alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Službeni list C 270I/2020

| | ISSN 1977-1088 |
| --- | --- |
| Službeni list
  Europske unije | C 270I |
| | |
| Hrvatsko izdanje | Informacije i objave | Godište 63.17. kolovoza 2020. |

ISSN 1977-1088

Službeni list

Europske unije

C 270I

Hrvatsko izdanje

Informacije i objave

Godište 63.17. kolovoza 2020.

---

| Sadržaj | Stranica |
| --- | --- |
| | IV.   Obavijesti |
| | OBAVIJESTI INSTITUCIJA, TIJELA, UREDA I AGENCIJA EUROPSKE UNIJE |
| | Europska komisija |
| 2020/C 270 I/01 | Izjava Komisije o Direktivi (EU) 2019/1937 Europskog parlamenta i Vijeća o zaštiti osoba koje prijavljuju povrede prava Unije | 1 |

Sadržaj

Stranica

IV.   Obavijesti

OBAVIJESTI INSTITUCIJA, TIJELA, UREDA I AGENCIJA EUROPSKE UNIJE

Europska komisija

2020/C 270 I/01

Izjava Komisije o Direktivi (EU) 2019/1937 Europskog parlamenta i Vijeća o zaštiti osoba koje prijavljuju povrede prava Unije

1

---

| HR | |
| --- | --- |

HR

---

IV. Obavijesti

OBAVIJESTI INSTITUCIJA, TIJELA, UREDA I AGENCIJA EUROPSKE UNIJE

Europska komisija

| 17.8.2020 | HR | Službeni list Europske unije | CI 270/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.8.2020

HR

Službeni list Europske unije

CI 270/1

---

Izjava Komisije o Direktivi (EU) 2019/1937 Europskog parlamenta i Vijeća o zaštiti osoba koje prijavljuju povrede prava Unije

(2020/C 270 I/01)

Prilikom preispitivanja koje se provodi u skladu s člankom 27. Direktive (EU) 2019/1937 Europskog parlamenta i Vijeća od 23. listopada 2019. o zaštiti osoba koje prijavljuju povrede prava Unije (1), Komisija će razmotriti mogućnost da se predloži proširenje njezina područja primjene na neke akte na temelju članaka 153. i 157. UFEU-a, nakon savjetovanja sa socijalnim partnerima, prema potrebi, u skladu s člankom 154. UFEU-a.

---

(1)  SL L 305, 26.11.2019., str. 17.

---
#### § 3515.20 May I exchange preference rights?

Yes. To have a preference right that can be exchanged, you must have timely submitted a preference right lease application. If you have demonstrated a right to a lease, BLM may, in lieu of issuing the preference right lease, negotiate for the selection of appropriate lands to exchange and establish lease terms for those lands.
§ 4.2 Membership of appeals boards; decisions, functions of Chief Judges. ( a ) The Appeals Boards consist of regular members, who are hereby designated Administrative Judges, one of whom is designated as Chief Administrative Judge, the Director as an ex officio member, and alternate members who may serve, when necessary, in place of or in addition to regular members. The Chief Administrative Judge of an Appeals Board may direct that an appeal may be decided by a panel of any two Administrative Judges of the Board, but if they are unable to agree upon a decision, the Chief Administrative Judge may assign one or more additional Administrative Judges of the Board to consider the appeal. The concurrence of a majority of the Board Administrative Judges who consider an appeal shall be sufficient for a decision.
( b ) Decisions of the Board must be in writing and signed by not less than a majority of the Administrative Judges who considered the appeal. The Director, being an ex officio member, may participate in the consideration of any appeal and sign the resulting decision.
( c ) The Chief Administrative Judge of an Appeals Board shall be responsible for the internal management and administration of the Board, and the Chief Administrative Judge is authorized to act on behalf of the Board in conducting correspondence and in carrying out such other duties as may be necessary in the conduct of routine business of the Board.
[39 FR 7931, Mar. 1, 1974]
Exhibit 32.1



AMN Healthcare Services, Inc.



