alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2006190EN.01001701.xml

| 12.8.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 190/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.8.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 190/17

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 21 June 2006 — Danzer v Council

(Case T-47/02) (1)

1

(Company law - Directives 68/151/EEC and 78/660/EEC - Disclosure of annual accounts - Protection of business secrets - Breach of fundamental rights - Legal basis - Action for damages - Inadmissibility)

(2006/C 190/28)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicants: Manfred Danzer and Hannelore Danzer (Linz, Austria) (represented by: initially by J. Hintermayr, M. Krüger, F. Haunschmidt, G. Minichmayr and P. Burgstaller, and subsequently by J. Hintermayr, F. Haunschmidt, G. Minichmayr, P. Burgstaller, G. Tusek, T. Riedler and C. Hadeyer, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendants: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Giorgi Fort and M. Bauer, Agents)

Defendants:

Re:

Application, first, for compensation under Article 288 EC in respect of damage allegedly suffered by the applicants due to the obligation to disclose certain information in the annual accounts of the companies of which they are managers under Article 2(1)(f) of First Council Directive 68/151/EEC of 9 March 1968 on coordination of safeguards which, for the protection of the interests of members and others, are required by Member States of companies within the meaning of the second paragraph of Article 58 of the Treaty (subsequently the second paragraph of Article 58 of the EC Treaty, now the second paragraph of Article 48 EC), with a view to making such safeguards equivalent throughout the Community (OJ, English Special Edition 1968 (I), p. 41), and Article 47 of Fourth Council Directive 78/660/EEC of 25 July 1978 based on Article 54(3)(g) of the Treaty (subsequently Article 54(3)(g) of the EC Treaty, now, after amendment, Article 44(2)(g) EC) on the annual accounts of certain types of companies (OJ 1978 L 222, p. 11) and, second, for a declaration that the aforementioned provisions are invalid.

Operative part of the order:

The Court hereby:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the applicants to bear their own costs and to pay the Council's costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the applicants to bear their own costs and to pay the Council's costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 109, 4.5.2002.

1

---
### §747. Command: when different commands of Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Space Force, and Coast Guard join

When different commands of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Space Force, and Coast Guard join or serve together, the officer highest in rank in the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Space Force, or Coast Guard on duty there, who is otherwise eligible to command, commands all those forces unless otherwise directed by the President.

(Added Pub. L. 90–235, §5(a)(1)(A), Jan. 2, 1968, 81 Stat. 760; amended Pub. L. 116–283, div. A, title IX, §924(b)(2)(A)(iv), (B), Jan. 1, 2021, 134 Stat. 3821.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2021—Pub. L. 116–283, §924(b)(2)(B), amended section catchline generally. Prior to amendment, section catchline read as follows: "Command: when different commands of Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard join".

Pub. L. 116–283, §924(b)(2)(A)(iv), substituted "Marine Corps, Space Force," for "Marine Corps," in two places.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Transfer of Functions

For transfer of authorities, functions, personnel, and assets of the Coast Guard, including the authorities and functions of the Secretary of Transportation relating thereto, to the Department of Homeland Security, and for treatment of related references, see sections 468(b), 551(d), 552(d), and 557 of Title 6, Domestic Security, and the Department of Homeland Security Reorganization Plan of November 25, 2002, as modified, set out as a note under section 542 of Title 6.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                      14,209,109
<SECURITIES>                                95,717,067
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,037,189
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (224,000)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           111,626,496
<PP&E>                                      81,260,017
<DEPRECIATION>                             (2,491,191)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             290,345,348
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       24,935,846
<BONDS>                                    180,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       160,991
<OTHER-SE>                                  80,955,023
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               290,345,348
<SALES>                                      1,563,801
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,563,801
<CGS>                                        2,377,531
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,810,703
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,000,851
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          10,169,270
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (12,174,358)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (12,174,358)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (12,174,358)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.76)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.76)


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.  SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, the undersigned Chief Financial Officer of The RiceX Company. (the Company), hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





|                        | /s/ Todd C. Crow | 
|----------------------- | ---------------- | 
|Todd C. Crow            |                 
|Chief Financial Officer
|                        |                  | 



