alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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

                              Date: April 19, 2004

                        Commission File Number 001-12510
                                               ---------

                                  ROYAL AHOLD
                 -----------------------------------------------
                 (Translation of registrant's name into English)

               Albert Heijnweg 1, 1507 EH Zaandam, The Netherlands
               ---------------------------------------------------
                     (Address of principal executive office)





     Indicate by check mark whether the registrant files or will file annual
reports under cover of Form 20-F or Form 40-F.

                        Form 20-F  X             Form 40-F
                                  ---                      ----

     Indicate by check mark whether the registrant by furnishing the information
contained in this Form is also thereby furnishing the information to the
Commission pursuant to Rule 12g3-2(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

                           Yes                   No   X
                               ---                   ---

         If "Yes" is marked, indicate below the file number assigned to the
registrant in connection with Rule 12g3-2(b):  82-
                                                  ------------------.
<PAGE>


     On April 19, 2004, Koninklijke Ahold N.V. ("Royal Ahold" or the "Company")
issued a press release announcing Ahold's results for 2003. A copy of this press
release is attached hereto as Exhibit 99.1.

     This Form 6-K shall be deemed to be incorporated by reference into the
prospectuses forming a part of the Company's Registration Statements on Form F-3
and Form S-3 (No. 333-52934, No. 333-52934-01, No. 333-80245 and No.
333-80245-01) and the Company's Registration Statements on Form S-8 (No.
333-09774, No. 333-70636, No. 333-07214, No. 333-07212 and No. 033-41068) and to
be a part of such prospectuses from the date of the filing thereof.

<PAGE>


                                   SIGNATURES

     Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.


                             KONINKLIJKE AHOLD N.V.



Date: April 19, 2004                By: /s/ H.R. Ryopponen
                                       ------------------------------
                                       By:    H.R. Ryopponen
                                       Title: Executive Vice President and CFO

<PAGE>


                                  EXHIBIT INDEX



The following exhibit has been filed as part of this Form 6-K:


Exhibit        Description
-------        ------------

99.1           Royal Ahold press release, dated April 19, 2004, announcing
               Ahold's results for 2003.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-50266

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MANUEL ESPARZA, JR.,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. W-95-CV-358

- - - - - - - - - -

December 3, 1996

Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Manuel Esparza, Jr., has filed a motion to appeal in forma

pauperis (IFP) the district court’s denial of his motion pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Having reviewed Esparza’s motion, appellate

brief and the record, we find that Esparza knowingly and

voluntarily waived his right to seek relief under § 2255. See

United States v. Wilkes, 20 F.3d 651, 653 (5th Cir. 1994). 

The court has not yet decided whether a certificate of
No. 96-50266

- 2 -

appealability (“COA”) is required under the circumstances of this

appeal or whether the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (PLRA)

applies to appeals from the denial of federal habeas relief. See

28 U.S.C. § 2253; see also Pub. L. No. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321

(PLRA). We need not resolve those issues here because we

conclude that the appeal does not involve a nonfrivolous

appellate issue. Accordingly, we DENY the motion for IFP and

DISMISS the appeal as frivolous. Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215,

219-20 (5th Cir. 1983); 5th Cir. R. 42.2. Esparza’s motion for

appointment of counsel is DENIED also. 

IFP DENIED; APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED.
AFS-14-172-E

March 28, 2014

 Exemption No. 10972

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2014-0106

Mr. David L. Jones

Corporate Aviation Education Director

Technical Educational Services Inc. dba

Aviation Institute of Maintenance

4455 South Boulevard

Virginia Beach, VA 23452

Dear Mr. Jones:

This letter is to inform you that we have denied your petition for exemption. It transmits our 

decision, explains its basis and describes its effect.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated October 1, 2013, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on 

behalf of Technical Educational Services Inc. dba, Aviation Institute of Maintenance (AIM) for 

an exemption from §65.75(a) of Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). The exemption, 

if granted, would allow AIM to administer the Aviation Mechanic General (AMG) written test to 

students, immediately following successful completion of the general curriculum and prior to 

meeting the experience requirements of 14 CFR §65.77.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition in 

the Federal Register because this is not a precedent-setting petition, and any delay in acting on 

this petition would be detrimental to AIM.