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 AMN Healthcare Services, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Susan R.
Nowakowski, President and Chief Executive 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.



/s/    SUSAN R.
NOWAKOWSKISusan R. Nowakowski President and Chief Executive Officer March 5,
2010
### **CHAPTER 49—COSMETIC SERVICES**

Sec.
5000B.
Imposition of tax on indoor tanning services.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior chapter 49, added Pub. L. 111–148, title IX, §9017(a), Mar. 23, 2010, 124 Stat. 872, which related to elective cosmetic medical procedures and consisted of section 5000B, was not set out in the Code in view of Pub. L. 111–148, title X, §10907(a), Mar. 23, 2010, 124 Stat. 1020, which provided that the amendments made by section 9017 of Pub. L. 111–148 were deemed null, void, and of no effect.
11Birector anb jf acultp 

of 

Wnmanneb l)ebirle 

all tubom tbese presents map come, Wbereas 

Will Adrian 

completeb a 42 bour intensibe sbort course. We unber tbe autborit

Jnbesteb in us, bo berebp confer a QCertificate· of QCompletion in 

UAV Basic Flight Training 

Student has completed a 16 hour ground school, received 10 ho

Training in a small UAV sjmulator and 16 hours of flight tra

Dean, School of Flight Training Provo

4803803v1(63686.1) 

... , 

. ' . '·'
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from
     BIO-CHEM, INC. March 31, 1997 financial statements and is qualified in
     its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<CIK>                         0000894562
<NAME>                        BIO-CHEM, INC.

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997

<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1997

<CASH>                                              50,000
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                            0
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    50,000
<PP&E>                                                   0
<DEPRECIATION>                                           0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      50,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                    0
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             1,100
<OTHER-SE>                                          48,900
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        50,000
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                         0
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                            0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                          0
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                      0
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                             0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                            0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0
        


</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-50007

Summary Calendar

Consolidated with 18-50008

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

MIGUEL ANTONIO URQUIA-MELENDEZ, 

 Defendant - Appellant

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 2:10-CR-290-1

 USDC No. 2:16-CR-1604-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, ELROD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Miguel Antonio Urquia-Melendez appeals his guilty-plea conviction for 

illegal reentry following a prior deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326, and 

his resulting 48-month sentence. He also appeals the concomitant revocation 

of his supervised release related to a prior conviction for illegal reentry.

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

October 3, 2018

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 18-50007 Document: 00514666759 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/03/2018
No. 18-50007

c/w No. 18-50008

2

Raising one issue, Urquia-Melendez argues that because his indictment 

did not specify the prior felony conviction that formed the basis of his 

sentencing enhancement, his sentence, imposed under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1), 

exceeded the two-year maximum sentence under § 1326(a) and therefore 

violated his due process rights. The Government has filed an unopposed 

motion for summary affirmance and, alternatively, seeks an extension of time 

to file its brief.

As the Government argues, and Urquia-Melendez concedes, the sole 

issue raised on appeal is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 

U.S. 224 (1998). See United States v. Wallace, 759 F.3d 486, 497 (5th Cir. 

2014); United States v. Pineda-Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625-26 (5th Cir. 2007). 

Because the issue is foreclosed, summary affirmance is appropriate. See 

Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969).

Urquia-Melendez’s appeal from the revocation of his supervised release 

was consolidated with the instant appeal. He has not, however, raised any 

argument with respect to these proceedings. Any such claim is thus deemed 

abandoned. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993).

The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and 

the district court’s judgments are AFFIRMED. The Government’s alternative 

motion for an extension of time to file its brief is DENIED. 

 Case: 18-50007 Document: 00514666759 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/03/2018
T16N R1W

T17N R1W

9 8

5 4 3

0

17 16

10

15

32 33

7

6

18

31

CCOOLLUUSSAA CC OO

95.6 L

Contractor's Service Area

Point of Diversion

Contract No. 14-06-200-1604A-R-1

Exhibit B

Baber, Jack, et al

725-202-5

Note: The Public Land Survey depicted here

was digitized from USGS topographic maps.

