I. Ou r jurisdiction arises under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a) and we affirm. The district court decide d that Mr. Soto-Campos wa s ineligible for safety valve relief because he was unable to sati sfy all three criminal -history requirements listed in 18 U.S.C. §§ 3553(f)(1)(A), (B), and (C). 1 We abated his appeal pending the Supreme Court’s resolution of Pulsifer v. United States, 601 U.S. __, 2024 WL 1120879 (2024). The Supreme Court subsequently held that a defendant is eligible for safety-valve relief only if he meets a ll three conditions. Id. at *3. Although Mr. Campos could satisfy one of the conditions, specifically § 3553(f)(1)(C), he could not satisfy the other conditions, § 3553(f)(1)(A) and (B). Accordingly, the district court correctly determined that he was ineligible for th e safety valve.
AFFIRMED.

Entered for the Court Paul J. Kelly, Jr. Circuit Judge

1 Mr. Soto-Campos also argued that he should have been excused from meeting the truthful disclosure requireme nt of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f)(5) because the government did not provide him with intercepted phone calls and messages. The district court did not reach this issue. Appellate Case: 23-4007 Document: 010111022660 Date Filed: 03/27/2024 Page: 2
§ 63.24 What protections must employers provide to applicants, volunteers and employees? ( a ) Indian tribes and tribal organizations must comply with the privacy requirements of any Federal, state, or other tribal agency providing background investigations. Indian tribes and tribal organizations must establish and comply with personnel policies that safeguard information derived from background investigations.
( b ) The Bureau of Indian Affairs must comply with all policies, procedures, criteria, and guidance contained in the Bureau of Indian Affairs Manual or other appropriate guidelines.
( c ) Federal agencies exercising authority under this part by delegation from OPM must comply with OPM policies, procedures, criteria, and guidance.
#### In the Matter of the Mayor, etc. In the Matter of Giuseppe A. Muliori, Deceased.

Motion granted. Settle order on notice.
§ 556.2 Privacy notice. ( a ) A tribe shall place the following notice on the application form for a key employee or a primary management official before that form is filled out by an applicant: In compliance with the Privacy Act of 1974, the following information is provided: Solicitation of the information on this form is authorized by 25 U.S.C. 2701 *et seq.* The purpose of the requested information is to determine the eligibility of individuals to be granted a gaming license. The information will be used by the Tribal gaming regulatory authorities and by the National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC) members and staff who have need for the information in the performance of their official duties. The information may be disclosed by the Tribe or the NIGC to appropriate Federal, Tribal, State, local, or foreign law enforcement and regulatory agencies when relevant to civil, criminal, or regulatory investigations or prosecutions or when pursuant to a requirement by a tribe or the NIGC in connection with the issuance, denial, or revocation of a gaming license, or investigations of activities while associated with a tribe or a gaming operation. Failure to consent to the disclosures indicated in this notice will result in a tribe's being unable to license you for a primary management official or key employee position. The disclosure of your Social Security Number (SSN) is voluntary. However, failure to supply a SSN may result in errors in processing your application.
( b ) A tribe shall notify in writing existing key employees and primary management officials that they shall either: ( 1 ) Complete a new application form that contains a Privacy Act notice; or
( 2 ) Sign a statement that contains the Privacy Act notice and consent to the routine uses described in that notice.
( c ) All license application forms used one-hundred eighty (180) days after February 25, 2013 shall comply with this section.
[78 FR 5279, Jan. 25, 2013, as amended at 80 FR 31994, June 5, 2015]
### SUBCHAPTER IV—PAYMENT, CLEARING, AND SETTLEMENT SUPERVISION
# C_2006326EN.01000103.xml

| 30.12.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 326/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 326/1

---

Election of the Presidents of the Chambers

(2006/C 326/03)

At their meeting on 9 October 2006, the Judges of the Court of Justice elected, under the first subparagraph of Article 10(1) of the Rules of Procedure, Mr Jann, Mr Timmermans, Mr Rosas and Mr Lenaerts as Presidents of the First, Second, Third and Fourth Chambers of five Judges respectively for a period of three years ending on 6 October 2009.

At their meeting on 12 October 2006, the Judges of the Court of Justice elected, under the second subparagraph of Article 10(1) of the Rules of Procedure, Mr Schintgen, Mr Kūris, Mr Klučka and Mr Juhász as Presidents of the Fifth, Sixth, Seventh and Eighth Chambers of three Judges respectively for a period of one year ending on 6 October 2007.