May 16, 2005







Exhibit 32.1-2
----

Order of the Court of First Instance of 31 May 2006 — Carrs Paper Ltd v Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-123/02) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Proceedings for the liquidation of the applicant - Legal interest in bringing proceedings - No need to adjudicate)

(2006/C 190/35)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Carrs Paper Ltd (Shirley, United Kingdom) (represented by: J. Grayston and A. Bywater, Solicitors)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: W. Mölls and A. Whelan, acting as Agents, and by M. van der Woude and V. Landes, lawyers)

Re:

Applicant for annulment, or in the alternative, for a reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant by Commission Decision 2004/337/EC of 20 December 2001 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 of the EC Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/E-1/36.212 — carbonless paper) (OJ 2004 L 115, p.1)

Operative part of the order

----

(1)OJ C 169, 13.7.2002.

----
# C_2006183EN.01001202.xml

| 5.8.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 183/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.8.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 183/12

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4244 — Ravago/Muehlstein)

(2006/C 183/07)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 31 July 2006, 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:

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

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/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 under document number 32006M4244. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://ec.europa.eu/eur-lex/lex) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32006M4244. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://ec.europa.eu/eur-lex/lex)

---
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Employers & Practitioners 
-  Interest Rates & Factors 
-  ERISA 4044 Annuities 

This page has not been translated. Please go to PBGC.gov's Spanish home page for more information available in Spanish.

Esta página no ha sido traducida. Por favor vaya a la página principal del sitio de español de PBGC para ver información disponible en español.

# ERISA 4044 Annuities

March 13, 2024

The select and ultimate interest rates are issued for the specific purpose of determining the present value of annuities in involuntary and distress terminations of single-employer plans, as discussed in 29 CFR 4044. They are also used to value benefits and certain assets under multiemployer plans following mass withdrawal as discussed in 29 CFR 4281.

2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | 1999 | 1998 | 1997 | 1996 | 1995 | 1994 | 1993 | Years Before 1993

## 2024

## 2023

## 2022

## 2021

## 2020

## 2019

## 2018

## 2017

## 2016

 

## 2015

 

## 2014

 

## 2013

 

## 2012

 

## 2011

 

## 2010

 

## 2009

 

## 2008

 

## 2007

 

## 2006

 

## 2005

 

## 2004

 

## 2003

 

## 2002

 

## 2001

 

## 2000

 

## 1999

 

## 1998

 

## 1997

 

## 1996

 

## 1995

 

## 1994

 

## 1993

 

## Years Before 1993
### §1192. Discharge

If the plan of the debtor is confirmed under section 1191(b) of this title, as soon as practicable after completion by the debtor of all payments due within the first 3 years of the plan, or such longer period not to exceed 5 years as the court may fix, unless the court approves a written waiver of discharge executed by the debtor after the order for relief under this chapter, the court shall grant the debtor a discharge of all debts provided in section 1141(d)(1)(A) of this title, and all other debts allowed under section 503 of this title and provided for in the plan, except any debt—

(1) on which the last payment is due after the first 3 years of the plan, or such other time not to exceed 5 years fixed by the court; or

(2) of the kind specified in section 523(a) of this title.

(Added Pub. L. 116–54, §2(a), Aug. 23, 2019, 133 Stat. 1083.)

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Section effective 180 days after Aug. 23, 2019, see section 5 of Pub. L. 116–54, set out as an Effective Date of 2019 Amendment note under section 101 of this title.
### §9593. Quarters: heat and light

The heat and light necessary for the authorized quarters of members of the Air Force and members of the Space Force shall be furnished at the expense of the United States.

(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 578; Pub. L. 116–283, div. A, title IX, §923(e)(7), Jan. 1, 2021, 134 Stat. 3816.)

| Revised section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 9593 | 10:723. | Mar. 2, 1907, ch. 2511 (1st proviso under "Quartermaster's Department"), 34 Stat. 1167. |

The word "members" is substituted for the words "officers and enlisted men". The words "under such regulations as the Secretary of the Army may prescribe" are omitted, since the Secretary has inherent authority to issue regulations appropriate to exercising his statutory functions.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2021—Pub. L. 116–283 inserted "and members of the Space Force" after "the Air Force".

