alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from
Form 10-Q and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial information.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<CIK> 0000027673
<NAME> JOHNDEERECAPITALCORP
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             NOV-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                             196
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,799
<ALLOWANCES>                                        88
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                              34
<DEPRECIATION>                                      16
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   8,077
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                          2,741
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           113
<OTHER-SE>                                         870
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     8,077
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   458
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       74
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    26
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 178
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    113
<INCOME-TAX>                                        39
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 73
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        73
<EPS-BASIC>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
# C_2008051EN.01000701.xml

| 23.2.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 51/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.2.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/7

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 December 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic

(Case C-194/05) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Environment - Directives 75/442/EEC and 91/156/EEC - Concept of ‘waste’ - Excavated earth and rocks intended for re-use)

(2008/C 51/11)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: M. Konstantinidis, Agent, and G. Bambara, avvocato)

Applicant:

Defendant: Italian Republic (represented by: I.M. Braguglia, Agent, and G. Fiengo, avvocato dello stato)

Defendant:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Article 1(a) of Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste (OJ 1975 L 194, p. 39), as amended by Council Directive 91/156/EEC of 18 March 1991 (OJ 1991 L 78, p. 32) — National law excluding excavated earth and rocks intended for re-use from the scope of the directive

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1) | Declares that, in so far as Article 10 of Law No 93 of 23 March 2001 concerning provisions on the environment and Article 1(17) and (19) of Law No 443 of 21 December 2001 delegating to the Government matters of infrastructure and strategic installations of production and of other action to boost production excluded from the scope of the national legislation relating to waste excavated earth and rocks intended for actual re-use for filling, backfilling, embanking or as aggregates, with the exception of those from contaminated and decontaminated sites with a concentration of pollutants above the acceptable limits laid down by the regulations in force, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste, as amended by Council Directive 91/156/EEC of 18 March 1991; |
| --- | --- |

1)

Declares that, in so far as Article 10 of Law No 93 of 23 March 2001 concerning provisions on the environment and Article 1(17) and (19) of Law No 443 of 21 December 2001 delegating to the Government matters of infrastructure and strategic installations of production and of other action to boost production excluded from the scope of the national legislation relating to waste excavated earth and rocks intended for actual re-use for filling, backfilling, embanking or as aggregates, with the exception of those from contaminated and decontaminated sites with a concentration of pollutants above the acceptable limits laid down by the regulations in force, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste, as amended by Council Directive 91/156/EEC of 18 March 1991;

| 2) | Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2)

Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 182, 23.7.2005.

1

---
### §320106. Limitation on obligation or expenditure of appropriated amounts

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no funds appropriated or otherwise made available to the Secretary to carry out subsection (f) or (g) of section 320102 of this title may be obligated or expended—

(1) unless the appropriation of the funds has been specifically authorized by law enacted on or after October 30, 1992; or

(2) in excess of the amount prescribed by law enacted on or after October 30, 1992.

(Pub. L. 113–287, §3, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3259.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 320106 | 16 U.S.C. 466(a). | Aug. 21, 1935, ch. 593, §6(a), 49 Stat. 668; Pub. L. 102–575, title XL, §4023, Oct. 30, 1992, 106 Stat. 4768. |

Section

The words "Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section" are omitted as obsolete.
§ 872.19 Are there any restrictions on how Indian tribes may use Tribal share funds? Yes. You may only use Tribal share funds for: ( a ) Coal reclamation under § 874.12 of this chapter;
( b ) Water supply restoration under § 874.14 of this chapter;
( c ) Noncoal reclamation under § 875.12 of this chapter that is requested under section 409(c) of SMCRA;
( d ) Deposit into an acid mine drainage abatement and treatment fund under part 876 of this chapter;
( e ) Land acquisition under § 879.11 of this chapter; and
( f ) Maintenance of the AML inventory under section 403(c) of SMCRA.
#### § 1605.61 Staff of area offices for selective service.

