alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2008008EN.01001101.xml

| 12.1.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 8/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.1.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 8/11

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 27 November 2007 — Pitsiorlas v Council and ECB

(Joined Cases T-3/00 and T-337/04) (1)

1

(Access to documents - Basle/Nyborg Agreement - Action for annulment - Challengeable acts - Statement of reasons - Plea of illegality - Decision 93/731/EC - Rules of Procedure of the European Central Bank - Action for damages - Non-contractual liability of the Community for the unlawful conduct of its organs - Damage - Causal link)

(2008/C 8/19)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: Athanasios Pitsiorlas (Thessaloniki, Greece) (represented by: D. Papafilippou, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendants: Council of the European Union (represented initially by M. Bauer, S. Kyriakopoulou and D. Zachariou, and subsequently by M. Bauer and D. Zachariou, acting as Agents), and European Central Bank (represented, in Case T-3/00, initially by C. Zilioli, C. Kroppenstedt and P. Vospernik, and subsequently by C. Zilioli, C. Kroppenstedt, F. Athanasiou and S. Vuorensola, and finally by C. Zilioli, C. Kroppenstedt and F. Athanasiou and, in Case T-337/04, by C. Kroppenstedt, F. Athanasiou and P. Papapaschalis, acting as Agents)

Defendants:

Re:

Application, first, for annulment of the decisions of the Council and the European Central Bank refusing the applicant access to documents relating to the Basle/Nyborg Agreement of September 1987 and, second, for damages

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Governing Council of 21 October 1999, as brought to the knowledge of Mr Athanasios Pitsiorlas by letter of the European Central Bank (ECB) of 8 November 1999; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the Governing Council of 21 October 1999, as brought to the knowledge of Mr Athanasios Pitsiorlas by letter of the European Central Bank (ECB) of 8 November 1999;

| 2. | Dismisses the action for annulment as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action for annulment as to the remainder;

| 3. | Dismisses the action for damages; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Dismisses the action for damages;

| 4. | Orders the Council, the ECB and the applicant each to bear their own costs as incurred in Joined Cases T-3/00 and T-337/04. The Council shall bear the costs that it incurred in Case C-193/01 P, together with those incurred in that case by the applicant. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Orders the Council, the ECB and the applicant each to bear their own costs as incurred in Joined Cases T-3/00 and T-337/04. The Council shall bear the costs that it incurred in Case C-193/01 P, together with those incurred in that case by the applicant.

---

(1)  OJ C 122, 29.4.2000.

1

---
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Samuel Lento, Appellant.

Upon court’s own motion, its order, dated September 12, 1960, dismissing the appeal, is vacated. Motion by appellant to dispense with printing granted. The appeal will be heard on the original papers (including the typed minutes) and on a typewritten brief. The appellant is directed to file six typewritten copies of his brief and to serve one copy on the District Attorney. The appellant’s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged to the February 1961 Term. The appeal is ordered on the calendar for said term. Motion for assignment of counsel granted. Sidney Holzer, Esq., 157 West 57th Street, New York City, is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.
#### § 1630.41 Class 4-B: Official deferred by law.

In Class 4-B shall be placed any registrant who is the Vice President of the United States, a governor of a State, Territory or possession, or any other official chosen by the voters of the entire State, Territory or Possession; a member of a legislative body of the United States or of a State, Territory or Possession; a judge of a court of record of the United States or of a State, Territory or Possession, or the District of Columbia.
**Exhibit 32.2**
**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO****SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
In connection with the Quarterly Report of Lifecore Biomedical, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the period ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the“Report”), I, David M. Noel, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, 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 SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and (2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and result of operations of the Company.     /s/ David M. NoelDavid M. Noel    Vice President of Finance and Chief Financial Officer    (principal financial and accounting officer)         May 9, 2005
### §21123. Authorization of appropriations

In addition to any funds authorized to be appropriated to the Commission under section 20930 of this title, there are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this subchapter—

(1) $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2003; and

(2) such sums as may be necessary for each succeeding fiscal year.

(Pub. L. 107–252, title V, §503, Oct. 29, 2002, 116 Stat. 1717.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 15523 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare, prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.
#### Robert V. Rafter, Appellant, v. Manufacturers Trust Co. et al., Respondents.