The FAA recently issued a denial of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects 

to those presented in your petition. In Denial of Exemption No. 9717 (copy enclosed), the FAA 

found that it would not be in the public interest to issue an exemption to a school that has not yet 

proven that its program meets the national norms. The FAA believes that AIM lacks the 
2

experience, at this time, to prove that its program meets the standards required of the students to 

take the FAA examinations early. 

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that:

 They do not differ materially from those presented by the petitioner in the enclosed 

 denial of exemption;

 The reasons stated by the FAA for denying the enclosed exemption also apply to the 

 situation you present; and

 A grant of exemption wouldn’t be in the public interest.

Our Decision

Under the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. §§ 106(f), 40113 and 44701, which the FAA 

Administrator has delegated to me, I hereby deny your petition for an exemption to allow AIM to 

administer the Aviation Mechanic General (AMG) written test to students, immediately 

following successful completion of the general curriculum and prior to meeting the experience 

requirements of 14 CFR §65.77.

Sincerely,

/s/

John S. Duncan

Director, Flight Standards Service

Enclosure:

Exemption No 9717
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF KAYDON CORPORATION FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED OCTOBER 3,
1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-03-1998
<CASH>                                          75,314
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   55,485
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,801
<INVENTORY>                                     71,569
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               213,539
<PP&E>                                         219,329
<DEPRECIATION>                                 121,490
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 396,530
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           68,970
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,642
<OTHER-SE>                                     293,428
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   396,530
<SALES>                                        291,458
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               291,458
<CGS>                                          173,211
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  173,211
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                33,469
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              (3,443)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 88,221
<INCOME-TAX>                                    33,525
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             54,696
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    54,696
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.67
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.66
        

</TABLE>
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency 

          - [FEMA-1550-DR] 

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate, Department of Homeland Security. 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

      ( print page 57954)    

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Mississippi (FEMA-1550-DR), dated September 15, 2004, and related determinations. 

# EFFECTIVE DATE:

September 21, 2004. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Magda Ruiz, Recovery Division, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2705. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Mississippi is hereby amended to include the following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of September 15, 2004: 

Clarke and Lauderdale Counties for Individual Assistance  (already designated for Public Assistance Categories A & B, including direct Federal assistance, for 100 percent of the total eligible costs for a period of up to 72 hours). 

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and Households Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050, Individuals and Households Program-Other Needs; 97.036, Public Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.) 

Michael D. Brown, 

Under Secretary,  Emergency Preparedness and Response,  Department of Homeland Security. 

[FR Doc. 04-21661 Filed 9-27-04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 19

- 00412

- CR

K IRK L YNN W RIGHT

, Appellant

V

.

T HE S TATE OF T EXAS §

§

§

§

§ On Appeal from the 297th District

Court

of Tarrant C ounty (1588770D)

December 5, 2019

Opinion by Chief Justice Sudderth

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that the

appeal should be dismissed. It is ordered that the appeal is dismissed

.

SECOND DISTRIC T COURT OF APPEALS

By __ /s/ Bonnie Sudderth

________________ Chief Justice Bonnie Sudderth
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 ELEV

 717.81

 720.15

 722.31

 710.24

 709.48

 712.39

 714.13

 715.51

 717.34

 720.89

 708.84

 711.47

 714.16

 716.29

 714.40

 712.25

 713.25

 708.22

 708.05

 708.49

 708.20

 710.40

 713.17

 715.25

 717.50

 721.90

 714.94

 713.93

 718.41

 721.66

 724.24

 1,109

 1,191

 1,270

 868

 846

 933

 987

 1,032

 1,093

 1,218

 829

 905

 988

 1,058

 996

 929

 959

 811

 806

 819

 811

 873

 956

 1,023

 1,098

 1,255

 1,013

 981

 1,129

 1,246

 1,343

STORAGE

+97

+82

+79

-402

-22

+87

+54

+45

+61

+125

-389

+76

+83

+70

+996

-67

+30

-148

-5

+13

-8

+62

+83

+67

+75

+157

-242

-32

+148

+117

+97

CHANGE

50

42

41

-7

18

45

28

24

32

64

-12

47

43

36

547

12

33

-1

25

31

19

44

43

35

39

80

64

78

76

60

50

INFLOW

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 1

 1

 1

 196

 29

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 184

 9

 1

 1

 45

 46

 18

 74

 28

 24

 23

 13

 1

 1

 1

 1

 186

 94

 1

 1

 1

 0935

 0945

 0920

 0940

TIME

 .05

 .06

 .05

 .06

COPPER

 .24

 .30

 .23

 .27

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

MAY 2010 SPRING CREEK DEBRIS RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: June 1, 2010

IN LAKE

SPRING CR DEBRIS DAM

ZINC

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS +1,389 1,686 0 986

ACRE-FEET +1,389 3,344 0 1,956

COMMENTS:

* COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES AND EVAPORATION.

