alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2007117EN.01001401.xml

| 26.5.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 117/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.5.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 117/14

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van beroep te Antwerpen (Belgium) lodged on 9 March 2007 — Belgische Staat v N.V. Cobelfret

(Case C-138/07)

(2007/C 117/22)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hof van beroep te Antwerpen

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Belgische Staat

Appellant:

Respondent: N.V. Cobelfret

Respondent:

Question referred

Is a set of rules such as the Belgian system of definitive taxed income, under which relevant dividends are, first, added to the taxable basis of the parent company and, subsequently, the amount of those received dividends is, pursuant to Article 205(2) of the Belgian Income Tax Code, deducted from the taxable basis of the parent company (in the amount of 95 %) only in so far as the parent company has taxable profits, compatible with Article 4 of Council Directive 90/435/EEC (1) of 23 July 1990 on the common system of taxation applicable in the case of parent companies and subsidiaries of different Member States, inasmuch as the result of such a restriction on deductibility from definitively taxed income is that a parent company will, in a subsequent taxable period, be taxed on the dividends received in the case where it had no, or had inadequate, taxable profits over the taxable period in which the dividends were received, or at least that the fiscal losses relating to the taxable period are wrongly used up and are, as a result, no longer transferable up to the amount of received dividends, which, in the absence of fiscal losses, ought in any case to have been exempted up to 95 %?

1

---

(1)  OJ 1990 L 225, p. 6.

1

---
II

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 11

For the relief of Wei Jingsheng.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 19, 1999

Mr. ABRAHAM introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

For the relief of Wei Jingsheng.

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

3 SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENCE.

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

5 ‘‘Wei Jingsheng Freedom of Conscience Act’’.

6 (b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for

7 purposes of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8

8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.), Wei Jingsheng shall be held and con9 sidered to have been lawfully admitted to the United

10 States for permanent residence as of the date of the enact11 ment of this Act upon payment of the required visa fee.
2

•S 11 IS

1 SEC. 2. REDUCTION OF NUMBER OF AVAILABLE VISAS.

2 Upon the granting of permanent residence to Wei

3 Jingsheng as provided in this Act, the Secretary of State

4 shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by one during

5 the current fiscal year the total number of immigrant visas

6 available to natives of the country of the alien’s birth

7 under section 203(a) of the Immigration and Nationality

8 Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(a)).

Æ
ex10_2.htm


    
      

    

    EXHIBIT
10.2

     

     

    Big
Lots, Inc. Non-Employee Director Compensation Package

    Effective
May 2008

    


    


    
      	
              Annual
      Retainer

            	 	$	45,000	 
	 
      	 	 	 	 
	
              Annual
      Committee Chair Retainer – Audit Committee

            	 	$	15,000	 
	
               
      

            	 	 	 	 
	
              Annual
      Committee Chair Retainer – Compensation Committee and Nominating/Corporate
      Governance Committee

            	 	$	10,000	 
	 
      	 	 	 	 
	
              Board
      Meeting Fee

            	 	$	1,500	 
	 
      	 	 	 	 
	
              Committee
      Meeting Fee

            	 	$	1,250	 
	 
      	 	 	 	 
	
              Telephonic
      Meeting Fee – All Types

            	 	$	500	 
	 
      	 	 	 	 
	
              Annual
      Charitable Donation to Organization Nominated by Director

            	 	$	10,000	 
	 
      	 	 	 	 
	
              Grant
      Date Fair Value of Big Lots, Inc. Common Shares Underlying Annual Grant of
      Restricted Stock Award1

            	 	$	75,000	 


    

    


    ______________________________ 

    
      1 Equity
awards are granted pursuant to the Big Lots 2005 Long-Term Incentive
Plan.
Exhibit 32.2

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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of FairPoint Communications, Inc. (the "Company") for
the quarter ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Lisa R. Hood, Interim Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



/s/ LISA R. HOODLisa R. Hood Interim Chief Financial OfficerApril 30, 2010


A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
Exhibit 31.2  IDEAEDGE, INC. CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a) OR 15d-14(a) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Jonathan Shultz, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-KSB of IdeaEdge, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The small business issuers other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; (b) [Paragraph omitted]; (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuers disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuers most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuers fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The small business issuers other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuers auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuers board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuers ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting.  Date: February 13, 2008/s/ Jonathan ShultzJonathan ShultzChief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)
### Federal Land Bank Associations; Special Provisions
# C_2007095EN.01001201.xml

| 28.4.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 95/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.4.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 95/12

---

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 8 March 2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht des Landes Brandenburg (Germany)) — Campina GmbH & Co., formerly TUFFI Campina emzett GmbH v Hauptzollamt Frankfurt (Oder)

