alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2011072EN.01003601.xml

| 5.3.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 72/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.3.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 72/36

---

Action brought on 15 December 2010 — Bömcke v EIB

(Case F-127/10)

2011/C 72/58

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Eberhard Bömcke (Athus, Belgium) (represented by: D. Lagasse, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Investment Bank

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the election of the EIB staff representative declared by the BEI polling station on 8 December 2010.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the election of the representative of all EIB staff declared by the EIB polling station on 8 December 2010 and the decision of 10 December 2010 of the EIB polling station rejecting the complaint made by the applicant on 9 December 2010 pursuant to Article 17 of Annex IV to the Convention on the Representation of the Staff of the EIB; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the election of the representative of all EIB staff declared by the EIB polling station on 8 December 2010 and the decision of 10 December 2010 of the EIB polling station rejecting the complaint made by the applicant on 9 December 2010 pursuant to Article 17 of Annex IV to the Convention on the Representation of the Staff of the EIB;

| — | order the EIB to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the EIB to pay the costs.

---
##### 



Exhibit 32 CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section
1350, chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned, the Chief Executive
Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of Penton Media, Inc. (the Company), hereby certifies,
that the Companys quarterly report for the quarter ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report) that to his 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 presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the periods
expressed in the Report. Dated: May 20, 2005
    /s/ David B. NussbaumDavid B. NussbaumChief Executive Officer/s/ Preston L. VicePreston L. ViceChief Financial Officer
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

June 26, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver 133280 & (20) Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 133280 COA: 274012 Kent CC: 05-002539-FH NORBERTO RIVERA-DELGATO, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion to a dd issue is GRANTED. The application for leave to appeal the January 10, 2007 order of the Court of Ap peals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not pe rsuaded that the questions pr esented should be reviewed by this Court.

d0618 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

June 26, 2007

Clerk
#### State of Nebraska, appellee, v. Wesley H. Peery, appellant.

305 N.W.2d 354

Filed April 24, 1981.

No. 43643.

Stanley D. Cohen for appellant.

Paul L. Douglas, Attorney General, and Terry R. Schaaf for appellee.

Heard before Krivosha, C.J., Boslaugh, McCown, Clinton, Brodkey, White, and Hastings, JJ.

McCown, J.

The defendant filed a motion for post conviction relief seeking to vacate and set aside a sentence of death on the ground that the judgment was void or voidable under the Constitution of this state or of the United States. The District Court denied defendant’s request for an evidentiary hearing, and found that the motion and the files and records of the case show *640that the defendant is entitled to no relief, and overruled the motion.

The defendant was found guilty by a jury on two counts, murder in the first degree and robbery. A three-judge sentencing panel sentenced the defendant to death on the murder count and the trial judge sentenced the defendant to a term of not less than 16 nor more than 50 years’ imprisonment on the robbery count, the sentences to run consecutively. The convictions and sentences were affirmed on direct appeal to this court in *State v.*Peery, 199 Neb. 656, 261 N.W.2d 95 (1977). Following an unsuccessful attempt to appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States the defendant filed the motion for post conviction relief in this case.

In this post conviction action the defendant essentially contends that the death sentence has been arbitrarily and unconstitutionally imposed in this case and requests that we alter or overrule our holdings in previous death sentence cases. The defendant also contends that *Godfrey v. Georgia,*446 U.S. 420, 100 S. Ct. 1759, 64 L. Ed. 2d 398 (1980), raises new and additional constitutional issues which are applicable in this case.

We have recently held that the death penalty, when properly imposed, does not violate either the U.S. or Nebraska Constitution. *State v. Anderson and Hochstein,*207 Neb. 51, 296 N.W.2d 440 (1980). The holding in *Godfrey*is not applicable in this case for the reasons set out in the very recent case of *State v. Harper, ante*p. 568, 304 N.W.2d 663 (1981).

The remaining issues and contentions of the defendant have been presented, considered, and determined in the direct appeal of the convictions involved here.

A motion to vacate a judgment and sentence under the Post Conviction Act cannot be used as a substitute for an appeal or to secure a further review of issues already litigated. *State v. Svoboda,*199 Neb. 452, *641259 N.W.2d 609 (1977); *State v. Holtan,*205 Neb. 314, 287 N.W.2d 671 (1980).

The judgment of the District Court was correct and is affirmed.

Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1027 Reported in House (RH)]

                                                 Union Calendar No. 466
106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 1027

                          [Report No. 106-805]

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 12, 1999

                 Referred to the Committee on Resources

                           September 6, 2000

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 
                       and ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To reauthorize the participation of the Bureau of Reclamation in the 
        Deschutes Resources Conservancy, and for other purposes.

    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 ``Deschutes Resources Conservancy 
Reauthorization Act of 1999''.

SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF PARTICIPATION OF BUREAU OF RECLAMATION IN 
              DESCHUTES RESOURCES CONSERVANCY.

    Section 301 of the Oregon Resource Conservation Act of 1996 
(division B of Public Law 104-208; 110 Stat. 3009-534) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (b)(3), by inserting before the period at 
        the end the following: ``, and up to a total amount of 
        $2,000,000 during each of fiscal years 2002 through 2006''; and
            (2) in subsection (h), by inserting before the period at 
        the end the following: ``and $2,000,000 for each of fiscal 
        years 2002 through 2006''.

            Passed the Senate July 1, 1999.

            Attest:

                                                    GARY SISCO,

                                                             Secretary.

                                                 Union Calendar No. 466

106th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                                S. 1027

                          [Report No. 106-805]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To reauthorize the participation of the Bureau of Reclamation in the 
        Deschutes Resources Conservancy, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                           September 6, 2000

