alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 381.95 Disposal of condemned poultry products. All condemned carcasses, or condemned parts of carcasses, or other condemned poultry products, except those condemned for biological residues shall be disposed of by one of the following methods, under the supervision of an inspector of the Inspection Service. (Facilities and materials for carrying out the requirements in this section shall be furnished by the official establishment.) ( a ) Steam treatment (which shall be accomplished by processing the condemned product in a pressure tank under at least 40 pounds of steam pressure) or thorough cooking in a kettle or vat, for a sufficient time to effectively destroy the product for human food purposes and preclude dissemination of disease through consumption by animals. (Tanks and equipment used for this purpose or for rendering or preparing inedible products shall be in rooms or compartments separate from those used for the preparation of edible products. There shall be no direct connection by means of pipes, or otherwise, between tanks containing inedible products and those containing edible products.)
( b ) Incineration or complete destruction by burning.
( c ) Chemical denaturing, which shall be accomplished by the liberal application to all carcasses and parts thereof, of: ( 1 ) Crude carbolic acid,
( 2 ) Kerosene, fuel oil, or used crankcase oil, or
( 3 ) Any phenolic disinfectant conforming to commercial standards CS 70-41 or CS 71-41 which shall be used in at least 2 percent emulsion or solution.
( d ) Any other substance or method that the Administrator approves in specific cases, which will denature the poultry product to the extent necessary to accomplish the purposes of this section.
( e ) Carcasses and parts of carcasses condemned for biological residue shall be disposed of in accordance with paragraph (b) of this section or by burying under the supervision of an inspector.
USDA 농촌 개발

미국 농무부 함께하면 번영하는 미국번영

2021 년 미국 구조 계획법

이 프로그램은

무엇을 합니까?

2021 년 미국 구조 계획(ARPA)법은 USDA 

농촌 개발의 단독 주택 직접 대출 프로그램을

위한 추가 자금을 제공합니다. ARP 기간은

2021 년 5 월 17 일에 시작되며, 추가 자금은

2023 년 9 월 30 일까지 지급될 수 있습니다.

ARP 의 주요 초점은 COVID-19 관련 지불

유예 기간(월 대출 상환이 중단된 기간) 

승인을 받은 기존 단독 주택 직접 차용인이

주택담보 대출을 재융자할 수 있도록 돕는

것입니다. 목표는 지불유예 기간이 끝난

후에도 USDA 차용인의 지불금이 적정

수준을 유지하도록 돕는 것입니다.

자격이 있는 사람은 누구입니까?

농촌 개발은 주택 수리 대출이 있는 고객을

포함하여 기존 단독 주택 직접 대출

차용인으로부터 승인된 COVID-19 유예 기간에

있는 대출 재융자 신청을 받습니다.

단독 주택 직접 대출 차용인의 경우 조정 가구

소득은 해당 지역의 중간 소득 한도 이하이어야

합니다. 주택 수리 대출 차용인의 경우 조정된

가계 소득은 해당 지역의 극빈 소득 한도

이하이어야 합니다. 소득 한도는

https://www.rd.usda.gov/sites/default/files/RDDirectLimitMap.pdf 에서 볼 수 있습니다.

연체 연방 부채를 제외하고, 재융자를 신청하는

단독 주택 직접 대출 차용인은 신용 분석, 표준

상환 비율 요건, 자산 한도 또는 자산 상태와

관련된 관례적 프로그램 표준의 적용을 받지

않습니다.

어떤 조건을 사용할 수 있습니까?

• 단독 주택 직접 차용인의 경우 10 년, 25 년, 

30 년 또는 33 년 기간을 사용할 수 있습니다. 

제한된 상황에서 38 년 만기가 제공될 수

있습니다.

• 주택 수리 차용인의 경우 20 년 기간이

가능합니다..

재융자 시 가능한 이점은 무엇입니까?

낮은 이자율과 기간 연장은 대출 지불금을 줄여 더

감당할 수 있도록 합니다.

차용인에게 비용이 발생합니까?