Motion by defendants Hays and Kellegrew to dismiss appeal, dismissed as academic in view of the disposition of the appeal proper (see *Rafter*v. *Manufacturers Trust Co.,*16 A D 2d 963). Beldock, P. J., Brennan, Hill, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
May 19, 1977.

M. P. Nos. 76-282 and 77-29.

#### Lewis B. Bischoff *et al. v.*Deeb G. Sarkas *et al.*

These cases, having been already consolidated by this court, are assigned to the calendar for October, 1977 for oral argument.

*935
      *Archibald B. Kenyon, Jr.,*Town Solicitor, for petitioners.

*Julius C. Michael-son,*Attorney General, *Forrest Avila,*Special Asst. Attorney General, *Moses Kando,*for Matunuek Beach Hotel, Inc., for respondents.

The parties are directed to argue the issue, among the other issues presented by this case, as to whether the petitioners have standing to apply for the prerogative writ of certiorari. See *Buffi*v. *Ferri,*106 R.I. 349, 259 A.2d 847 (1969) and *Ramsay*v. *Sarkas,*110 R.I. 590, 295 A.2d 416 (1972).
#### § 921.828 Special performance standards—in situ processing.

Part 828 of this chapter, *Special Permanent Program Performance Standards—In Situ Processing,* shall apply to any person who conducts in situ processing activities.
### **CHAPTER 89A—ENHANCED DENTAL BENEFITS**

Sec.
8951.
Definitions.
8952.
Availability of dental benefits.
8953.
Contracting authority.
8954.
Benefits.
8955.
Information to individuals eligible to enroll.
8956.
Election of coverage.
8957.
Coverage of restored survivor or disability annuitants.
8958.
Premiums.
8959.
Preemption.
8960.
Studies, reports, and audits.
8961.
Jurisdiction of courts.
8962.
Administrative functions.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                           4,703
<SECURITIES>                                     4,950
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,687
<ALLOWANCES>                                        75
<INVENTORY>                                      6,255
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                33,401
<PP&E>                                          11,377
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,737
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  46,839
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,872
<BONDS>                                          4,488
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      33,028
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    46,839
<SALES>                                         31,881
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                31,881
<CGS>                                           20,891
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   20,891
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 9,992
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 379
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,332
<INCOME-TAX>                                       347
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                985
<DISCONTINUED>                                     333
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,440
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.23<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.22
<FN>
<F1>For purposes of this Exhibit, Primary means Basic.
</FN>
        

</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.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         December 23, 2020.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 11, 2020, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Contract 683 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2021-44, CP2021-45.                

Sean Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2020-28446 Filed 12-22-20; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
#### § 934.25 Approval of North Dakota abandoned mine land reclamation plan amendments.

The following is a list of the dates amendments were submitted to OSM, the dates when the Director's decision approving all, or portions of these amendments, were published in the Federal Register and the State citations or a brief description of each amendment. The amendments in this table are listed in order of the date of final publication in the Federal Register.

| Original amendment submission date | Date of final publication | Citation/description |
| --- | --- | --- |
| March 4, 1983 | June 24, 1983 | Definition of reclamation terms; right of entry; land acquisition, management, and disposition; other policies and procedures. |
| September 15, 1987 | June 16, 1988 | Revision of administrative and management structure of the approved North Dakota Plan. |
| October 31, 1991 | July 27, 1992 | NDCC 38-14.2-04, -06. |
| May 25, 1993 | September 27, 1993 | Emergency response reclamation program; set-aside trust funds, eligible lands. |
| September 20, 1995 | October 8, 1996 | NDCC 38-14.2-03(14); Public Service Commission Procurement and Contract Procedures; PSC policies Nos. 2-01-81(5), 2-02-81(5); PSC organizational structure. |