0 0.25 0.5 1

Miles

Date: October 28, 2004

File Name: N:\districts\contracts\baber_jack\baber_jack.mxd
EX-4.2





 Exhibit 4.2 

Incorporated in the Cayman Islands 

AMTD Digital Inc. 
 This is
to certify that 
 is/are the registered shareholders of 
  

													
		 	No. of Shares	  		  	Type of Share	  		  	Par Value
		 		  		  	Class A Ordinary	  		  	USD	  	0.0001 
		 	Date of Record	  		  	Certificate Number	  		  		  	% Paid

 The above shares are subject to the Memorandum and Articles of Association of the Company and transferable in
accordance therewith. 
  

									
	  
	  	Director	  		  	  
	  	Director / Secretary
EXHIBIT 32.2



Certification of Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



The undersigned Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of First Republic Preferred Capital Corporation (the Company), hereby certifies on the date hereof pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350(a),
as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 (the Form 10-K), filed concurrently herewith by the Company, fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.



|                     |  |                              |  |                                                                            
|-------------------- |  | ---------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: March 16, 2005 |  | /s/    WILLIS H. NEWTON, JR.
|                     |  | Name: Title:                 |  | Willis H. Newton, Jr. Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
### §1621k. Coverage of screening mammography

The Secretary, through the Service, shall provide for screening mammography (as defined in section 1861(jj) of the Social Security Act [42 U.S.C. 1395x(jj)]) for Indian and urban Indian women 35 years of age or older at a frequency, determined by the Secretary (in consultation with the Director of the National Cancer Institute), appropriate to such women, and under such terms and conditions as are consistent with standards established by the Secretary to assure the safety and accuracy of screening mammography under part B of title XVIII of the Social Security Act [42 U.S.C. 1395j et seq.] and other cancer screenings.

(Pub. L. 94–437, title II, §212, as added Pub. L. 102–573, title II, §207(a), Oct. 29, 1992, 106 Stat. 4550; amended Pub. L. 111–148, title X, §10221(a), Mar. 23, 2010, 124 Stat. 935.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Social Security Act, referred to in text, is act Aug. 14, 1935, ch. 531, 49 Stat. 620. Part B of title XVIII of the Act is classified generally to part B (§1395j et seq.) of subchapter XVIII of chapter 7 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see section 1305 of Title 42 and Tables.

#### Codification

Amendment by Pub. L. 111–148 is based on section 128 of title I of S. 1790, One Hundred Eleventh Congress, as reported by the Committee on Indian Affairs of the Senate in Dec. 2009, which was enacted into law by section 10221(a) of Pub. L. 111–148.

#### Amendments

2010—Pub. L. 111–148 inserted "and other cancer screenings" before period at end.
### §458b. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 458b was editorially reclassified as section 5353 of this title.
Exhibit
99.6



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 Provident Energy Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 40-F for the year ended December
31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I Douglas Haughey,
President and Chief Executive 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 to the best of my 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 represents, in all material
                                                               respects, the financial condition and results of the operations
                                                               of the Company.
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|Date:       March 16, 2012 |                                      
|-------------------------- | -------------------------------------
|                           |                                      
|                           | /s/ Douglas
    J. Haughey           
|                           | Douglas J. Haughey                   
|                           | President and Chief Executive Officer
Record of Discussion Docket No. F A A- Directo rate Identifier: -AD

With whom outside the FAA bas this action been discussed (i.e . , Design Approval Holder, manufacturer, ATA, NBAA, RAA, AOPA, ALPA, GAMA, etc)?

O RGANIZATION PE RSON CONTACTED DATE TOPI C S DISCUSSED 

### A4A Bob Ireland Left voicemail on 

### 11 / 8

/ 2012 

### (202) 626 -4228

Oth e r / Additional Inf o rmation:



### 9
#### Levy *v.*Mayor &c. of Brunswick, and *vice versa.*

Atkinson, J.

1. This was an action of ejectment in the fictitious form, and the description of the land sued for in the petition was sufficient.