매매 수수료는 (부동산 거래와 관련된 수수료)

대출에 포함될 수 있습니다. 원래 계정의 에스크로

계정은 ARP 재융자 대출로 이전됩니다. 에스크로

계정을 설정해야 하는 경우 대출에 포함될 수 있는

위험 보험에 가입하는 비용은 귀하가 부담해야

합니다.

재융자에는 무엇이 포함될 수 있습니까?

• USDA 농촌 개발 부채. 특정 조건에서 여기에는

단독 주택 보조금 회수가 포함됩니다. 보조금

환수에 대한 추가 정보는

https://www.rd.usda.gov/sites/default/files/factsheet/508 RD FS RHS 

SubsidyRecaptureDirectLoans.pdf 에서 확인할 수

있습니다.

• 제한된 상황에서 단독 가족 주택 직접 대출

프로그램에 대한 부채와 관련되지 않은 선취특권

• 제한된 상황에서 가정의 주요 건강 및 안전

문제를 해결하기 위한 수리

• 마감 비용

• 농촌 개발에서 승인한 대출 포장

수수료
USDA 농촌 개발

미국 농무부 2021 년 미국 구조 계획법

다음에 무엇을 해야 합니까?

• 기존 단독 주택 직접 대출 차용인은

https://pubmai.sc.egov.usda.gov 를 방문하여

신청서 패키지를 다운로드해야 합니다. 또한

지역 사무소에 연락하여 신청서를 요청하거나

더 많은 정보를 얻을 수 있습니다. 주정부

사무실 위치는 https://rd.usda.gov/about 

rd/state-offices 에서 찾을 수 있습니다.

• 재상각 또는 보조금 환수를 포함하여 기존

대출에 대한 질문이 있는 경우 1-800-414-

1226 번으로 고객 서비스 센터(CSC)에

문의하십시오.

자세한 정보는 어디에서 찾을 수 있습니까?

• 차용자는 USDA 농촌 개발 단독 주택 미국

구조 계획법(ARPA) 웹페이지(이 링크에서 사용

가능: https://go.usa.gov/xteKW)를 방문하여

ARPA 가 어떻게 도움이 될 수 있는지 알아볼 수

있습니다.

• 이 프로그램과 관련된 내부 농촌 개발 구현

지침을 보려면 다음을 방문하십시오. 

https://www. 

rd.usda.gov/resources/directives/unnumberedletters 를 방문하여 메뉴에서 “Housing 

Programs”를 선택하십시오.

• 추가 양식, 리소스 및 프로그램 정보는

https://www.rd.usda.gov/programs 

services/all-programs/single-family 

housing-programs 에서 찾을 수

있습니다.

• 귀하의 지역 농촌 주택 프로그램

직원은 항상 훌륭한 자원입니다. 주 기반

사무실 위치는 https://rd.usda.

gov/about-rd/state-offices 에서 찾을 수

있습니다. 

참고: 정보는 변경될 수 있으므로 항상 공식 프로그램 지침을 참조하거나 지역 농촌 개발

사무소에 도움을 요청하십시오. https://rd.usda.gov 에서 추가 리소스, 양식 및

프로그램 정보를 찾을 수 있습니다. USDA 는 평등한 기회 제공자, 고용주 및 대출

기관입니다.

2022 년 4 월 마지막 업데이트
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30, 2000 FOR MEDIQUIK SERVICES
INC., AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                             147,781
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      521,039
<ALLOWANCES>                                       199,975
<INVENTORY>                                        106,519
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   575,364
<PP&E>                                             202,259
<DEPRECIATION>                                      11,402
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     998,412
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,101,033
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             6,393
<OTHER-SE>                                      (1,109,014)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       998,412
<SALES>                                            707,469
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   707,469
<CGS>                                              578,627
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,434,361
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   111,273
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   5,392
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (1,310,911)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (1,310,911)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1,390,911)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          (0.21)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (0.21)