---
### Nebraska Court of Appeals Memorandum Opinions NOT Selected for Posting to Court Website (r eleased the week prior to October 30, 2018 

### ) The following memorandum opinions were filed by the Nebraska Court of Appeals and can be viewed using SSCALES : A - 17 - 843 Robertson v. Nebraska Dept. of Corr. Servs. A - 18 - 029 In re Interest of Nehemyah H. A - 18 - 030 In re Interest of Nehemyah H. A - 18 - 415 In re Interest of Nevaeh S. The above - listed memorandum opinions c an be viewed online through the appellate court case search available by subscription through Nebra ska.gov: http://www.nebraska.gov/subscriber/ . Current subscribers to Nebraska.gov can search appellate court cases here: http s ://www.nebraska.gov/courts/s c cales/ .
§ 700.81 Monthly housing cost. ( a ) *General.* The term monthly housing cost for a replacement dwelling purchased by a certified eligible head of household is the average monthly cost for all mortgage payments, real property taxes, reasonable utility charges, and insurance.
( b ) *Computation of monthly housing cost for replacement dwelling.* A person's monthly housing cost for a replacement dwelling shall be a projected amount that includes one-twelfth of the estimated reasonable annual cost for utility charges.
### [§2399. Renumbered §4171]

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 2399, added Pub. L. 97–295, §1(29)(A), Oct. 12, 1982, 96 Stat. 1293, which related to limitation on availability of appropriations to reimburse a contractor for the cost of commercial insurance, was repealed by Pub. L. 100–370, §1(f)(2)(B), July 19, 1988, 102 Stat. 846, and was restated in section 2324(e)(1)(L) of this title (now 10 U.S.C. 3744(a)(12)) by section 1(f)(2)(A) of Pub. L. 100–370.
### **CHAPTER 24—FEDERAL FINANCING BANK**

Sec.
2281.
Congressional findings and declaration of purpose.
2282.
Definitions.
2283.
Creation of Federal Financing Bank.
2284.
Board of Directors.
2285.
Functions.
2285a.
Acquisition of obligations involving loan guarantees for New York City.
2286.
Approval of financing plans by Secretary of the Treasury.
2287.
Initial capital.
2288.
Bank obligations.
2289.
General powers.
2290.
Exemptions.
2291.
Preparation of obligations.
2292.
Annual report to the President and Congress.
2293.
Budget and audit provisions of Government corporation control law applicable.
2294.
Payments on behalf of public bodies.
2294a.
Contracts for periodic payments to offset costs of purchase of obligations of local public housing agencies.
2295.
Authority or responsibility under other provisions of law not to be affected or impaired.
2296.
Increase not authorized in amounts of obligations issued, sold, or guaranteed by Federal agencies.
### [§2134. Renumbered §16134]
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER



In connection with the Quarterly Report of River Holding Corp. (Holding) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Periodic Report), I, Charles A. French, President and Chief Executive Officer of Holding, certify, to my knowledge, that:



| | 1. | The Periodic Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Holding.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/    Charles FrenchCharles A. French Chief Executive Officer and
President  May 7,
2004
AMENDMENT
TO NAME AND LIKENESS LICENSING AGREEMENT




THIS AMENDMENT TO NAME AND LIKENESS
LICENSING AGREEMENT(the “Amendment”) is made as of
February 18, 2010 by and between Carley Roney (“Licensor”) and The Knot, Inc.,
a Delaware corporation (the “Company”).




WHEREAS, Licensor and the
Company have previously entered into that certain Name and Likeness Licensing
Agreement, dated as of November 5, 2008 (the “Agreement”), as amended, and
desire to change certain obligations under the Agreement as set forth
herein.




NOW, THEREFORE, in
consideration of the mutual promises contained herein and other good and
valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby
acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows:




1.           Fee.  The
annual fee set forth in Section 3.1(a) of the Agreement is changed to $10,000
per year, effective January 1, 2010.




2.           Non-Accountable
Talent Expense Allowance.  The Company shall permanently
suspend, and Licensor shall permanently waive the Company’s obligation to pay,
the annual non-accountable talent expense allowance set forth in Section 3.1(c)
of the Agreement, effective January 1, 2010.  During such suspension
period, Licensor shall be permitted to seek reimbursement from the Company for
her expenses for clothes for television, personal and other appearances while
promoting, representing and endorsing the Company; hair and make-up expenses for
maintenance and on-air appearances; and other expenses related to Licensor’s
services for the Company, in each case in accordance with the Company’s regular
reimbursement policies.




