alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2013032EN.01002602.xml

| 2.2.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 32/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.2.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 32/26

---

Order of the President of the General Court of 6 December 2012 — Poland v Commission

(Case T-258/04 RENV) (1)

1

2013/C 32/42

Language of the case: Polish

The President of General Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 251, 9.10.2004.

1

---
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-13-00171-CV

ROSS MANDEL AND LEA MANDEL APPELLANTS

V.

LEWISVILLE INDEPENDENT

SCHOOL DISTRICT; COUNTY OF

DENTON, TEXAS; AND CITY OF

PLANO APPELLEES

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

FROM THE 431ST DISTRICT COURT OF DENTON COUNTY

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

AND

NO. 02-13-00412-CV

IN RE ROSS MANDEL AND LEA

MANDEL RELATORS

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

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

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

### ORDER

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

We have considered “Constable Ron Smith’s Motion to Quash Orders to

Show Cause.” The motion is DENIED. In ordering the trial court to conduct a

show-cause hearing as dictated in our February 28, 2014 order, it is our intention

that the trial court will rule on evidentiary matters that arise during the hearing

while allowing for a full record for this court’s consideration.

The clerk of this court is directed to transmit a copy of this order to the trial

court judge, the trial court clerk, the attorney of record for each of the parties to

the appeal and the mandamus action, the attorney who filed an amicus brief in

the appeal, and the attorney of record for Constable Ron Smith.

DATED April 11, 2014

.

PER CURIAM

PANEL: LIVINGSTON, C.J.; GARDNER and GABRIEL, JJ.

2
#### Instalment Department, Inc., Appellant, *v.*State of New York, Respondent.

(Claim No. 39348.)

Third Department,

May 27, 1964.

*Axelrod <& Axelrod (Herman 8. Axelrod*of counsel), for appellant.

*Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney-General (Dunton F. Tyncm*and *Paxton Blair*of counsel), for respondent.

Taylor, J.

The Court of Claims has dismissed appellant’s claim against the State as not stating facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The appeal is from its orders and judgment which effectuated this result.

The claim alleges that claimant, a sales finance corporation licensed under article 11-B of the Banking Law to engage in the business of purchasing obligations represented by retail installment contracts and similar written evidences of indebtedness, sustained damages when the Attorney-General of the State acting through his assistants procured upon a false affidavit ex parte leave to and thereafter maliciously and without probable cause instituted and prosecuted an action against claimant to procure a judgment vacating its charter which resulted in the dismissal of the complaint. It is also alleged *212that in the interim between these events the action was further prosecuted by unneedful applications for *pendente Ute*relief whose objectives were to coerce claimant into a voluntary and baseless surrender of its charter.

The difficulty in the way of the claim is that the Attorney-General in deciding whether the public interest required that the action be brought, interim statutory procedures invoked and the cause prosecuted to a conclusion acted in a quasi-judicial capacity. *(People*v. *Buffalo Stone & Cement Co.,*131 N. Y. 140, 143.) The State is not liable under its general waiver of immunity (Court of Claims Act, § 8) for the misconduct of a judicial officer on the theory of *respondeat superior. (Koeppe*v. *City of Hudson,*276 App. Div. 443; *Jameison*v. *State of New York,*7 A D 2d 944.) A coterminus exception obtains, in our opinion, in the case of the head of the State’s Department of Law where, as here, he functioned in a matter committed by law to his control and supervision which necessarily involved the exercise of judgment and discretion. (General Corporation Law, §§ 91, 92, 93, 95; see *Beaudrias*v. *State of New York,*47 N. Y. S. 2d 509.) A claim asserted against the State without its consent, of course, does not lie.

The judgment and orders should be affirmed.

Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds and Atjlisi, JJ., concur.

Judgment and orders affirmed, without costs.
§ 1648.3 Opportunity for personal appearances. ( a ) A registrant who has filed a claim for classification in Class 1-A-O or Class 1-O shall be scheduled for a personal appearance in accord with § 1648.4 before his claim is considered.
( b ) A registrant who has filed a claim for classification in Class 2-D, Class 3-A, or Class 4-D, shall, upon his written request, be afforded an opportunity to appear in person before the board before his claim for classification is considered.
( c ) Any registrant who has filed a claim for classification in an administrative class and whose claim has been denied, shall be afforded an opportunity to appear before the board if he requests that the denial of such claim be reviewed by the board.
[47 FR 4661, Feb. 1, 1982, as amended at 52 FR 24458, July 1, 1987]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> OPUR1
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                       648646
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                     122624
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                          164840
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                        368914
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                   62025
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1367049
<COMMON>                                        102180
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                       215439
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                              53486
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                  371105
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            28086
<PREFERRED>                                       6900
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                            308425
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                   0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                        45011
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                    21913
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                  585609
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                  1367049
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                       138877
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                              4178
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                      123248
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                      127426
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                          11451
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                3111
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                   14562
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          8393
<NET-INCOME>                                      6169
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        576
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                     5593
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          8481
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                         6475
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                           21865
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .27
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .27
        