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

SPILL 0

OUTLET

TOTAL

 1,956

 1,956

 1,012

SPILL OUTLET

**KES

COPPER

MG/L

 .004

 .004

 .004

 .004
1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 47722

STATE OF IDAHO ,

Plaintiff

- Respondent ,

v.

BRIAN MICHAEL TRAPPEN ,

Defendant

- Appellant

. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Filed: June 3, 2021

Melanie Gagnepain, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Jerome County. Hon. Eric J. Wildman , District Judge.

Order of restitution, affirmed

.

Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Justin M. Curtis , Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Kenneth K. Jorgensen , Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

________________________________________________
LORELLO, Judge

Brian Michael Trappen appeals from an order of restitution. We affirm.

I.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

While driving under the influence of alcohol, Trappen caused a multi

- vehicle accident that

resulted in two fatalities and injuries to several oth er drivers. As a result, the State charged Trappen

with two counts of vehicular manslaughter, two counts of aggravated driving under the influence,

and driving without privileges. Trappen pled guilty to the two counts of vehicular manslaughter,

I.C. § 18

- 4006(3)(a), and the State dismissed the remaining charges. The State also sought
$6,155.49 in restitution. Of the amount requested, Trappen objected to the State’s request for2 $1,330.49 for the Idaho State Police. The district court denied the requeste d $1,330.49, but ordered
Trappen to pay the balance of the requested restitution in the amount of $4,825. Trappen appeals.

II.

ANALYSIS

Mindful that the district court “struck [the] only item to which he objected from the

restitution order,” Trappen argues that the district court abused its discretion in awarding

restitution. The State responds that Trappen failed to preserve his challenge to the restitution order

because he did not object to the amount requested. We agree with the State and hold that Trappen’s

challenge to the restitution order is not preserved.

Generally, issues not raised below may not be considered for the first time on appeal. State

v. Fodge , 121 Idaho 192, 195, 824 P.2d 123, 126 (1992). During the restitution hearing, Trappen

only objected to $1,330.49 of the State’s $6,155.49 restitution request. The district court sustained
Trappen’s objection, excluded $1,330.49 from the restitution award, and only ordered Trappen to
pay $4,825. Be cause Trappen did not challenge any portion of the amount actually awarded or

otherwise object during the restitution proceeding, as he concedes on appeal, this Court will not

consider the merits of his claim that the district court’s restitution award was an abuse of discretion.

III.

CONCLUSION

Trappen failed to preserve his argument that the district court abused its discretion in

ordering him to pay restitution. Consequently, the order of restitution is affirmed.

Chief Judge HUSKEY and Judge BRAIL SFORD, CONCUR

.
**Exhibit
      32.1**




**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 Annual Report of Ultitek. Ltd., a Nevada corporation (the
      “Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2007 as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
      Roman Price, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge
      and belief:





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.





Dated:
                April 15, 2008
            
            /s/ ROMAN
                PRICERoman
                PricePresident,
                Chief Executive Officer and Sole Director
              (Principal
                Executive Officer)
**Exhibit 31.1**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Michael J. McMennamin, certify that:
 1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of HuntingtonPreferred Capital, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect tothe period covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and otherfinancial information included in this report, fairly present inall material respects the financial condition, results of operations,and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) forthe registrant and have:
 a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures,or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to bedesigned under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared; and  b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisreport our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the periodcovered by this report based on such evaluation; and  c) disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarterthat has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and
 5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controlover financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent functions):
 a) all significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize,and report financial information; and  b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role inthe registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
Date: March 30, 2004   /s/ Michael J. McMennamin      Michael J. McMennamin, President     (chief executive officer)
### §1776d. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 103–444, §6, Nov. 2, 1994, 108 Stat. 4638; amended Pub. L. 103–435, §23, Nov. 2, 1994, 108 Stat. 4575, which provided for the establishment and administration of the Crow Tribal Trust Fund, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.