[62 FR 9949, Mar. 5, 1997]
## IN THE COURT O F CRIMINA L A PPEA LS OF TEXA S NO. WR-82,467-01
EX P ARTE ST ANLEY ORSON MOZEE, Appl icant
ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. F -99-02631- TR IN THE 265 DISTRICT COURT T H F ROM DALLAS COUNTY
Per curiam . O R D E R Pursuant to the provisions of Ar t i cl e 1 1
. 07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedur e, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of capital murder and sentenc ed to life imprisonment. The Fifth Court of Appea ls aff irmed his conviction. Mozee v. State , No. 05-00-01260- CR (Tex. App.—Dallas Dec . 14, 2001) (not designated f or publication). Applicant contends, among other things, that the State violated Brady v. Maryland when it 1 did not disclose an alleg ed agree ment with a jailhouse informant despite the informant’s testimony
373 U.S. 83 (1963). 12

at trial that they had “no deal.” The trial court and the State agree that Applicant is entitled to relief under Brady
. In these circ umstances, additional fac ts are neede d. As we held in Ex parte Rodriguez , 334 S.W .2d 294, 294 (Tex. Crim. App. 1960), the trial court is the appropr iate forum for finding s of fac t. The trial court shall provide the trial prosec utor with the opportunity to respond to Applicant’s Brady claim. The tria l court may use any means set out in T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 11.07, § 3(d)
. It appea rs that Applicant is repr esente d by counsel. I f the trial court determ i n es h e i s not repr esente d by counsel and elec ts to hold a hearing, it shall t h en d et er mine whether Applicant is indigen t
. I f Applicant is indige nt and wishes to be repr esente d by counsel, the trial court shall appoint an attorne y

to repre sent Applicant at the hearing. T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 26.04. The trial court shall make supplemental finding s of fac t a nd conclusions of law addre ssing the re sponse, if any , of the trial pr osecutor. T he trial c ourt shall also make a ny other supplementa l finding s of fa ct and c onclusions of law that it deems rele vant and appropr iate to the dispositi on of Applicant’s c laim for habe as cor pus relief
. This application will be held in abeyance until the trial court has resolved the fac t issues. The issues shall be resolved within 90 day s of this order
. A sup p l em en t al t ranscript containing all aff idavits and int err og atories or the t ransc ription of t he court repor ter’s notes from any hearing or deposition, alongwith the trial court’ s supplemental finding s of fa ct and c onclusions of law, shall be for war ded to this Court within 120 day s of t he date of t his order. Any extensions of ti me shall be obtained f

rom this Court. Filed: F ebrua

ry 4, 2015 Do not publish
IIB 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 996 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 3, 2023 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 3901 MacArthur Blvd., in New Orleans, Louisiana, as the ‘‘Dr. Rudy Lombard Post Office’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


rfrederick on DSKB3L4F33PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 996 RFS

1 SECTION 1. DR. RUDY LOMBARD POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 3901 MacArthur Blvd., in New 

4 Orleans, Louisiana, shall be known and designated as the 

5 ‘‘Dr. Rudy Lombard Post Office Building’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Dr. Rudy Lombard 

10 Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives October 2, 

2023. 

Attest: KEVIN F. MCCUMBER, 

Clerk. 


rfrederick on DSKB3L4F33PROD with BILLS
### §308302. Program

(a) Establishment; Responsibilities of Secretary.—The Secretary shall establish in the Service the National Underground Railroad Network to Freedom. Under the national network, the Secretary shall—

(1) produce and disseminate appropriate educational materials, such as handbooks, maps, interpretive guides, or electronic information;

(2) enter into appropriate cooperative agreements and memoranda of understanding to provide technical assistance under subsection (c); and

(3) create and adopt an official, uniform symbol or device for the national network and issue regulations for its use.

(b) Elements.—The national network shall encompass the following elements:

(1) All System units and programs of the Service determined by the Secretary to pertain to the Underground Railroad.

(2) Other Federal, State, local, and privately owned properties pertaining to the Underground Railroad that have a verifiable connection to the Underground Railroad and that are included on, or determined by the Secretary to be eligible for inclusion on, the National Register of Historic Places.

(3) Other governmental and nongovernmental facilities and programs of an educational, research, or interpretive nature that are directly related to the Underground Railroad.

(c) Cooperative Agreements and Memoranda of Understanding.—To achieve the purposes of this chapter and to ensure effective coordination of the Federal and non-Federal elements of the national network with System units and programs of the Service, the Secretary may enter into cooperative agreements and memoranda of understanding with, and provide technical assistance—

(1) to the heads of other Federal agencies, States, localities, regional governmental bodies, and private entities; and

(2) in cooperation with the Secretary of State, to the governments of Canada, Mexico, and any appropriate country in the Caribbean.