Subject to applicable law and within the limits of available funds, the staff of each area office shall consist of as many compensated employees, either military or civilian, as shall be authorized by the Director of Selective Service.
#### § 556.809 [Reserved]
§ 903.816 Performance standards—Surface mining activities. ( a ) Part 816 of this chapter, *Permanent Program Performance Standards—Surface Mining Activities,* applies to any person who conducts surface mining activities, except § 816.116(a)(1) of this chapter regarding revegetation success standards, for which paragraph (b) of this section substitutes.
( b ) Standards for success shall be those identified at § 816.116(a)(2) and (b) of this chapter. Statistically valid sampling techniques for measuring success shall be included in the mining and reclamation plan and approved by the regulatory authority.
### §854. Rules, regulations, and forms

The Attorney General may at any time, make, prescribe, amend, and rescind such rules, regulations and forms as he deems necessary to carry out the provisions of this subchapter.

(Aug. 1, 1956, ch. 849, §5, 70 Stat. 900.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was not enacted as part of the Internal Security Act of 1950 which comprises subchapters I to III of this chapter.
**Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) of 11 July 2006 –Torres v OHIM – Bodegas Muga (Torre Muga)**

**(Case T-247/03)**

Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for figurative Community trade mark Torre Muga – Earlier national and international word marks TORRES – Likelihood of confusion – Breach of the rights of the defence

Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services
(Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see para. 71)

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | ACTION brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 7 April 2003 (Case R 998/2001‐1) concerning opposition proceedings between Miguel Torres, SA, and Bodegas Muga, SA. |

**Information relating to the case**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| Applicant for the Community trade mark: | Bodega Muga, SA |
| Community trade mark sought: | Figurative mark Torre Muga (Application No 791.004, for goods in Class 33) |
| Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: | Miguel Torres, SA |
| Mark or sign cited in opposition: | TORRES (an international mark, a Danish mark, a German mark, three Spanish marks and two United Kingdom marks) for goods in Class 33 |
| Decision of the Opposition Division: | Rejection of the opposition |
| Decision of the Board of Appeal: | Rejection of the appeal |

**Operative part**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | Dismisses the action; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Orders the applicant to pay the costs incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM); |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 3. | | Orders the intervener to bear its own costs. |
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of Principal Executive Officer  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 on Form 10-Q of DRS Technologies, Inc. for the quarter ended December 31, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Mark S. Newman, Chief Executive Officer of DRS Technologies, Inc., hereby certify pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|Dated: February 17, 2004 |  | By: |  | /s/MARK S. NEWMANMark S. Newman Chief Executive Officer
|------------------------ |  | --- |  | -------------------------------------------------------

50

---

QuickLinks
Exhibit 23.10



Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm



The Board of Directors

FNB Corp.



We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (Nos. 33-72686, 333-54702, 333-99333, 333-105442 and 333-109450) on Form S-8 and the registration
statement (No. 33-59565) on Form S-3 of FNB Corp. of our report dated February 25, 2005, with respect to the consolidated balance sheet of FNB Corp. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2004 and the related consolidated statements of income,
shareholders equity and comprehensive income and cash flows for the year then ended, which report appears in the December 31, 2004 annual report on Form 10-K of FNB Corp.



LOGO



February 25, 2005

Sanford, North Carolina
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

STEPHEN HARRIS
, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA
, Appellee

.

No. 4D 19

- 3972

[ July 2, 2020 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; Mariya Weekes , Judge; L.T. Case No. 05

- 16325CF10A

.

Stephen Harris, Indiantown, pro se.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Melynda L. Melear, Senior Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed

.

L EVINE
, C.J., G ROSS and F ORST

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
###### Editorial Note on Part 75

#### Editorial Note:

The provisions of this part marked [Statutory Provision] appear in Title III of the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969.

#### § 75.1724 Hand-held power tools; safety devices.

Hand-held power tools shall be equipped with controls requiring constant hand or finger pressure to operate the tools or shall be equipped with friction or other equivalent safety devices.

[38 FR 4976, Feb. 23, 1973]
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Hugo H. McIntosh, Appellant.