(Case C-45/06) (1)

1

(Milk and milk products - Additional levy - Slight delay in observing the time-limit for communication of the summary of statements - Financial penalty - Regulation (EEC) No 536/93 as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1001/98 - Article 3(2), second subparagraph - Regulation (EC) No 1392/2001 - Article 5(3) - Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 - Article 2(2), second sentence - Principle of retroactive application of the less severe penalty)

(2007/C 95/19)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht des Landes Brandenburg

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Campina GmbH & Co., formerly TUFFI Campina emzett GmbH

Applicant:

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Frankfurt (Oder)

Defendant:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Finanzgericht des Landes Brandenburg — Validity of the second subparagraph of Article 3(2) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 536/93 of 9 March 1993 laying down detailed rules on the application of the additional levy on milk and milk products (OJ 1993 L 57, p. 12), as amended by Regulation 1001/98 (OJ 1998 L 142, p. 22) — Penalty for failure to comply with the time-limit for the annual submission of the statements of the individual producers — Slight delay in observing the time-limit — Principle of proportionality

Operative part of the judgment

The principle of retroactive application of the more lenient penalty must be respected by national courts when they have to penalise practices which do not comply with rules laid down by Community legislation.

In the case of a slight delay in observing the deadline such as that at issue in the main proceedings, the system of financial penalties provided for by Article 5(3) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1392/2001 of 9 July 2001 laying down detailed rules for applying Council Regulation (EEC) No 3950/92 establishing an additional levy on milk and milk products is less severe than that provided for by the first indent of the second subparagraph of Article 3(2) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 536/93 of 9 March 1993 laying down detailed rules on the application of the additional levy on milk and milk products, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1001/98 of 13 May 1998.

---

(1)  OJ C 154, 1.7.2006.

1

---
Postal Regulatory Postal Regulatory Commission

901 New York Avenue, NW

Phone: 202-789-6829

Fax: 202-789-6891

Commission Suite 200

Washington, DC 20268-0001

www.prc.gov

Contact: Gail Adams

gail.adams@prc.gov

Press Release

February 21, 2024

PRC Outlines Activities in FY 2023 Annual Report to the President and Congress

Washington, DC –Today the Postal Regulatory Commission released its Fiscal Year 2023 

Annual Report to the President and Congress. By law, the Commission is required each year 

to address in its report information concerning the operations of the agency, including the 

extent to which regulations are achieving the rate-setting objectives of the Postal 

Accountability and Enhancement Act. The Commission’s report must also include an 

estimate of the costs incurred by the Postal Service to provide certain services that the 

Postal Service would not otherwise have provided except for the requirements of the law, 

and further provides an estimate for the value of the postal monopoly.

Throughout the year, the Commission had several significant accomplishments that reflect

its mission to provide transparency and accountability of Postal Service activities. In 

addition to reviewing and approving proposed rate changes for Market Dominant and 

Competitive products, new product proposals, and formal complaint adjudication, the 

Commission performed new activities as dictated by the Postal Service Reform Act (PSRA) 

and beyond. In FY 2023, the Commission:

• Issued a Flats Operation Study with principal findings as required by the PSRA

• Published reports that (1) reviewed the Postal Service's compliance with pricing 

and service standards, (2) provided an in-depth analysis of the Postal Service’s 

finances, and (3) evaluated whether the Postal Service met its performance goals as 

required under the law 

• Successfully implemented several of its strategic goals in its 2023-2028 Strategic 

Plan. In particular, the Commission completed a comprehensive stakeholder 

analysis that informed new activities currently underway surrounding the 

Commission’s engagement with stakeholders and the general public
- 2 -

Initiated a Public Inquiry Docket to examine the recent and planned network changes 

associated with the Postal Service’s Delivering for America Plan

• Presided over rulemakings related to Commission processes and activities

A complete report of the Commission’s actions throughout Fiscal Year 2023 is available

here and on the Commission’s website, www.prc.gov.

The Postal Regulatory Commission is an independent federal agency that provides regulatory oversight over the Postal Service to ensure the 

transparency and accountability of the Postal Service and foster a vital and efficient universal mail system. The Commission is comprised of five 

Presidentially-appointed and Senate-confirmed Commissioners, each serving terms of six years. The President designates the Chairman. In 

addition to Chairman Michael Kubayanda, the other commissioners are Vice Chairman Tom Day and Commissioners Ann Fisher, Ashley Poling, 

and Robert Taub. Follow the PRC on Twitter: @PostalRegulator and LinkedIn.
### Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA

- 

### 2015

- 4808 Directorate Identifier: 

### 2014

- NM

- 134

- AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If

they do not, click (or Tab) into and then ou t of the changed cell

.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection,

replacement)

Do not include on

condition costs here Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine,

propeller, appliance)

Work

- hours

(include

access, testing,

and close

- up) Labor

cost

(@$8 5 / h

our) Parts Cost Total Costs

(labor +

parts) Number of

U.S.