</TABLE>
§ 229.4 Prohibited acts and criminal penalties. ( a ) Under section 6(a) of the Act, no person may excavate, remove, damage, or otherwise alter or deface, or attempt to excavate, remove, damage, or otherwise alter or deface any archaeological resource located on public lands or Indian lands unless such activity is pursuant to a permit issued under § 229.8 or exempted by § 229.5(b) of this part.
( b ) No person may sell, purchase, exchange, transport, or receive any archaeological resource, if such resource was excavated or removed in violation of: ( 1 ) The prohibitions contained in paragraph (a) of this section; or
( 2 ) Any provision, rule, regulation, ordinance, or permit in effect under any other provision of Federal law.
( c ) Under section (d) of the Act, any person who knowingly violates or counsels, procures, solicits, or employs any other person to violate any prohibition contained in section 6 (a), (b), or (c) of the Act will, upon conviction, be fined not more than $10,000.00 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both: provided, however, that if the commercial or archaeological value of the archaeological resources involved and the cost of restoration and repair of such resources exceeds the sum of $500.00, such person will be fined not more than $20,000.00 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both. In the case of a second or subsequent such violation upon conviction such person will be fined not more than $100,000.00, or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
Exhibit 23.1


                              ACCOUNTANTS' CONSENT



The Board of Directors
Cyanotech Corporation:

We consent to incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 33-63789
and 33-55310  on Form S-8 of Cyanotech  Corporation  of our report dated May 14,
1999,  except as to the second paragraph of note 3, the second paragraph of note
4 and the second  paragraph of note 13, which are as of July 13, 1999,  relating
to the consolidated balance sheets of Cyanotech  Corporation and subsidiaries as
of  March  31,  1999  and  1998,  and the  related  consolidated  statements  of
operations,  stockholders'  equity  and cash  flows for each of the years in the
three-year  period  ended  March  31,  1999,  which  report is  incorporated  by
reference in the 1999 annual  report on Form 10-K of Cyanotech  Corporation.  We
also  consent to  incorporation  by  reference  of our report dated May 14, 1999
relating to the  financial  statement  schedule  of  Cyanotech  Corporation  and
subsidiaries in the aforementioned  1999 annual report on Form 10-K which report
is included in said Form 10-K.

Our report dated May 14, 1999,  except as to the second paragraph of note 3, the
second  paragraph of note 4 and the second paragraph of note 13, which are as of
July 13, 1999,  relating to the consolidated  financial  statements of Cyanotech
Corporation and subsidiaries and our report dated May 14, 1999,  relating to the
financial statement schedules of Cyanotech  Corporation and subsidiaries contain
an  explanatory  paragraph  that states that the Company has suffered  recurring
losses from  operations and has limited sources of additional  liquidity,  which
raise  substantial  doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern.  The
consolidated  financial  statements  and  financial  statement  schedule  do not
include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of that uncertainty.




/s/ KPMG LLP
Honolulu, Hawaii
July 14, 1999
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN RE:

AMENDMENTS TO RULE 1905 OF THE 

PENNSYLVANIA RULES OF JUDICIAL 

ADMINISTRATION 

:

:

:

:

:

NO. 593

JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION DOCKET

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 1

st day of May, 2023, it is Ordered pursuant to Article V, Section 

10 of the Constitution of Pennsylvania that Rule 1905 of the Pennsylvania Rules of 

Judicial Administration is amended in the form attached.

To the extent that notice of proposed rulemaking would otherwise be required by

Pa.R.J.A. 103, the immediate promulgation of the amendments is found to be in the 

interest of efficient administration.

This Order shall be processed in accordance with Pa.R.J.A. 103(b), and shall be 

effective immediately.

Additions are bolded and are underlined.

Deletions are bolded and are bracketed.
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 245 (Monday, December 21, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 83104]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-28108]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 731-TA-1467 (Final)]


Fluid End Blocks From India; Termination of Investigation

AGENCY: International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: On December 11, 2020, the Department of Commerce published 
notice in the Federal Register of a negative final determination of 
sales at less than fair value in connection with the subject 
investigation concerning India. Accordingly, the antidumping duty 
investigation concerning fluid end blocks from India (Investigation No. 
731-TA-1467 (Final)) is terminated.