</TABLE>
```

[113th Congress Public Law 204]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

[[Page 128 STAT. 2071]]

Public Law 113-204
113th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
 14 Red River Avenue North in Cold Spring, Minnesota, as the ``Officer 
  Tommy Decker Memorial Post Office''. <<NOTE: Dec. 16, 2014 -  [H.R. 
                                 43]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. OFFICER TOMMY DECKER MEMORIAL POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 14 Red River Avenue North in Cold Spring, Minnesota, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Officer Tommy Decker Memorial Post 
Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Officer 
Tommy Decker Memorial Post Office''.

    Approved December 16, 2014.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 43:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 160 (2014):
            June 17, considered and passed House.
            Dec. 3, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
# C_2010179EN.01004202.xml

| 3.7.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 179/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.7.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 179/42

---

Action brought on 22 April 2010 — Sviluppo Globale v Commission

(Case T-183/10)

(2010/C 179/75)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Sviluppo Globale GEIE (Rome, Italy) (represented by: F. Sciaudone, lawyer, R. Sciaudone, lawyer, and A. Neri, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the Commission decision of 14 February 2010; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the Commission decision of 14 February 2010;

| — | Order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The present action has been brought against the Commission’s decision of 14 February 2010 by which the Commission, in its capacity as contracting authority, notified Sviluppo Globale GEIE, the applicant, that it had excluded the consortium led by it from the short list drawn up for the restricted procedure EuropeAid/129038/C/SER/SY for the supply to the Syrian Government of technical assistance services designed to facilitate decentralisation and local development.

In support of its action for annulment, Sviluppo Globale GEIE alleges manifest error in the interpretation and application of the selection criteria laid down in the tender specifications. In particular, it argues, the Commission misapplied the selection criteria laid down in the tender specifications in respect of technical capability, thereby excluding the consortium led by Sviluppo Globale GEIE from the short list, despite the fact that it fulfilled the requirements laid down in those specifications. Such a manifest error on the part of the contracting authority can be seen clearly simply by comparing the technical capability requirements laid down for admission to the short list in question, on the one hand, with the actual technical capability of the consortium led by Sviluppo Globale GEIE, on the other.

Moreover, and in any event, Sviluppo Globale GEIE submits that the reasons stated for the exclusionary decision of 14 February 2010 are inadequate, in that no explanation is given as to why its tender does not satisfy the selection criteria relating to technical capability as laid down in the tender specifications.

---
**Exhibit 12.2**

**CERTIFICATION OF ANNUAL REPORT**

**PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, BenA. van der Klift, certify that:

1.           I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of ARCADISN.V.;

2.           Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.           Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the company asof, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.           The company’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for thecompany and have:

(a)           Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the company, including its consolidated subsidiaries,is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;

(b)           Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the company’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

(c)           Disclosedin this report any change in the company’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the company’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

5.           The company’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to thecompany’s auditors and the audit committee of the company’s board of directors(or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)           Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the company’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

(b)           Any fraud,whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the company’s internal control over financial reporting.

 
| Date: June 22, 2006 |   | /s/ Ben A. van der Klift      |
|--------------------------|--------|-------------------------------|
|                     |   | Ben A. van der Klift          |
|                     |   | Chief Financial Officer       |
|                     |   | (Principal Financial Officer) |

 

----
Dismissed and Opinion Filed February 19, 2020

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-19-01592-CV

ARLAN P. JOHNSON AND SPRINT TRANSPORT, LLC, Appellant

V.

SABA T. YOHANS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 193rd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-19-02250

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Bridges, Molberg, and Carlyle

Opinion by Justice Molberg

Before the Court is appellants’ “Agreed Motion to Effectuate Settlement” requesting that 

we set aside the trial court’s default judgment and dismiss this appeal.1 See TEX. R. APP. P.

42.1(a)(2)(A). We grant the motion, set aside the trial court’s default judgment signed on October 

3, 2019, and dismiss this appeal. See id.

191592f.p05

 

1 Although the certificate of conference states that counsel for appellee agrees with the relief sought, the motion is signed only by counsel for 

appellants. 

/Ken Molberg//

KEN MOLBERG

JUSTICE
–2–

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