Motion by appellant to dispense with printing granted. The appeal will be heard on the original papers and on appellant’s typewritten brief. The appellant is directed to file six copies of his typewritten brief and to serve one copy on the District Attorney. The appellant’s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged to the April Term, beginning March 27, 1961; the appeal is ordered on the calendar for said term. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Ughetta, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 12 (a)

                             BNP U.S. FUNDING L.L.C.
                Computation of ratio of earnings to fixed charges
                          (in thousands, except ratios)


                                                 Three-month period ended
                                                      March 31, 2002
                                                      --------------

Net Income....................................           $7,995
                                                       -----------
Fixed Charges
         Trustee Fees.........................               30
         Audit Fees...........................                5
         Administrative and Consulting Fees...              255.88

Total Fixed Charges...........................              290.88
                                                       -----------
Earnings before fixed charges.................         $  8,285.88
                                                       ===========
Fixed charges, as above.......................         $    290.88
                                                       ===========
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges............               28.49
                                                       ===========
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated balance sheet at September 30, 1996 and the consolidated statements
of operations and cash flows for the quarter ended September 30, 1996, and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         793,659
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  462,202
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     78,558
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,435,608
<PP&E>                                       3,144,140
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,702,828
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,699,444
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,159,959
<BONDS>                                      2,927,375
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  3,881,000
<COMMON>                                       196,435
<OTHER-SE>                                 (4,545,325)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 (387,890)
<SALES>                                     14,172,936
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            14,172,936
<CGS>                                        9,061,082
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               13,787,748
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             244,746
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                507,859
<INCOME-TAX>                                   104,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            403,859
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                200,000
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   203,859
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane lunani m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T B A L W IN D E RS IN G H M A L H I, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 07- 73279 A ge nc yN o. A 075- 302- 081 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

an O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d F e bruary15, 2011 ** B efo re: C A N B Y , F E RN A N D E Z , an dM . S M IT H , C i rcu i tJu d g es. B a l w i nde rS i ngh M a l hi , ana t i ve and c i t i z e n of I ndi a , pe t i t i ons f

orr e vi e w of th e B o ar do f

I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls ’ ( “B I A ” ) o r d e rd e n y in g h is m o tio n to r e o p e n . W e have j ur i s di c t i on unde r8 U . S . C . § 1252. W e r e vi e w f orabus e of

di s c r e t i on the 

# FI LED MA R 15 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS07- 73279 2 d e n ia l o f am o tio n to r e o p e n , an dr e v ie w d e n o v o qu e s tio n s o f law . Iturri ba rr i a v. I NS , 3 2 1 F .3 d8 8 9 , 8 9 4 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) . W e d e n yth e p e titio n f o rr e v ie w . T he B IA di d n otabuse i t s di sc re t i on i n d enyi ng M alhi ’ s m ot i on t o reopen as t i m e- and n um ber- barr ed because the succ es si ve m ot i on w as fi l ed m ore than three y e ar s a f te rth e B I A ’s Ju n e 1 0 , 2 0 0 3 , o r d e rd is m is s in g h is u n d e r ly in g ap p e a l. See 8 C . F . R . § 1003. 2( c ) ( 2) ( onl yone m ot i on t o r e ope n pe rm i tt e d and the m ot i on g en er ally m u st b e f

il edw ith in9 0 d ay s o f th e f in al o rd er ). It fo ll o w s th at M alh i’ s du e p r o c e s s c la im f

a ils . Se e La ta v . I

NS , 204 F . 3d 1241, 1246 ( 9th C i r . 2000) (r equi ri ng error andprej ud i ce for apet i t i on ert o p re vai lon a due process cl ai m ). M a lh i’s r e m a in in g c o n te n tio n s ar e u np e r s u a s iv e . W e d e n yM a lh i’s m o tio n to s up p le m e n t th e r e c o r d , se e 8 U . S. C. § 1 2 5 2 ( b ) ( 4 ) ( A ) , an dw e d e n yr e s p o n d e n t’s m o tio n to d is m is s . P E T I T I ON F OR RE V I E W DE NI E D.
C. A. No. 75-322.

#### State *v.*Robert Cline.

On September 30, 1976, we granted the defendant’s motion for a limited remand. In his motion defendant, through his attorneys’ alleged that he was seeking a revision of an illegal sentence and that such review must be first sought in the Superior Court, citing *State*v. *Tessier,*115 R.I. 372, 346 A.2d 121 (1975). The State made no objection to this motion.

