alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2012038EN.01002801.xml

| 11.2.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 38/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.2.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 38/28

---

Notice from the Government of the Republic of Cyprus concerning Directive 94/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the conditions for granting and using authorisations for the prospection, exploration and production of hydrocarbons

(Text with EEA relevance)

2012/C 38/11

Without prejudice to the application of the provisions regarding national security, of Article 2(2) of Directive 94/22/EC, the Republic of Cyprus hereby notifies all interested persons that the criteria, which shall be used when granting authorisations for the prospection, exploration and production of hydrocarbons, are:

| (a) | the technical and financial ability of the applicants; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

the technical and financial ability of the applicants;

| (b) | the ways in which the applicant intends to carry out the activities that are specified in the licence; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the ways in which the applicant intends to carry out the activities that are specified in the licence;

| (c) | the financial consideration that the applicant is offering in order to obtain the licence; and |
| --- | --- |

(c)

the financial consideration that the applicant is offering in order to obtain the licence; and

| (d) | any lack of efficiency and responsibility that the applicant has shown under any previous licence or authorisation of any form in any country of the world. |
| --- | --- |

(d)

any lack of efficiency and responsibility that the applicant has shown under any previous licence or authorisation of any form in any country of the world.

If, following evaluation under the above criteria, two or more applications have equal merit, the proposals of the applicants regarding the protection of public safety, public health, security of transport, protection of the environment, protection of biological resources and of national treasures possessing artistic, historic or archaeological value, safety of installations and workers and planned management of hydrocarbon resources, shall be taken into account.

In accordance with Article 5(2) of Directive 94/22/EC, information on the conditions and requirements concerning the exercise or termination of the activity, which apply to the type of authorisations that are to be granted, is contained in the relevant legislation and in a Model Exploration and Production Sharing Contract, which will be made available to interested entities upon request addressed to the office of the Minister of Commerce, Industry and Tourism, 1421 Nicosia, Cyprus, tel. +357 22867111, fax: +357 22375323, email: cdiomedous@dits.mof.gov.cy

---
Exhibit 24**WILLIAMS PARTNERS GP LLC****POWER OF ATTORNEY**     KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS that each of the undersigned individuals, in their capacity asa director or officer, or both, as hereinafter set forth below their signature, of WilliamsPartners GP LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the “Company”), as general partner ofWilliams Partners L.P. (the “Partnership”), does hereby constitute and appoint JAMES J. BENDER,WILLIAM H. GAULT, and BRIAN K. SHORE their true and lawful attorneys and each of them (with fullpower to act without the others) their true and lawful attorneys for them and in their name and intheir capacity as a director or officer, or both, of the Company, as hereinafter set forth belowtheir signature, to sign the Partnership’s Annual Report to the U.S. Securities and ExchangeCommission on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005, and any and all amendmentsthereto or all instruments necessary or incidental in connection therewith; and     THAT the undersigned Company does hereby constitute and appoint JAMES J. BENDER, WILLIAM H.GAULT, and BRIAN K. SHORE its true and lawful attorneys and each of them (with full power to actwithout the others) its true and lawful attorney for it and in its name and on its behalf to signsaid Form 10-K and any and all amendments thereto and any and all instruments necessary orincidental in connection therewith.     Each of said attorneys shall have full power of substitution and resubstitution, and saidattorneys or any of them or any substitute appointed by any of them hereunder shall have full powerand authority to do and perform in the name and on behalf of each of the undersigned, in any andall capacities, every act whatsoever requisite or necessary to be done in the premises, as fully toall intents and purposes as each of the undersigned might or could do in person, the undersignedhereby ratifying and approving the acts of said attorneys or any of them or of any such substitutepursuant hereto.     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this instrument, all as of the February24th day of February, 2006.   /s/ Steven J. Malcolm /s/ Donald R. Chappel   Steven J. Malcolm
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-4793

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

JAMES GORMLEY,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Huntington. Robert C. Chambers, District

Judge. (CR-98-152)

Submitted: March 30, 1999 Decided: April 13, 1999

Before MURNAGHAN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Wilmer Parker, III, Robert P. Marcovitch, KILPATRICK STOCKTON,

L.L.P., Atlanta, Georgia; S. Benjamin Bryant, ALLEN, GUTHRIE &

MCHUGH, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellant. Rebecca A.