2. A certified copy of an application for partition of the premises in dispute and the judgment entered thereon within less than seven years from the institution of the action of ejectment, to which neither the plaintiff in ejectment nor any one claiming under him was a party, though the plaintiff in ejectment claimed under one of the parties to the partition proceeding by deed executed and duly recorded prior to the filing of the partition proceeding, was not admissible in evidence for the purpose of showing title out of the plaintiff, or as color of title, and was properly excluded on the ground of irrelevancy.

3. There was no error in ruling out evidence of the attorney of a former owner of the land that he returned it for taxation for such owner after its conveyance by him to the plaintiff in a suit by the latter against the city, which claimed ¿itle under tax sales against such former owner.

4. If the plaintiff was entitled to recover from the city, the latter was not entitled to recover from the former, under equitable pleadings, the amount paid by such city át a marshal’s sale under a tax fi. fa. in its own favor, and at a sheriff’s sale for State and county taxes, at which the city bought, such sales being invalid.

5. Where a city claimed title to land, and for a time was in possession thereof, and subsequently a recovery in ejectment was had against the corporation, it was not entitled to have, the court, under equitable pleadings, .declare that city taxes of a certain amount might have been assessed on the land for certain yéars and to recover such amount against the plaintiff, no assessment having in fact been made for such years for taxes on the land.

*95September 20, 1910.

Ejectment. Before Judge Parker. Glynn superior court. May *21,*July *27,*1909.

*Twitty & Reese,*for plaintiff.

*Grovatt & Whitfield,*for defendant.

6. Under tlie evidence, there was no error in overruling the motion for a nonsuit, or in directing a verdict for the plaintiff for the land. But it was erroneous to direct a recovery in favor of the defendant against the plaintiff for municipal taxes never assessed, hut claimed by the city as the proper amount of taxes for certain years during which the city claimed title to the land.

7. No other assignment of error in either of the bills of exception requires . a reversal.

8. There was no merit in the motion to dismiss the writ of error.

*Judgment reversed in the first ease, and affirmed in the second.*

*All the Justices concur.*
§ 3802.1-2 When not required. A plan of operations under this subpart is not required for— ( a ) Searching for and occasionally removing mineral samples or specimens;
( b ) Operating motorized vehicles over *open use areas and trails* as defined in 43 CFR part 8340 so long as the vehicles conform to the operating regulations and vehicle standards contained in that subpart;
( c ) Maintaining or making minor improvements of existing access routes, bridges, landing areas for aircraft, or other facilities for access where such improvements or maintenance shall not alter the alignment, width, gradient, size or character of such facilities; or
( d ) Making geological, radiometric, geochemical, geophysical or other tests and measurements using instruments, devices, or drilling equipment which are transported without using mechanized earth moving equipment or tracked vehicles.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

FLORIDA HOSPITAL MEDICINE SERVICES, LLC , Appellant,

v.

QUALITY MEDICAL CONSULTANT GROUP, INC., RAGNIER STEIN, LAZARO CADAVIECO, BRIAN HORVATH, and MOLINA INPATIENT SERVICES, INC. , Appellee s

.

No. 4D 18

- 2169

[ February 21, 2019 ]

Appeal of a non

- final order from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; David A. Haimes , Judge; L.T. Case No.

CACE 18

- 1690

.

Beverly A. Pohl, Peter R. Goldman, Barbara Viota

- S awisch and Michael R. Lorigas of Nelson Mullins Broad and Cassel, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Robert B. Miller of Robert B. Miller Law, LLC, for a ppellee Molina Inpatient Services, Inc.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

G ERBER , C.J., C IKLIN and C ONNER , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
### §1300i–11. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 100–580, §14, Oct. 31, 1988, 102 Stat. 2936; Pub. L. 101–301, §9(4), May 24, 1990, 104 Stat. 211; Pub. L. 102–572, title IX, §902(b)(1), Oct. 29, 1992, 106 Stat. 4516, which related to claims challenging the partition of the joint reservation pursuant to former section 1300i–1 of this title, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.