When the Superior Court received the remand the Presiding Justice, 'acting pursuant to G.L. 1956 (1969 Reenactment) §8-2-23, convened a three judge panel. It is clear from the record that what the defendant actually seeks is a ruling on the constitutionality of G.L. 1956, (1969 Reenactment) §11-23-2, which authorizes imposition of the death penalty.

We are now in receipt of a request for instructions from the three judge panel asking whether it was our intent that the Superior Court direct itself to the constitutional issues involved in this case in the light of *Gregg*v. *Georgia,*428 U.S. 153, 96 S.Ct. 2909, 49 L.Ed.2d 859 (1976), and its companion cases.

In issuing the remand order, it was never our intention that the Superior Court consider the constitutionality of §11-23-2. *907Consequently, it is hereby ordered that if the sole issue which the defendant seeks to argue in that court is the constitutionality of §11-23-2, that the Superior Court return the case forthwith to this court.

*Julius C. Michaelson,*Attorney General, *Judith Romney Wegner,*Special Asst. Attorney General, for plaintiff.

*William F. Reilly,*Public Defender, *Barbara Hurst, John A. MacFadyen III,*Asst. Public Defenders. *Milton Stanzler, Robert Shuman, Robert Mann,*for Rhode Island Affiliate of the American Civil Liberties Union, Amicus Curiae, for defendant.
#### § 1615.9 Registration card or form.

For the purposes of these regulations, the terms Registration Card and Registration Form are synonomous.
### §§45 to 45d. Repealed. June 25, 1948, ch. 645, §21, 62 Stat. 862

Section 45, act Jan. 12, 1938, ch. 2, §1, 52 Stat. 3, related to photographing of defensive installations. See sections 795 to 797 of Title 18, Crimes and Criminal Procedure.

Section 45a, act Jan. 12, 1938, ch. 2, §2, 52 Stat. 3, related to photographing, etc., from aircraft. See section 796 of Title 18.

Section 45b, act Jan. 12, 1938, ch. 2, §3, 52 Stat. 3, related to reproducing, publishing, selling uncensored copies. See section 797 of Title 18.

Section 45c, act Jan. 12, 1938, ch. 2, §4, 52 Stat. 4, related to definitions of "aircraft", "post", "camp", and "station". See sections 795 and 796 of Title 18.

Section 45d, act Jan. 12, 1938, ch. 2, §5, 52 Stat. 4, related to geographical application of law.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal of sections 45 to 45d effective Sept. 1, 1948, see section 38 of act June 25, 1948, set out as an Effective Date note preceding section 1 of Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure.
§ 947.817 Performance standards—underground mining activities. ( a ) Part 817 of this chapter, *Permanent Program Performance Standards—Underground Mining Activities,* shall apply to any person who conducts underground coal mining operations.
( b ) All operators shall have a plan of reclamation approved by the Washington Department of Fisheries for operation in affected streams, RCW 75, and shall comply with the Hydraulic Project Approval Law, RCW 75.20.100, the Shoreline Management Act, RCW 90.58, the Forest Practices Act, RCW, 76.09, the Water Pollution Control Act, RCW 90.48, the Minimum Water Flows and Levels Act, RCW 90.22, the Pesticide Control Act, RCW 15.58, and the Washington Water Code, RCW 90.03, and regulations promulgated pursuant to these laws.
§ 917.10 State regulatory program approval. The Kentucky State program as resubmitted on December 30, 1981, and amended and clarified on February 22, 1982, was conditionally approved, effective May 18, 1982. Beginning on that date, the Kentucky Department for Natural Resources and Environmental Protection was deemed the regulatory authority in Kentucky for surface coal mining and reclamation operations and for coal exploration operations on non-Federal and non-Indian lands. Copies of the approved program are available for review at: ( a ) Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Lexington Field Office, 2675 Regency Road, Lexington, Kentucky 40503-2922.
( b ) Department for Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Number 2, Hudson Hollow Complex, Frankfort, Kentucky 40601.
[48 FR 251, Jan. 4, 1983, as amended at 59 FR 17929, Apr. 15, 1994]