Betts, United States Attorney, John J. Frail, Assistant United

States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

James Gormley appeals from the district court’s order denying

his motion to vacate the ex parte order restraining all of

Gormley’s assets except ordinary and reasonable living expenses,

pending the outcome of his trial on charges of conspiracy to commit

wire and securities fraud and to obstruct justice, wire fraud;

perjury; money laundering; and conspiracy to engage in money

laundering. Gormley challenges the order on the basis that the

indictment fails to allege that he possessed or exercised dominion

and control over the suspect funds and therefore fails to show that

the assets sought to be restrained are forfeitable. He also contends that the district court erred in finding that he could be

held jointly and severally liable for any forfeitable assets

possessed by his codefendants. We have reviewed the record and the

arguments raised by counsel and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. See United States v. McHan, 101 F.3d 1027, 1043

(4th Cir. 1996), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1281 (1997); United States

v. Hurley, 63 F.3d 1, 22 (1st Cir. 1995). 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.

AFFIRMED
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 378 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 378

  To prohibit the purchase, ownership, or possession of enhanced body 
                  armor by civilians, with exceptions.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 14, 2015

 Mr. Honda (for himself, Mr. Hastings, Ms. Kelly of Illinois, and Mr. 
 Danny K. Davis of Illinois) introduced the following bill; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To prohibit the purchase, ownership, or possession of enhanced body 
                  armor by civilians, with exceptions.

    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 ``Responsible Body Armor Possession 
Act''.

SEC. 2. BAN ON PURCHASE, OWNERSHIP, OR POSSESSION OF ENHANCED BODY 
              ARMOR BY CIVILIANS; EXCEPTIONS.