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Charges for Excess Energy Consumption; Deposit of Proceeds; Applicability; Implementation

Assessment of members for excess energy consumption in military family housing facilities, see section 507 of Pub. L. 95–82, title V, Aug. 1, 1977, 91 Stat. 372, set out as a note under section 4593 of this title.
#### State of Nebraska, appellee, v. Fred Edward Stewart, appellant.

236 N. W. 2d 834

Filed December 24, 1975.

No. 40144.

John J. Battershell of Cunningham Law Office, for appellant.

Paul L. Douglas, Attorney General, and Patrick T. O’Brien, for appellee.

Heard before White, C. J., Spencer, Boslaugh, McCown, Newton, Clinton, and Brodkey, JJ.

Newton, J.

The defendant was charged with breaking and entering with intent to steal. After a preliminary hearing he was held for trial. He then moved that the transcript of the preliminary hearing be suppressed, the information quashed, and the case remanded for a preliminary hearing. The information had been filed on July 25,1974. The motions were filed on September 16, 1974, and on that date a copy of the information was served on the defendant. The defendant was out on bond and, it appears, absent until September 16, 1974. On that date defendant entered a waiver of his appearance at future proceedings until trial. On January 14, 1975, the pretrial motions were overruled. On February 13, 1975, *91defendant was arraigned and waived any complaint based on the lack of a speedy trial due to delays thereafter occurring. Trial commenced on April 10, 1975.

The present action is one in habeas corpus. Defendant relies on the overruling of the motions dealing with the sufficiency of the evidence and the transcript of the preliminary hearing; also, he charges he has been denied a speedy trial. We affirm the judgment denying the requested writ of habeas corpus.

Habeas corpus will not lie to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence at a preliminary hearing. See, State v. Franklin, 194 Neb. 630, 234 N. W. 2d 610; Kruger v. Brainard, 183 Neb. 455, 161 N. W. 2d 520. Furthermore, examination of the record of the preliminary hearing reveals ample evidence justifying the binding over of the defendant. The defendant was seen entering the premises involved and was apprehended while hiding in the basement.

Under section 29-1207, R. S. Supp., 1974, trial is to be held within 6 months after the filing of the information. The statute specifically excludes from computation the time from filing to final disposition of pretrial motions, and any delay resulting from the absence of the defendant.

It is evident that this appeal is frivolous and the judgment of the District Court is affirmed. See Rule 20.

Affirmed.
Exhibit 35.1

 

ANNUAL SERVICER’S COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE

 

This Compliance Certificateis furnished pursuant to Section 4.10 of the Sale and Servicing Agreement (the “Agreement”), dated as of March 7, 2012,by and among Hyundai Auto Receivables Trust 2012-A, Hyundai Capital America, as seller and servicer (the “Servicer”),Hyundai ABS Funding Corporation, as depositor, and Citibank, N.A., as indenture trustee and Item 1123 of Regulation AB. The undersignedhereby certifies that:

 

1)            I am a duly authorized officer of the Servicer.

 

2)            A review of the activities of the Servicerfrom January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014 (the “Relevant Period”) and of the Servicer’s performance underthe Agreement during the Relevant Period has been made under my supervision.

 

3)            Based on such review, the Servicer has,to the best of my knowledge, fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the RelevantPeriod.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have duly executed thisCompliance Certificate this 17th day of March, 2015.
§ 166.906 What can happen if we recruit you after graduation? ( a ) The purpose of the post graduation recruitment program is to recruit Indian and Alaska Native natural resource and trained agriculture technicians into the agriculture programs of approved organizations.
( b ) We may assume outstanding student loans from established lending institutions of Indian and Alaska Native natural resources and agriculture technicians who have successfully completed a post-secondary natural resources or agriculture-related curriculum at an accredited institution.
( c ) Indian and Alaska Natives receiving benefits under this program will enter into an obligated service agreement in accordance with § 166.901 of this subpart. Obligated service required under this program will be one year for every $5,000 of student loan debt repaid.
( d ) If the obligated service agreement is breached, we will collect student loan(s) in accordance with § 166.910 of this subpart.
### [§679. Renumbered §12311]
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Gerald Van Horn, Respondent, v County of Cayuga et al., Appellants. Workers’ Compensation Board, Respondent.