DATES: December 11, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristina Lara (202-205-3386), Office 
of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street 
SW, Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired individuals are advised that 
information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the 
Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility 
impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the 
Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. 
General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by 
accessing its internet server (https://www.usitc.gov). The public 
record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's 
electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov.
    Authority: This investigation is being terminated under authority 
of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930 and pursuant to section 
207.40(a) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 
207.40(a)). This notice is published pursuant to section 201.10 of the 
Commission's rules (19 CFR 201.10).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: December 16, 2020.
Lisa Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2020-28108 Filed 12-18-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
Exhibit 21
 SYBASE, INC. SUBSIDIARIES
(AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2008)
 COMPANY NAME
    
    JURISDICTION OF FORMATIONSybase Argentina, S.A.
    
    ArgentinaSybase Australia Pty Limited
    
    AustraliaSybse 365 Pty Limited
    
    AustraliaSybase BVBA/SPRL
    
    BelgiumSybase Brasil Software Limitada
    
    BrazilSybase 365 Ltd.
    
    British Virgin IslandsSybase Canada Limited
    
    CanadaiAnywhere Solutions Canada Limited
    
    CanadaSybase Software (China) Co., Ltd.
    
    ChinaRuan Lian Technologies (Beijing) Co., Ltd. (WFOE)
    
    ChinaBeijing Zhang Zhong Hu Dong Information Technology Co., Ltd.
    
    ChinaSybase Taiwan Co., Ltd.
    
    ChinaSybase ApS
    
    DenmarkSybase France S.a.r.l.
    
    FranceSybase GmbH
    
    Germanypaybox solutions AG
    
    GermanySybase Hong Kong Limited
    
    Hong KongSybase 365 Limited
    
    Hong KongSybase Software (India) Private Limited
    
    IndiaSybase 365 (India) Private Limited
    
    IndiaP.T. Sybase Informatindo Indonesia
    
    IndonesiaPT Sybase 365 Indonesia
    
    IndonesiaSybase Italia S.r.l.
    
    ItalyiAnywhere Solutions K.K.
    
    JapanSybase KK
    
    JapanSybase Luxembourg S.a.r.l.
    
    LuxembourgSybase Software (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd
    
    MalaysiaSybase 365 Pte. Ltd., (Malaysia Branch Office)
    
    MalaysiaSybase de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V.
    
    MexicoSybase Europe B.V.
    
    NetherlandsSybase Nederland B.V.
    
    NetherlandsiAnywhere Solutions B.V.
    
    NetherlandsChristie Partners Holding C.V.
    
    NetherlandsJoe D Partners CV
    
    NetherlandsSybase (N.Z.) Limited
    
    New ZealandSybase Norge AS
    
    NorwaySybase Philippines Inc.
    
    PhilippinesSybase (Singapore) Pte Ltd.
    
    SingaporeMicawber 447 (Pty) Ltd trading as Sybase 365
    
    South AfricaSybase Korea, Ltd.
    
    South KoreaSybase Iberia S.L.
    
    SpainSybase Sverige AB
    
    SwedenSybase (Schweiz) GmbH
    
    SwitzerlandSybase 365 Pte. Ltd., (Taiwan Branch Office)
    
    TaiwanSybase (UK) Limited
    
    United KingdomOasis Group Pension Trustees Limited
    
    United Kingdom




---



##### 



COMPANY NAME
    
    JURISDICTION OF FORMATIONSybase 365 Limited
    
    United KingdomSybase International Holdings Corporation, LLC
    
    United StatesiAnywhere Solutions, Inc.
    
    United StatesFinancial Fusion, Inc.
    
    United StatesSybase Global, LLC
    
    United StatesCounterpoint Systems Foundry, Inc.
    
    United StatesSybase, Inc.
    
    United StatesSybase 365, LLC
    
    United StatesExtended Systems, Incorporated
    
    United StatesExtended Systems of Idaho, Incorporated
    
    United States
#### MORRIS, Respondent, v. BARNES, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

October 16, 1903.)

Action by Alfred H. Morris, individually, etc., against Thurlow Weed Barnes.

No opinion. Motion to dismiss appeal granted, with $10 costs.
# C_2008171EN.01003302.xml

| 5.7.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 171/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 171/33

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 19 May 2008 — TF1 v Commission

(Case T-144/04) (1)

1

(Action for annulment - Commission decision classifying certain measures adopted by the French Republic in favour of France 2 and France 3 as State aid compatible with the common market - Time-limit for instituting proceedings - Article 44(1)(c) of the Rules of Procedure - Inadmissibility)

(2008/C 171/60)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Télévision française 1 SA (TF1) (Nanterre, France) (represented by: J.-P. Hordies and C. Smits, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: J. Bundía Sierra, N. Niejahr and C. Giolito, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the form of order sought by the defendant: French Republic (represented by: G. de Bergues, Agent)

Intervener in support of the form of order sought by the defendant:

Re:

Action for annulment of Commission Decision 2004/838/EC of 10 December 2003 on State aid implemented by France for France 2 and France 3 (OJ 2004 L 361, p. 21).

