alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2023004EN.01005701.xml

| 5.1.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 4/57 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.1.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 4/57

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No 234/2019

of 27 September 2019

amending Annex IV (Energy) to the EEA Agreement [2023/39]

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (“the EEA Agreement”), and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/2379 of 18 December 2017 on recognition of the report of Canada including typical greenhouse gas emissions from cultivation of agricultural raw materials pursuant to Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/2379 of 18 December 2017 on recognition of the report of Canada including typical greenhouse gas emissions from cultivation of agricultural raw materials pursuant to Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.

| (2) | Annex IV to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Annex IV to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following point is inserted after point 41b (Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/749) of Annex IV to the EEA Agreement:

| ‘41c. | 32017 D 2379: Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/2379 of 18 December 2017 on recognition of the report of Canada including typical greenhouse gas emissions from cultivation of agricultural raw materials pursuant to Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 337, 19.12.2017, p. 86).
  The Decision shall not apply to Liechtenstein.’ |
| --- | --- |

‘41c.

32017 D 2379: Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/2379 of 18 December 2017 on recognition of the report of Canada including typical greenhouse gas emissions from cultivation of agricultural raw materials pursuant to Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 337, 19.12.2017, p. 86).

The Decision shall not apply to Liechtenstein.’

Article 2

The text of Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/2379 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 28 September 2019, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement have been made (*1).

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 27 September 2019.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Gunnar PÁLSSON

---

(1)  
  OJ L 337, 19.12.2017, p. 86.

1

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
TRANSPORTATION IN UKRAINE

----
§ 990.42 Determination to conduct restoration planning. ( a ) *Determination on restoration planning.* If trustees determine that there is jurisdiction to pursue restoration under OPA, trustees must determine whether: ( 1 ) Injuries have resulted, or are likely to result, from the incident;
( 2 ) Response actions have not adequately addressed, or are not expected to address, the injuries resulting from the incident; and
( 3 ) Feasible primary and/or compensatory restoration actions exist to address the potential injuries.
( b ) *Proceeding with preassessment.* If the conditions listed in paragraph (a) of this section are met, trustees may proceed under § 990.44 of this part. If one of these conditions is not met, trustees may not take additional action under this part, except action to finalize this determination. However, trustees may recover all reasonable assessment costs incurred up to this point.
### SUBCHAPTER II—AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE PREFERENCES FOR ELDERLY RESIDENTS AND UNITS FOR DISABLED RESIDENTS IN CERTAIN SECTION 8 ASSISTED HOUSING
|                                                         |                | Exhibit 99(b)
|-------------------------------------------------------- | -------------- | -------------
|Household Finance Corporation                            |                |              
|Household Receivables Funding, Inc. III                  |                |              
|Household Credit Card Master Note Trust I, Series 2001-1 |               
|                                                         |                |              
|                                                         |                |              
|Original Class A Principal                               | 827,500,000.00 |              
|Number of Class A Bonds (000's)                          | 827,500.00     |              
|Original Class B Principal                               | 72,500,000.00  |              
|Number of Class B Bonds (000's)                          | 72,500.00      |              
|                                                         |                |              
|                                                         |                |              
|Distribution Date                                        |                | 2003 Totals  
|                                                         |                |              
|CLASS A                                                  |                |              
|Class A Principal Distributions                          |                | 0.00         
|Class A Interest                                         |                | 11,648,660.73
|                                                         |                |              
|                                                         |                |              
|CLASS B                                                  |                |              
|Class B Principal Distributions                          |                | 0.00         
|Class B Interest                                         |                | 1,233,163.64 
|                                                         |                |
Exhibit 32.1

             CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE, ACCOUNTING AND
             FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


In connection with the Quarterly Report of New Pacific Ventures, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended April 30, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I Brent
Petterson, Secretary/Treasurer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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/Brent Petterson
-------------------
Brent Petterson
Secretary/Treasurer/Director

September 18, 2003
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed April 14, 2021.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D21-154

Lower Tribunal No. 19-38-A-M

________________

Julio Melendez,

Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida,

Appellee.

An appeal conducted pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 

(1967), from the Circuit Court for Monroe County, Ruth L. Becker, Judge.

Julio Melendez, in proper person.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before FERNANDEZ, HENDON and GORDO, JJ. 

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
October 1, 2004

Securities and ExchangeCommission

450 – Fifth Street– N.W.

Washington, DC 20549

Ladies andGentlemen:

This letter authorizes thefollowing representatives of The Clorox Company,

acting singly, to executeand file with you on my behalf all future Forms 3,

4 and 5 respecting myholdings of equity securities of The Clorox Company:

Peter D. Bewley, SeniorVice President-General Counsel

Patrick M. Meehan,Associate General Counsel

Robin A. Stoner, SeniorParalegal II

Thomas W. Huckaby,Assistant Secretary

Very trulyyours,

/s/ STEPHEN M.ROBB

Stephen M. Robb

Vice President –Financial Planning & Analysis
#### § 921.82 Amendments to financial assistance awards.