[823 NYS2d 591]

Cardona, P.J.

Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed January 6, 2006, which, inter aha, directed claimant’s schedule loss of use award to be paid in a lump sum.

Claimant sustained work-related injuries to his left arm and left leg during the course of his employment as a highway superintendent with the County of Cayuga. Following a claim for workers’ compensation benefits, the parties entered into a stipulation providing for, among other things, an award of benefits to claimant for a 47.5% schedule loss of use of the left arm and for a 15.8% schedule loss of use of the left leg. Based upon the parties’ stipulation, the Workers’ Compensation Law Judge directed payment in the amount of $75,503.88, less payments already made, to be paid in full immediately. The Workers’ Compensation Board ¿[firmed, and the County and its workers’ compensation carrier now appeal contending that the Board erred when it provided for a lump-sum payment, contrary to Workers’ Compensation Law § 15 (3) (u).

Relying upon the “well-settled distinction between a schedule award and an award for any other type of disability,” we recently *902concluded that the method of computing a schedule award pursuant to Workers’ Compensation Law § 15 (3) “does not transform the schedule award into an award of compensation that must be paid periodically and ‘in like manner as wages’ ” *(Matter of Lacroix v Syracuse Exec. Air Serv. Inc., 25*AD3d 967, 968-969 [2006], *lv granted*7 NY3d 707 [2006], quoting Workers’ Compensation Law § 25 [1] [a]). “[T]he schedule set forth in Workers’ Compensation Law § 15 (3) ‘[is] simply the measure by which the total amount of the award is to be determined,’ ” and “ ‘[t]he payment of a schedule award is not allocable to any particular period of disability’ ” *(id.*at 968, quoting *Matter of Lynch v Board of Educ. of City of N. Y., 1*AD2d 362, 365 [1956], *affd*3 NY2d 871 [1957]; *see Matter of Miller v North Syracuse Cent. School Dist.,*1 AD3d 691, 692 [2003]). With this in mind, we affirm the Board’s decision.

Workers’ Compensation Law § 15 (3) (u) does not compel a different result. That section requires, in relevant part, that compensation awards for “loss of use of more than one member . . . not amounting to permanent total disability . . . shall run consecutively.” Contrary to the position of the County and its carrier, we do not interpret this provision as pertaining to the method of payment, but rather to the manner in which the awards, or schedules of compensation, are to run so as to permit a claimant to reap the full benefit of his or her award.

We have considered the remaining arguments raised on appeal and found them to be lacking in merit.

Peters, Spain, Mugglin and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
Exhibit 99.7



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Annual Report of
Pembina Pipeline Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2012, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Peter D. Robertson, Vice President, Finance and Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:



| | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934; and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|Date: March 1, 2013 |                                                            
|------------------- | -----------------------------------------------------------
|                    |                                                            
|                    | /s/ Peter D. Robertson                                     
|                    | Peter D. Robertson                                         
|                    | Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial
        Officer
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Employers & Practitioners 
-  Mortality, Retirement and PV Max Guarantee 
-  ERISA Section 4044 Retirement Assumptions 
-  Retirement Rate Category Tables 2021 

This page has not been translated. Please go to PBGC.gov's Spanish home page for more information available in Spanish.

Esta página no ha sido traducida. Por favor vaya a la página principal del sitio de español de PBGC para ver información disponible en español.

# Retirement Rate Category Tables 2021

The rate tables applicable for other years are accessible from the main XRA webpage.

**TABLE I-21 SELECTION OF RETIREMENT RATE CATEGORY**

For valuation dates in 2021

December 7, 2020
#### § 39.901 Conditions for distribution.

Funds from the Interim Maintenance and Minor Repair Fund shall be distributed to Bureau operated and funded schools and shall be separately earmarked in local school financial plans solely for expenditure at the discretion of the school supervisor for cost of school facility maintenance and minor repair. These funds shall be used to meet immediate minor repair and maintenance needs.