    (a) In General.--Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 932. Ban on purchase, ownership, or possession of enhanced body 
              armor by civilians
    ``(a) Except as provided in subsection (b), it shall be unlawful 
for a person to purchase, own, or possess enhanced body armor.
    ``(b) Subsection (a) shall not apply to--
            ``(1) a purchase, ownership, or possession by or under the 
        authority of--
                    ``(A) the United States or any department or agency 
                of the United States; or
                    ``(B) a State, or a department, agency, or 
                political subdivision of a State; or
            ``(2) enhanced body armor that was lawfully possessed by 
        any person at any time before the date this section takes 
        effect.''.
    (b) Enhanced Body Armor Defined.--Section 921(a) of such title is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(36) The term `enhanced body armor' means body armor, including a 
helmet or shield, the ballistic resistance of which meets or exceeds 
the ballistic performance of Type III armor, determined using National 
Institute of Justice Standard-0101.06.''.
    (c) Penalties.--Section 924(a) of such title is amended by adding 
at the end the following:
    ``(8) Whoever knowingly violates section 932 shall be fined under 
this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.''.
                                 <all>
```
### SUBCHAPTER IV—OTHER ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 Washington, D.C. 20549
 FORM 6-K
 REPORT OF FOREIGN PRIVATE ISSUER PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-16 OR 15D-16
UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 For
the month of June 2011
 Commission file number 0-30752
 AETERNA ZENTARIS INC.
 1405 du Parc-Technologique Blvd.

Quebec City, Québec

Canada, G1P 4P5
  Form 20-F     þ
    
    Form 40-F     o
 o
 o
  Yes     o
    
    No     þ




---



##### 



DOCUMENTS INDEX
 Documents Description
 99.1
    
    

Press
release dated June 29, 201199.2
    
    

At
market issuance sales agreement dated June 29, 2011 between the
registrant and McNicoll Lewis & Vlak, LLC
 SIGNATURE
  ÆTERNA ZENTARIS INC.Date:  June 29,
2011
    
    By:
    /s/  DENNIS TURPINDennis TurpinSenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Fourth Department,

May, 1943.

(May 5, 1943.)

#### Ethel G. Becker, Respondent, v. Walter W. Becker, Appellant.

Present — Crosby, P. J., Taylor, Dowling, Harris, and McCurn, JJ.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

DAY HIGH

 239

 235

 223

 237

 231

 226

 229

 231

 235

 238

 236

 236

 242

 245

 242

 239

 225

 243

 246

 248

 241

 238

 237

 229

 218

 206

 202

 205

 210

 160

 139

 143

 151

 164

 175

 184

 194

 204

 211

 214

 216

 216

 221

 222

 218

 217

 212

 213

 217

 218

 215

 212

 204

 191

 185

 186

 186

 187

 205

 189

 178

 183

 189

 193

 198

 206

 216

 221

 222

 225

 227

 231

 230

 226

 221

 220

 223

 227

 226

 223

 219

 214

 203

 194

 192

 192

 194

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

FEBRUARY 2016 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: March 3, 2016

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

RIO VISTA ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
##### 



Exhibit 99.1

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 Identix Incorporated (the Company)
on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of Joseph J.
Atick, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Erik E.
Prusch, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifies, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 result of operations of the
Company.

|                                                           |  |                   
|---------------------------------------------------------- |  | ------------------
|/s/ Joseph J AtickJoseph J. Atick, Chief Executive Officer |  | Date: May 14, 2003
|                                                          
|/s/ Erik E. PruschErik E. Prusch, Chief Financial Officer  |  | Date: May 14, 2003
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 2,320

 3,214

 2,104

 937

 694

 310

 306

 286

 317

 1,705

 2,476

 2,791

 2,238

 2,646

 1,952

 1,393

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 345

 282

 286

 265

 246

 249

 229

 230

 227

 217

 222

 235

 231

 219

 220

 227

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 894

 1,128

 605

 378

 318

 276

 262

 258

 259

 471

 640

 859

 695

 609

 478

 431

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

JANUARY 2003 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: February 10, 2003

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

PORT CHICAGO TOP IN SUISUN BAY
<TABLE> <S> <C>


        

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS OF REALMARK PROPERTY INVESTORS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP III FOR
NINE MONTHS  ENDED  SEPTEMBER  30,  1996,  AND IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                          54,944       
<SECURITIES>                                         0            
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,030,329      
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,006,977      
<INVENTORY>                                          0            
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               963,828         
<PP&E>                                      20,924,153
<DEPRECIATION>                               9,816,340              
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              12,071,642           
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,182,608    
<BONDS>                                     10,103,269   
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                    
<PREFERRED>                                          0            
<COMMON>                                             0  