3.           Miscellaneous.




3.1           No Other
Amendments.  Except as expressly set forth herein, all terms
and conditions of the Agreement (including the schedules thereto) shall remain
in full force and effect.  In the event of any inconsistency between
the terms of this Amendment and the terms of the Agreement, the terms of
this Amendment shall govern.




3.2           Governing
Law.  This Amendment shall be governed by, and construed and
enforced in accordance with, the laws of the State of New York, without regard
to principles of conflicts of law.




3.3           Titles and
Subtitles.  The titles, subtitles and defined terms used in
this Amendment are used for convenience only and are not to be considered in
construing or interpreting this Amendment.




3.4           Definitions.  Capitalized
terms used herein and not defined upon first usage shall have the meanings
assigned such terms in the Agreement.




3.5           Counterparts.  This
Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts (including by
facsimile), each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together
shall constitute one and the same instrument.




Confidential







IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the
parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be executed as of the date first
written above.




/s/ CARLEY RONEYCARLEY
      RONEYTHE
      KNOT, INC.By:
              /s/ IRA CARLINName:
      Ira CarlinTitle:
      Chairman, Compensation
                Committee
      of the Board of
                Directors





Confidential
#### § 33.10 Issuance of procedures.

The Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs, directly or through the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, shall issue procedures in the Bureau of Indian Affairs Manual governing the provision of support services to the Bureau's Education Office function.
#### LAWRENCE HENRY RANDOM v. ELIZA RANDOM.

(163 N. W. 833.)

District court — judge — orders — not discretionary — necessary orders — stay proceedings — to enable appeal — refusal — supreme court judge — may act — judgment — decree — executed in part — prior to appeal — cannot supersede.

Section 7836 of the Compiled Laws of 1913, which provides that “when the court or the judge thereof from which the appeal is taken or desired to he taken shall neglect or refuse to make any order or direction not wholly discretionary, necessary to enable the appellant to stay proceedings upon an appeal, the supreme court, or one of the justices thereof, shall make such order or direction,” does not give an intending appellant a right to supersede a portion of a judgment or decree that is executed prior to the taking of an appeal.

Opinion filed July 11, 1917.

Application for the fixing of a supersedeas bond to stay proceedings under a decree of the District Court pending an appeal in a divorce action.

Petition denied.

Per Curiam:

This is an application to the supreme court for an order fixing the sum, terms, and conditions of an undertaking which will operate to stay ail proceedings upon the judgment and decree of the district court of the fifth judicial distilct entered in the above-entitled action on the 3d day of May, 1917. Its main purpose is to stay the operation of that portion of the judgment of the court below ■which, in an action for divorce between the plaintiff, Lawrence Random, and the defendant Eliza Random, found the issues for the plain*288tiff, Lawrence Random, and awarded to him the sole custody of the minor children, aged eleven, nine, and seven years respectively, together with a permission and direction to such plaintiff, to take the children from the home of the defendant’s parents, or from anyone in whose possession they might be, and allowing the plaintiff to keep the said children at his parents’ home in the state of North Dakota.

The motion to fix the sum, terms, and conditions of' a supersedeas bond is denied, for the reason that the moving papers show that the trial judge did not neglect or refuse to make an order which would enable the appellant to stay proceedings upon the appeal, in so far as any further proceedings might be had under the judgment. It appears that the judgment had been partially executed before the application was made to the -district court. Under such facts the appellant is not entitled to have the executed portion of the decree stayed. We do not question the soundness of the moving party’s contention that the appellant is entitled, as a matter of right, to have the sum, terms, and conditions of a supersedeas bond fixed by the trial judge, and, in case of his neglect or refusal, by this court or a judge thereof. Comp. Laws 1913, § 7836. We cannot see that the question of the custody of the •children is in any way involved in this motion.
### §399. Notifications relating to military operations in the information environment: requirement to notify Chief of Mission

The Secretary may not authorize a military operation in the information environment under this title intended to cause an effect in a country unless the Secretary fully informs the chief of mission for that country under section 207 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (22 U.S.C. 3927) of the planned operation.

(Added Pub. L. 117–263, div. A, title XV, §1521, Dec. 23, 2022, 136 Stat. 2897.)