Actions requiring an amendment to the financial assistance award, such as a request for additional Federal funds, revisions of the approved project budget or original scope of work, or extension of the performance period must be submitted to NOAA on Standard Form 424 and approved in writing.
281 (1997) (noting that this court generally will not consider writ petitions

challenging orders denying motions to dismiss). Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED. , J.

Pickering cc: Hon. James Crockett, District Judge Alverson Taylor Mortensen & Sanders Eglet Prince Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A 441/193»
TASHVIENTERPRISE 

MAHAVIR ESTATE,687 A MAKBA BLDG,2'° FLOOR, FLAT N0.24, BYCULLAMUMBAI·400027 INDIA, PHONE·23087298 

To, 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 1 0 0 E C 7014 

600 Independence Avenue, 

S.W., Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2Wl000, 

Washington, D.C. 20591. 

R D 

DE.'- It 261¥ 

Ref:- Case No. 2014S0700395 HEARl ... ~,:<ET 

Attention : Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

MAY IT PLEASE YOUR HONOUR :-

Please refer to your notice dated 25th November, 2014 received 

by me on 30th day of November, 2014. 

As per the final notice it is brought to my notice that you have 

proposed to levy a heavy civil penalty of fine of $32,800 without 

giving me an opportunity to prove that the allegations placed by you 

are incorrect, false and baseless. 

In this respect, I therefore request for a hearing in the said 

matter to prove my innocence. Therefore, kindly provide me with a 

particular date and place and the method of conducting the 

hearing. 

Thanking you 

Yours truly
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL**

**FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT BY**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with this amended Quarterly Report of Bekem Metals, Inc., (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q/A-1 for the period ended September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the *"Report"*), I, Zhassulan Bitenov, Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350, 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 result of operations of the Company. 

 

 

| Date:  April 2, 2008 | By: | /s/ Zhassulan Bitenov |  
 

Zhassulan Bitenov

 

Chief Financial Officer

 

 

 

 

  |
|----------------------|-----|-----------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-20033

Conference Calendar

 

FREDDIE ROBIN EDWARDS,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

SAM NUCHIA; GERALD F. CRAWFORD,

Defendants-Appellees.

---------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-94-CV-2650

---------------------

October 22, 1997

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and WIENER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Freddie Robin Edwards, a Texas inmate (# 658647), appeals

from the district court’s dismissal of his pro se civil rights

complaint, in which he had alleged that he was falsely arrested

for auto theft in 1992. 

Edwards argues that the district court erred in determining

that his claims were barred by the rule of Heck v. Humphrey, 512

U.S. 477 (1994), in that he continues to serve a sentence that
No. 97-20033

- 2 -

would be invalidated were his claims found to be meritorious. 

The court dismissed the complaint after holding a hearing

pursuant to Spears v. McCotter, 766 F.2d 179 (5th Cir. 1985).

We have reviewed the record and Edwards’ brief and find no

reversible error in the district court’s dismissal. See Edwards

v. Nuchia, No. H-94-2650 (S.D. Tex. Dec. 24, 1996). The appeal

is without arguable merit and is thus frivolous. See Howard v.

King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Accordingly, the

appeal is DISMISSED. 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. 

Edwards’ motions to correct his brief to add references to

the record, to order production of a transcript of the

Spears hearing, to supplement the record with exhibits, for

appointment of counsel, and for civil contempt are DENIED. 

MOTIONS DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED.
Court of Appeals, State of Michigan 

ORDER 

Heather Ann Kimball v Timothy Roland Pearson Jr 

Docket No. 335639 

LC No. 2010-002626 DM 

Elizabeth L. Gleicher 

Presiding Judge 

Michael J. Kelly 

Douglas B. Shapiro 

Judges 

Pursuant to the opinion issued concmTently with this order, this case is REMANDED for 

further proceedings consistent with the opinion of this Court. We retain jurisdiction. 

Proceedings on remand in this matter shall commence within 56 days of the Clerk's 

certification of this order, and they shall be given p1iority on remand until they are concluded. As stated 

in the accompanying opinion, we remand this case to the trial court so that it may conduct an evidentiary 

hearing on defendant's motion and reconsider its ruling. The proceedings on remand are limited to 

this issue. 

The parties shall promptly file with this Court a copy of all papers filed on remand. 

Within seven days after entry, appellant shall fi le with this Comi copies of all orders entered on remand. 

The transcript of all proceedings on remand shall be prepared and filed within 21 days 

after completion of the proceedings. 

A true copy entered and certified by Jerome W. Zimmer Jr., Chief Clerk, on 

Jll 25 2011 

Date
#### In the Matter of Mary Roberts Bailey, an Attorney, Resignor.