(Pub. L. 113–287, §3, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3234.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 308302 | 16 U.S.C. 469l–1. | Pub. L. 105–203, §3, July 21, 1998, 112 Stat. 679; Pub. L. 110–229, title III, subtitle G, §361(a)(1), May 8, 2008, 122 Stat. 801. |

Section

In subsection (a), the words "a program to be known as" are omitted as unnecessary. The words "national network" are substituted for "program" because of the definition of "national network" in section 308301 of this title and for consistency with subsections (b) and (c).
§ 1801.33 Allocation of resources; agreed extensions of time. ( a ) *In general.* NACIC components shall devote such personnel and other resources to the responsibilities imposed by the Privacy Act as may be appropriate and reasonable considering: ( 1 ) The totality of resources available to the component,
( 2 ) The business demands imposed on the component by the Director, NACIC or otherwise by law,
( 3 ) The information review and release demands imposed by the Congress or other governmental authority, and
( 4 ) The rights of all members of the public under the various information review and disclosure laws.
( b ) *Discharge of Privacy Act responsibilities.* Offices shall exercise due diligence in their responsibilities under the Privacy Act and must allocate a reasonable level of resources to requests under the Act in a strictly “first-in, first-out” basis and utilizing two or more processing queues to ensure that smaller as well as larger (i.e., project) cases receive equitable attention. The Information and Privacy Coordinator is responsible for management of the NACIC-wide program defined by this part and for establishing priorities for cases consistent with established law. The Director, NACIC shall provide policy and resource direction as necessary and shall render decisions on administrative appeals.
( c ) *Requests for extension of time.* While the Privacy Act does not specify time requirements, our joint treatment of requests under the FOIA means that when NACIC is unable to meet the statutory time requirements of the FOIA, NACIC may request additional time from a requester. In such instances NACIC will inform a requester of his or her right to decline our request and proceed with an administrative appeal or judicial review as appropriate.
### §797. Penalty for violation of security regulations and orders

#### (a) Misdemeanor violation of defense property security regulations

#### (1) Misdemeanor

Whoever willfully violates any defense property security regulation shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

#### (2) Defense property security regulation described

For purposes of paragraph (1), a defense property security regulation is a property security regulation that, pursuant to lawful authority—

(A) shall be or has been promulgated or approved by the Secretary of Defense (or by a military commander designated by the Secretary of Defense or by a military officer, or a civilian officer or employee of the Department of Defense, holding a senior Department of Defense director position designated by the Secretary of Defense) for the protection or security of Department of Defense property; or

(B) shall be or has been promulgated or approved by the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration for the protection or security of NASA property.

#### (3) Property security regulation described

For purposes of paragraph (2), a property security regulation, with respect to any property, is a regulation—

(A) relating to fire hazards, fire protection, lighting, machinery, guard service, disrepair, disuse, or other unsatisfactory conditions on such property, or the ingress thereto or egress or removal of persons therefrom; or

(B) otherwise providing for safeguarding such property against destruction, loss, or injury by accident or by enemy action, sabotage, or other subversive actions.

#### (4) Definitions

In this subsection:

#### (A) Department of Defense property

The term "Department of Defense property" means covered property subject to the jurisdiction, administration, or in the custody of the Department of Defense, any Department or agency of which that Department consists, or any officer or employee of that Department or agency.

#### (B) NASA property

The term "NASA property" means covered property subject to the jurisdiction, administration, or in the custody of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration or any officer or employee thereof.

#### (C) Covered property

The term "covered property" means aircraft, airports, airport facilities, vessels, harbors, ports, piers, water-front facilities, bases, forts, posts, laboratories, stations, vehicles, equipment, explosives, or other property or places.

#### (D) Regulation as including order

The term "regulation" includes an order.

#### (b) Posting

Any regulation or order covered by subsection (a) shall be posted in conspicuous and appropriate places.

(Sept. 23, 1950, ch. 1024, title I, §21, 64 Stat. 1005; Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title X, §1053, Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3435.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2006—Pub. L. 109–163 amended section generally. Prior to amendment, section related to security regulations and orders and penalties for violations.