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 
                       and ordered to be printed
```
#### In the Matter of Joan Kaiser, Appellant, v Orange County Department of Social Services et al., Respondents.

[826 NYS2d 313]

In a guardianship proceeding, the petitioner maternal grandmother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Orange County (Klein, J.), dated November 14, 2005, which dismissed the petition.

*587Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The petitioner contends that the Family Court erroneously considered certain hearsay testimony at the guardianship hearing. This contention is unpreserved for appellate review since the petitioner did not object to admission of the testimony at any time during the hearing *(see Matter of Diaz v Santiago,*8 AD3d 562, 563 [2004]). In any event, even in view of the hearsay nature of the testimony, the Family Court properly concluded that it was in the child’s best interest to deny the petition by the maternal grandmother for guardianship of the child *(see*SCPA 1707). There is a sound and substantial basis in the record for the Family Court’s determination. Santucci, J.R, Mastro, Fisher and Dillon, JJ., concur.
NotesFAQContact Us

Collection

Thesaurus
AdvancedSearch Tips

Collection

Thesaurus
BrowseThesaurus

 Download full text

**ERIC Number:**

**Record Type:**

**Publication Date:**

**Pages:**

**Abstractor:**

**ISBN:**

**ISSN:**

**EISSN:**

Educational ResourcesElementary EducationElementary School MathematicsFractionsMathematics CurriculumMathematics Instruction

**Publication Type:**

**Education Level:**

**Audience:**

**Language:**

**Sponsor:**

**Authoring Institution:**

**Grant or Contract Numbers:**

PrivacyCopyrightContact UsSelection PolicyAPI
JournalsNon-JournalsDownloadSubmitMultimediaWidget
#### § 592.320 Products that may bear the inspection mark.

Products that are permitted to bear the inspection mark shall be processed in an official plant from edible shell eggs or other edible egg products eligible to bear the inspection mark and may contain other edible ingredients. The official mark, when used, shall be printed or lithographed and applied as a part of the principal display panel of the container, but shall not be applied to a detachable cover.
### §635n. Prohibition of loans, guarantees, and insurance as to sales of defense articles or services

The Bank shall not extend loans, guarantees, or insurance under this subchapter in connection with the sale of defense articles or defense services.

(Pub. L. 90–390, §5, July 7, 1968, 82 Stat. 297.)
#### § 381.77 Carcasses held for further examination.

Each carcass, including all parts thereof, in which there is any lesion of disease, or other condition which might render such carcass or any part thereof adulterated and with respect to which a final decision cannot be made on first examination by the inspector, shall be held for further examination. The identity of each such carcass, including all parts thereof, shall be maintained until a final examination has been completed.
Sanitized Chemical Structure
#### SHELTON MUSIC COMPANY, Plaintiff v. SUSAN TOKI CASTRO, Defendant

Civil No. 1663-75

Superior Court of Guam

October 27, 1976

BENSON, *Judge*

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

The above-entitled cause was tried on June 21,1976. The *359Plaintiff appeared by its attorney, Mr. Stephen A. Cronin and the Defendant appeared by its attorney, Mr. Joaquin C. Arriola.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Plaintiff and Pil Son Whiteman entered into a Contract by which Plaintiff supplied certain amusement devices for use at Mrs. Whiteman’s place of business. This Contract was admitted as Exhibit 1.

2. Pil Son Whiteman’s interest in the business was transferred to Susan Toki Castro, who became obligated under Exhibit 1.

3. Susan Toki Castro breached the Contract’s provision forbidding use of any devices not supplied by the Plaintiff.

4. No actual damages resulting from the breach were proved.

5. Actual damages, in case of breach, were ascertainable.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. The Plaintiff is entitled to judgment for nominal damages of $1.00 together with his costs of this action.

2. The Plaintiff is not entitled to liquidated damages.

Let judgment be entered accordingly.

JUDGMENT

This cause came on regularly for trial on the 21st day of June, 1976, before the Honorable Richard H. Benson, Judge, presiding, sitting without a jury. The plaintiff appeared by its attorney, Mr. Stephen A. Cronin, and the defendant appeared by her attorney, Mr. Joaquin C. Arriola, and evidence both oral and documentary having been presented by both parties and the cause having been argued and submitted for decision and the court having made and caused to be filed its written Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

*360IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that plaintiff have judgment against defendant in the sum of $1.00 together with his costs of this action.
EXHIBIT 23.1


            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


The Board of Directors and Stockholders
Clarus Corporation

We consent to the  incorporation by reference in the registration  statements on
Form  S-8  (Registration  Nos.  333-42600,   333-42602,   333-42604,  333-42606,
333-59193 and 333-71838) and on Form S-3  (Registration No. 333-90077) of Clarus
Corporation  of  our  reports  dated  March  14,  2005,   with  respect  to  the
consolidated  balance  sheets  of  Clarus  Corporation  and  subsidiaries  as of
December  31,  2004  and  2003,  and  the  related  consolidated  statements  of
operations, stockholders' equity and comprehensive loss, and cash flows for each
of the years in the  three-year  period ended December 31, 2004, and the related
financial  statement schedule,  management's  assessment of the effectiveness of
internal  control  over  financial  reporting  as of  December  31, 2004 and the
effectiveness  of internal  control over financial  reporting as of December 31,
2004,  which reports  appear in the December 31, 2004 annual report on Form 10-K
of Clarus Corporation.


/s/ KPMG LLP

Stamford, Connecticut
March 14, 2005
### §5499. Open data publication

All public data assets published by the Bureau shall be—

(1) made available as an open Government data asset (as defined in section 3502 of title 44);

(2) freely available for download;

(3) rendered in a human-readable format; and

(4) accessible via application programming interface where appropriate.

(Pub. L. 111–203, title X, §1019, as added Pub. L. 117–263, div. E, title LVIII, §5851(a)(2), Dec. 23, 2022, 136 Stat. 3433.)

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

#### Rule of Construction Regarding No New Disclosure Requirements

Enactment of section not to be construed to require certain additional information to be collected or disclosed, see section 5853 of Pub. L. 117–263, set out as a note under section 5498 of this title.
§ 381.197 Foreign inspection certificate requirements. ( a ) Except as provided in §§ 381.207 and 381.209, each consignment imported into the United States must have an electronic foreign inspection certification or a paper foreign inspection certificate issued by an official of the foreign government agency responsible for the inspection and certification of the product.