[820 NYS2d 909]

Voluntary resignation accepted and name removed from roll of attorneys *(see Matter of Manown,*240 AD2d 83 [1998]). Present — Pigott, Jr., P.J., Hurlbutt, Kehoe, Martoche and Smith, JJ. (Filed Aug. 29, 2006.)
#### § 734.11 BIS activities conducted outside the United States.

The Export Control Reform Act of 2018 (ECRA) (50 U.S.C. 4801-4852) authorizes the Secretary of Commerce, in carrying out its provisions, to undertake activities outside the United States, including, but not limited to, conducting investigations; requiring and obtaining information from persons; and conducting pre-license checks and post-shipment verifications. BIS officials will act with due care in the jurisdiction of a foreign nation and, to the extent possible, consistent with the applicable host nation government's laws. For any action taken outside the United States, BIS officials will consult and coordinate with the appropriate U.S. Government agencies and act in a manner consistent with the United States' international commitments and international agreements to which the United States is a party.

[85 FR 73413, Nov. 18, 2020]
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

DAMON LOUIS WHEELOUS,

Petitioner-Appellant,

v.

No. 97-6859

DAVID GARRAGHTY, Warden;

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF

VIRGINIA,

Respondents-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk.

Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge.

(CA-97-444-2)

Submitted: August 11, 1998

Decided: September 2, 1998

Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG,

Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________

Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Damon Louis Wheelous, Appellant Pro Se.

_________________________________________________________________

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c).
OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Damon Louis Wheelous appeals from the district court's order dismissing his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 &

Supp. 1998) as untimely filed. We vacate and remand the district

court's decision. The record does not reveal when Appellant delivered

his petition to the prison authorities for mailing to the court. Accordingly, we grant a certificate of appealability and remand the case for

the district court to determine whether Wheelous' petition was delivered to prison authorities on or before April 23, 1997, under Houston

v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988). See Brown v. Angelone, ___ F.3d ___,

1998 WL 389030, at *6 (4th Cir. July 14, 1998).

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.

VACATED AND REMANDED

 2
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3366 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3366

   To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to clarify that bonus 
depreciation is not a cost allocated to a contract under the percentage 
             of completion method for long-term contracts.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            November 4, 2011

  Mr. Sam Johnson of Texas (for himself and Mr. Neal) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to clarify that bonus 
depreciation is not a cost allocated to a contract under the percentage 
             of completion method for long-term contracts.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. CLARIFICATION THAT BONUS DEPRECIATION IS NOT A COST 
              ALLOCATED TO A CONTRACT UNDER THE PERCENTAGE OF 
              COMPLETION METHOD FOR LONG-TERM CONTRACTS.

    (a) In General.--Clause (ii) of section 460(c)(6)(B) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
            (1) by striking ``2011'' and inserting ``2013'', and
            (2) by striking ``2012'' and inserting ``2014''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to property placed in service after December 31, 2010.
                                 <all>
```
### §300111. Authority of the Comptroller General of the United States

The Comptroller General of the United States is authorized to review the corporation's involvement in any Federal program or activity the Government carries out under law.

(Added Pub. L. 110–26, §11(a), May 11, 2007, 121 Stat. 109.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 300111 was renumbered section 300113 of this title.
#### Morris Spergel v. Morris H. Westin.

Motion denied, with ten dollars costs. Present—Clarke, P. J., Laughlin, Dowling, Page and Davis, JJ.
(November 28, 1951.)

#### Nancy Stevens, as Administratrix of the Estate of George Stevens, Deceased, Appellant, v. State of New York, Respondent.

(Claim No. 27979.)

Present — Foster, P. J., Heffernan, Brewster, Bergan and Coon, JJ. [See 277 App. Div. 418.]
```

[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 223 (Friday, November 19, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 67759]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-25733]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 731-TA-244 (Second Review)]

Natural Bristle Paint Brushes From China

Determination

    On the basis of the record \1\ developed in the subject five-year 
review, the United States International Trade Commission (Commission) 
determines, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 
U.S.C. 1675(c)) (the Act), that revocation of the antidumping duty 
order on natural bristle paint brushes from China would be likely to 
lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in 
the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the Commission's 
Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background

    The Commission instituted this review on May 3, 2004 (69 FR 24191) 
and determined on August 6, 2004 that it would conduct an expedited 
review (69 FR 51474, August 19, 2004).
    The Commission transmitted its determination in this review to the 
Secretary of Commerce on November 9, 2004. The views of the Commission 
are contained in USITC Publication No. 3733 (November 2004), entitled 
Natural Bristle Paint Brushes from China: Investigation No. 731-TA-244 
(Second Review).

    Issued: November 16, 2004.
    By order of the Commission.

Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 04-25733 Filed 11-18-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
```