Registered

Products Total Cost

for U.S. Fleet



### Inspection 77.7 $ 6,604.5

0 $ 6,604.50 

### 35 $ 231,157.50

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0 .00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.0 0

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00



### The known number of products in compliance:

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $ 231,158



### Costs covered under warranty ( if know n ) $

On

- Condition Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection,

replacement) Work

- hours

(include access,

testing, and close

up) Labor cost

(@$85/hour) Parts Cost Cost per Product



### Repair 99.7 $ 8,474.50 $136,400 $ 144,874.50

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00



### Special considerations for Economic Analysis ( Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table

that was assumed or might no t be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs) 

### :

### Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES * NO

* Explanation:

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES * NO

* Explanation:

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? E xplain for

either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO

Explanation:

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alas ka. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES * NO



### * Explanation 

### :
# C_2006253EN.01000701.xml

| 19.10.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 253/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.10.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 253/7

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4332 — MEAS/DSPL/Sadoport)

(2006/C 253/06)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 3 October 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 Portuguese 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 32006M4332. 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 32006M4332. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://ec.europa.eu/eur-lex/lex)

---
#### James H. Porter, Appellant, *v.*James T. Porter, et al., Respondents.

(Argued March 30, 1877;

decided April 10, 1877.)

*Daniel D. Barnard,*for appellant.

*William Wickham,*for respondents.

Agree to affirm on opinion of Talcott, J., in court below; and also on ground that there was no available exception. All concur; no opinion.

Judgment affirmed.
§ 300.34 Transfers. ( a ) *Federal funds.* ( 1 ) Notwithstanding 11 CFR 102.6(a)(1)(ii), a State, district, or local committee of a political party must not use any Federal funds transferred to it from, or otherwise accepted by it from, any of the persons enumerated in paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this section as the Federal component of an expenditure or disbursement for Federal election activity under 11 CFR 300.32. A State, district, or local committee of a political party must itself raise the Federal component of an expenditure or disbursement allocated between Federal funds and Levin funds under 11 CFR 300.32 and 300.33.
( 2 ) A State, district, or local committee of a political party that makes an expenditure or disbursement of Federal funds for Federal election activities must demonstrate through a reasonable accounting method approved by the Commission (including any method embedded in software provided or approved by the Commission) that the Federal funds used to make the expenditure or disbursement do not include Federal funds transferred to the committee in violation of this section. Alternatively, a State, district, or local committee of a political party may establish a separate Federal account into which the committee deposits only Federal funds raised by the committee itself, and from which all expenditures or disbursement of Federal funds for Federal election activities are made.
( b ) *Levin funds.* Levin funds must be raised solely by the State, district, or local committee of a political party that expends or disburses the funds. A State, district, or local committee of a political party must not use as Levin funds any funds transferred or otherwise provided to the committee by: ( 1 ) Any other State, district, or local committee of any political party, any officer or agent acting on behalf of such a committee, or any entity directly or indirectly established, financed, maintained or controlled by such a committee; or,
( 2 ) The national committee of any political party (including a national congressional campaign committee of a political party), any officer or agent acting on behalf of such a committee, or any entity directly or indirectly established, financed, maintained, or controlled by such a committee.
( c ) *Allocation transfers.* Transfers of Levin funds between the accounts of a State, district, or local committee of a political party for allocation purposes must comply with 11 CFR 300.30 and 11 CFR 300.33.
#### § 248.9 Camping and use restrictions.

All camping, picnicking, use of alcoholic beverages, setting or use of fires, use of the sites for cleaning of fish, the deposit of any garbage, paper, cans, bottles, or rubbish of any kind, or use of the sites for any commercial activity (including commercial purchase of fish) shall be subject to such prohibitions, restrictions, or other regulations as the Regional Director may prescribe and cause to be posted on the site or sites to which said regulations are applicable; provided that no fee may be charged to any Indian or member of his family for any such use.

[32 FR 3945, Mar. 10, 1967, as amended at 85 FR 73193, Nov. 17, 2020]
#### § 145.7 Specific provisions for participating dealers.

Dealers in hatching eggs, newly hatched poultry, or started poultry shall comply with the provisions in this part (within the NPIP Program Standards document, Program Standard C applies to hatcheries; alternatives to the program standards may also be approved by the Administrator under § 147.53 of this subchapter).

[85 FR 62564, Oct. 5, 2020]