( b ) An official of the foreign government must certify that any product described on any official certificate was produced in accordance with the regulatory requirements in § 381.196.
( c ) The electronic foreign inspection certification must be in English, be transmitted directly to FSIS before the product's arrival at the official import inspection establishment, and be available to import inspection personnel.
( d ) The paper foreign inspection certificate must accompany each consignment; be submitted to import inspection personnel at the official import inspection establishment; be in English; and bear the official seal of the foreign government responsible for the inspection of the product, and the name, title, and signature of the official authorized to issue inspection certificates for products imported to the United States.
( e ) The electronic foreign inspection certification and paper foreign inspection certificate must contain: ( 1 ) The date;
( 2 ) The foreign country of export and the producing foreign establishment number;
( 3 ) The species used to produce the product and the source country and foreign establishment number, if the source materials originate from a country other than the exporting country;
( 4 ) The product's description, including the process category, the product category, and the product group;
( 5 ) The name and address of the importer or consignee;
( 6 ) The name and address of the exporter or consignor;
( 7 ) The number of units (pieces or containers) and the shipping or identification mark on the units;
( 8 ) The net weight of each lot; and
( 9 ) Any additional information the Administrator requests to determine whether the product is eligible to be imported into the United States.
[79 FR 56234, Sept. 19, 2014]
### §1672. Definitions

For the purposes of this subchapter:

(a) The term "earnings" means compensation paid or payable for personal services, whether denominated as wages, salary, commission, bonus, or otherwise, and includes periodic payments pursuant to a pension or retirement program.

(b) The term "disposable earnings" means that part of the earnings of any individual remaining after the deduction from those earnings of any amounts required by law to be withheld.

(c) The term "garnishment" means any legal or equitable procedure through which the earnings of any individual are required to be withheld for payment of any debt.

(Pub. L. 90–321, title III, §302, May 29, 1968, 82 Stat. 163.)
### §5333. Study of the effects of size and complexity of financial institutions on capital market efficiency and economic growth

#### (a) Study required

#### (1) In general

The Chairperson of the Council shall carry out a study of the economic impact of possible financial services regulatory limitations intended to reduce systemic risk. Such study shall estimate the benefits and costs on the efficiency of capital markets, on the financial sector, and on national economic growth, of—

(A) explicit or implicit limits on the maximum size of banks, bank holding companies, and other large financial institutions;

(B) limits on the organizational complexity and diversification of large financial institutions;

(C) requirements for operational separation between business units of large financial institutions in order to expedite resolution in case of failure;

(D) limits on risk transfer between business units of large financial institutions;

(E) requirements to carry contingent capital or similar mechanisms;

(F) limits on commingling of commercial and financial activities by large financial institutions;

(G) segregation requirements between traditional financial activities and trading or other high-risk operations in large financial institutions; and

(H) other limitations on the activities or structure of large financial institutions that may be useful to limit systemic risk.

#### (2) Recommendations

The study required by this section shall include recommendations for the optimal structure of any limits considered in subparagraphs (A) through (E), in order to maximize their effectiveness and minimize their economic impact.

#### (b) Report

Not later than the end of the 180-day period beginning on July 21, 2010, and not later than every 5 years thereafter, the Chairperson shall issue a report to the Congress containing any findings and determinations made in carrying out the study required under subsection (a).

(Pub. L. 111–203, title I, §123, July 21, 2010, 124 Stat. 1412.)
§ 417.5 Records. ( a ) The establishment shall maintain the following records documenting the establishment's HACCP plan: ( 1 ) The written hazard analysis prescribed in § 417.2(a) of this part, including all supporting documentation;
( 2 ) The written HACCP plan, including decisionmaking documents associated with the selection and development of CCP's and critical limits, and documents supporting both the monitoring and verification procedures selected and the frequency of those procedures.
( 3 ) Records documenting the monitoring of CCP's and their critical limits, including the recording of actual times, temperatures, or other quantifiable values, as prescribed in the establishment's HACCP plan; the calibration of process-monitoring instruments; corrective actions, including all actions taken in response to a deviation; verification procedures and results; product code(s), product name or identity, or slaughter production lot. Each of these records shall include the date the record was made.
( b ) Each entry on a record maintained under the HACCP plan shall be made at the time the specific event occurs and include the date and time recorded, and shall be signed or initialed by the establishment employee making the entry.
( c ) Prior to shipping product, the establishment shall review the records associated with the production of that product, documented in accordance with this section, to ensure completeness, including the determination that all critical limits were met and, if appropriate, corrective actions were taken, including the proper disposition of product. Where practicable, this review shall be conducted, dated, and signed by an individual who did not produce the record(s), preferably by someone trained in accordance with § 417.7 of this part, or the responsible establishment official.
( d ) *Records maintained on computers.* The use of records maintained on computers is acceptable, provided that appropriate controls are implemented to ensure the integrity of the electronic data and signatures.
( e ) *Record retention.* ( 1 ) Establishments shall retain all records required by paragraph (a)(3) of this section as follows: for slaughter activities for at least one year; for refrigerated product, for at least one year; for frozen, preserved, or shelf-stable products, for at least two years.
( 2 ) Off-site storage of records required by paragraph (a)(3) of this section is permitted after six months, if such records can be retrieved and provided, on-site, within 24 hours of an FSIS employee's request.
( f ) *Official review.* All records required by this part and all plans and procedures required by this part shall be available for official review and copying.