ARLAN P. JOHNSON AND SPRINT 

TRANSPORT, LLC, Appellants

No. 05-19-01592-CV V.

SABA T. YOHANS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 193rd Judicial District 

Court, Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-19-02250.

Opinion delivered by Justice Molberg. 

Justices Bridges and Carlyle participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s October 3, 2019 default 

judgment is SET ASIDE and the appeal is DISMISSED.

Subject to any agreement between the parties, it is ORDERED that appellee SABA T. 

YOHANS recover her costs of this appeal from appellants ARLAN P. JOHNSON AND SPRINT 

TRANSPORT, LLC.

Judgment entered this 19th day of February, 2020.
EXHIBIT 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2003

     In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of WNC Housing Tax Credit
Fund IV, L.P., Series 1 (the "Partnership") for the year ended March 31, 2005 as
filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the
"Report"),  and  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.,  section  1350,  as adopted  pursuant to
section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of  2003,  I,  Thomas  J.  Riha,  Chief
Financial Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc., general partner of the Partnership,
hereby certify that:

     1.   The Report fully  complies with the  requirements  of section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the  Securities  Exchange  Act of 1934,  except to the extent
          that such  provisions  require the filing of an opinion of  registered
          public   accountants   to  accompany   the   Partnership-s   financial
          statements; and

     2.   The  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
          material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of
          the Partnership.




/s/THOMAS J. RIHA
-----------------
Thomas J. Riha
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.
November 21, 2005
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7962

DARRELL L. RICKS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus JAMES PEQUESE, Warden; J. JOSEPH CURRAN, JR., Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (CA-03-131) Submitted: April 15, 2004 Decided: April 22, 2004 Before NIEMEYER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Darrell L. Ricks, Appellant Pro Se. Ann Norman Bosse, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Darrell L. Ricks seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000), and denying reconsideration. An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a § 2254 proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. SeeMiller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U. S. 322, 336 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Ricks has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Ricks’ motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
# C_2011055EN.01002902.xml

| 19.2.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 55/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.2.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 55/29

---

Action brought on 14 December 2010 — Trenzas y Cables de Acero v Commission

(Case T-577/10)

2011/C 55/52

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Trenzas y Cables de Acero PSC, SL (Santander, Spain) (represented by F. González Díaz and A. Tresandi Blanco, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul, pursuant to Article 263 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the decision of the European Commission of 30 September 2010 amending the decision of 30 June 2010 (C(2010) 4837 final in Case COMP/38.344 — prestressing steel); |
| --- | --- |

—

annul, pursuant to Article 263 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the decision of the European Commission of 30 September 2010 amending the decision of 30 June 2010 (C(2010) 4837 final in Case COMP/38.344 — prestressing steel);

| — | in the alternative, annul, pursuant to Article 263 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Article 2 of the decision of the European Commission of 30 September 2010 amending the decision of 30 June 2010 (C(2010) 4837 final in Case COMP/38.344 — prestressing steel) insofar as it entails an infringement of the principle of non-discrimination in not having extended to TYCSA PSC the additional period for payment of the fine, and fails to state reasons; and |
| --- | --- |

—

in the alternative, annul, pursuant to Article 263 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Article 2 of the decision of the European Commission of 30 September 2010 amending the decision of 30 June 2010 (C(2010) 4837 final in Case COMP/38.344 — prestressing steel) insofar as it entails an infringement of the principle of non-discrimination in not having extended to TYCSA PSC the additional period for payment of the fine, and fails to state reasons; and

| — | order the European Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the European Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are those already raised in Case T-575/10 Moreda-Riviere Trefilerías v Commission.

Moreda-Riviere Trefilerías v Commission

---
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 of Service Bancorp, Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-QSB for the quarter ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Dana S. Philbrook, 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:



| | (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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This certification is provided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-B (Item 601(b)(32))
promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933 (the Securities Act) and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act). In accordance with clause (ii) of Item 601(b)(32), this certification (A) shall not
be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section, and (B) shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or the
Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ DANA S. PHILBROOK  
|Dana S. Philbrook      
|Chief Financial Officer

February 14, 2007