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed.

| 2. | Télévision française 1 SA (TF1) is ordered to bear its own costs and pay those of the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Télévision française 1 SA (TF1) is ordered to bear its own costs and pay those of the Commission.

| 3. | The French Republic shall bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The French Republic shall bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 168, 26.6.2004.

1

---
No. 8217.

#### Knox *v.*Carr et al.

(Decided January 26, 1904.)

Error to Circuit Court of Greene county.

*Mr. Geo. Arthur; Mr. Horace L. Smith*and *Mr.. John B. Knox,*for plaintiff in error. •

*Mr. Charles L. Spencer*and *Mr. Charles H. Kyle,*for defendants in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Spear, Davis, Shauck, Price and Crew, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.2



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 Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-K/A (the Report) to the Annual
Report of North Pittsburgh Systems, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, I, A. P. Kimble, Vice President, Treasurer and Chief Financial and Accounting 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 Sections 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.



Date: April 29,
2005



/s/ A. P. KimbleA. P. KimbleVice President, Treasurer andChief Financial and Accounting Officer




A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to North Pittsburgh Systems, Inc. and will be retained by North Pittsburgh Systems, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
### §10209. Clothing allowances

(a) In General.—In addition to the benefits provided under section 5901, the Director of the United States Secret Service or the designee of the Director is authorized to provide a clothing allowance to a member assigned to perform duties in normal business or work attire purchased at the discretion of the employee. Such clothing allowance shall not to be treated as part of the member's basic pay for any purpose (including retirement purposes) and shall not be used for the purpose of computing the member's overtime pay, pay during leave or other paid time off, lump-sum payments under section 5551 or section 5552, workers' compensation, or any other benefit. Such allowance for any member may be discontinued at any time upon written notification by the Director of the United States Secret Service or the designee of the Director.

(b) Maximum Amount Authorized.—A clothing allowance authorized under this section shall not exceed $500 per annum.

(Added Pub. L. 111–282, §2(a), Oct. 15, 2010, 124 Stat. 3037.)

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective on first day of first pay period which begins after Oct. 15, 2010, see section 5 of Pub. L. 111–282, set out as an Effective Date of 2010 Amendment note under section 5102 of this title.
Exhibit
23.2





CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We
consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement (No.
333-138903) on Form S-8, pertaining to the 2001 Stock Option Plan of CVD
Equipment Corporation of our report dated March 31, 2010 relating to our audit
of the consolidated financial statements which, appear in the Annual Report on
Form 10-K of CVD Equipment Corporation for the year ended December 31,
2009.





/s/
      MSPCCertified
      Public Accountants and Advisors,A
      Professional Corporation
 
 Cranford,
New Jersey


March 31,
2010
IV 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 1037 

Providing the sense of the House of Representatives that in vitro fertilization 

(IVF) is necessary for women who cannot conceive naturally, and for 

other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 29, 2024 

Mrs. CHAVEZ-DEREMER (for herself, Mrs. STEEL, and Mr. CISCOMANI) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on 

Energy and Commerce 

RESOLUTION 

Providing the sense of the House of Representatives that 

in vitro fertilization (IVF) is necessary for women who 

cannot conceive naturally, and for other purposes. 

Whereas, infertility presents a significant challenge for 

women across the nation, affecting their ability to conceive and realize their aspirations of parenthood; 

Whereas, CDC reports that roughly 19 percent of women 

deal with infertility; 

Whereas, advancements in medical science have led to the 

emergence of in vitro fertilization (IVF), providing hope 

and options for those grappling with infertility; 

Whereas, IVF has proven to be a widely embraced and effective solution for couples contending with infertility, afVerDate Sep 11 2014 19:48 Mar 05, 2024 Jkt 049200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\HR1037.IH HR1037

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 1037 IH 

fording them the opportunity to establish families and experience the blessings of parenthood; and 

Whereas, the Columbia University Fertility Center reports 

over 8 million babies have been born through IVF: Now, 

therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) strongly supports the access to and use of 

3 IVF treatments across the United States; 

4 (2) remains committed to commonsense policies 

5 that enable 4 families to grow and thrive; and 

6 (3) recognizes the fundamental truth that life is 

7 precious. 

Æ 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with BILLS