<OTHER-SE>                                           0            
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                12,071,642           
<SALES>                                              0                    
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,244,904            
<CGS>                                                0            
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,095,658    
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                59,325        
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0            
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             978,555      
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (910,079)            
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0            
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0            
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                    
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                    
<CHANGES>                                            0            
<NET-INCOME>                                  (910,079)    
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (56.77)      
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                        
                                           
        

</TABLE>
### §§8101 to 8105. Repealed. Pub. L. 107–110, title X, §1011(5)(A), Jan. 8, 2002, 115 Stat. 1986

Section 8101, Pub. L. 89–10, title X, §10411, as added Pub. L. 103–382, title I, §101, Oct. 20, 1994, 108 Stat. 3832, set forth findings and purpose of subpart.

Section 8102, Pub. L. 89–10, title X, §10412, as added Pub. L. 103–382, title I, §101, Oct. 20, 1994, 108 Stat. 3833; amended Pub. L. 104–208, div. A, title I, §101(e) [title VII, §709(b)(3)(B)], Sept. 30, 1996, 110 Stat. 3009–233, 3009–313, authorized program.

Section 8103, Pub. L. 89–10, title X, §10413, as added Pub. L. 103–382, title I, §101, Oct. 20, 1994, 108 Stat. 3835, related to authorized activities.

Section 8104, Pub. L. 89–10, title X, §10414, as added Pub. L. 103–382, title I, §101, Oct. 20, 1994, 108 Stat. 3836; amended Pub. L. 104–208, div. A, title I, §101(e) [title VII, §709(b)(3)(C)], Sept. 30, 1996, 110 Stat. 3009–233, 3009–313, related to payments, amounts of award, cost share, and limitations.

Section 8105, Pub. L. 89–10, title X, §10415, as added Pub. L. 103–382, title I, §101, Oct. 20, 1994, 108 Stat. 3837, authorized appropriations.
### §§219 to 222. Repealed. June 25, 1948, ch. 645, §21, 62 Stat. 862, eff. Sept. 1, 1948

Section 219, R.S. §4078; act June 14, 1902, ch. 1088, §3, 32 Stat. 386, related to issuance of false passports. See section 1541 of Title 18, Crimes and Criminal Procedure.

Section 220, acts June 15, 1917, ch. 30, title IX, §2, 40 Stat. 227; Mar. 28, 1940, ch. 72, §7, 54 Stat. 80, related to false statements in application for passports. See section 1542 of Title 18.

Section 221, acts June 15, 1917, ch. 30, title IX, §3, 40 Stat. 227; Mar. 28, 1940, ch. 72, §7, 54 Stat. 80, related to unlawful use of passports. See section 1544 of Title 18.

Section 222, acts June 15, 1917, ch. 30, title IX, §4, 40 Stat. 227; Mar. 28, 1940, ch. 72, §7, 54 Stat. 80, related to forging or altering of passports. See section 1543 of Title 18.
Exhibit 12.2



CERTIFICATION OF THE PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER



I, Gregory McGrath, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Omega Navigation Enterprises, 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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4. The registrant'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 registrant 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 registrant, 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)

evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant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



c)

disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and



5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):



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 registrant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 registrant's internal control over financial reporting.





Date: April 25, 2007



/s/ Gregory McGrathGregory McGrath

Principal Financial Officer
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A16A1080. DEBRA ANNE GARY v. BRUCE CHATMAN, WARDEN.

Debra Anne Gary filed an action seeking damages and the reinstatement of her

visitation privileges after she was arrested while trying to visit her incarcerated

husband. She filed a Motion to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees, which the trial

court denied on August 18, 2015. Gary subsequently filed a motion for

reconsideration. The trial court denied Gary’s motion for reconsideration on

September 10, 2015. Gary filed her notice of appeal on October 14, 2015.

1 However,

we lack jurisdiction.

A notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days after entry of an appealable

order. OCGA § 5-6-38 (a). The proper and timely filing of a notice of appeal is an

absolute requirement to confer jurisdiction on this Court. See Couch v. United

PaperworkersIntl. Union, 224 Ga. App. 721, 721 (482 SE2d 704) (1997). The denial

of a motion for reconsideration is not directly appealable. See Bell v. Cohran, 244

Ga. App. 510, 511 (536 SE2d 187) (2000). And the filing of such a motion does not

extend the time for appealing the underlying judgment – here, the order denying her

Motion to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees. See id. Gary’s notice of appeal,

therefore, is invalid as to the order denying her motion for reconsideration and

untimely asto the order denying her Motion to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees. 

Accordingly, we lack jurisdiction to consider this appeal, which is hereby

DISMISSED.

1 Gary originally filed her appeal in the Georgia Supreme Court, which

transferred the case to this Court.

March 16, 2016
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

03/16/2016