alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2008022EN.01000402.xml

| 26.1.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 22/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.1.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 22/4

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 6 December 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Federal Republic of Germany

(Case C-456/05) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Article 43 EC - Psychotherapists admitted to practise - System of quotas - Derogating transitional rules - Proportionality - Admissibility)

(2008/C 22/07)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: H. Støvlbæk and S. Grünheid, Agents

Applicant:

Defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: M. Lumma and U. Forsthoff, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Article 43 EC — Transitional rules concerning the authorisation of psychotherapists which require previous activities carried out under the national sickness insurance scheme in order for authorisation to be obtained

Operative part of the judgment

The Court

| 1. | Declares that, by applying the transitional provisions or ‘established rights’, which permit psychotherapists to obtain authorisation or admission to practise independently of the applicable rules of the statutory sickness insurance scheme, solely to psychotherapists who have practised in a region of Germany under the German statutory sickness insurance schemes and by failing to take account of comparable or similar professional activity performed by psychotherapists in other Member States, the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 43 EC; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by applying the transitional provisions or ‘established rights’, which permit psychotherapists to obtain authorisation or admission to practise independently of the applicable rules of the statutory sickness insurance scheme, solely to psychotherapists who have practised in a region of Germany under the German statutory sickness insurance schemes and by failing to take account of comparable or similar professional activity performed by psychotherapists in other Member States, the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 43 EC;

| 2. | Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 86, 8.4.2006.

1

---
#### GRETSCHEL, Respondent, v. VOLKENING, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division. Second Department.

February 11, 1903.)

Action by Joseph Gretschel against Otto Volkening.

No opinion. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 1197 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 1197

  Recognizing the roles and contributions of elementary and secondary 
  school teachers in building and enhancing the civic, cultural, and 
               economic well-being of the United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 6, 2024

    Mr. Graves of Missouri (for himself, Mr. Cleaver, Mr. Boyle of 
 Pennsylvania, Mr. Davis of Illinois, Mr. Fitzpatrick, Mr. Moylan, Ms. 
Norton, Mr. Casten, Ms. Moore of Wisconsin, Ms. Stevens, Ms. Wild, Mr. 
   Turner, Ms. Porter, Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania, Mr. Peters, Mr. 
 Kildee, Mr. Garamendi, Ms. Spanberger, and Mr. Allred) submitted the 
following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Education 
                           and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Recognizing the roles and contributions of elementary and secondary 
  school teachers in building and enhancing the civic, cultural, and 
               economic well-being of the United States.

Whereas education and knowledge are the foundation of the current and future 
        strength of the United States;
Whereas teachers and other education staff have earned and deserve the respect 
        of their students and communities for their selfless dedication to 
        community service and the futures of the children of the United States;
Whereas the purposes of National Teacher Appreciation Week, celebrated from May 
        6, 2024, through May 10, 2024, are--

    (1) to raise public awareness of the unquantifiable contributions of 
teachers; and

    (2) to promote greater respect and understanding for the teaching 
profession; and

Whereas students, schools, communities, and a number of organizations 
        representing educators are recognizing the importance of teachers during 
        National Teacher Appreciation Week: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) thanks elementary and secondary school teachers of the 
        United States; and
            (2) promotes the profession of teaching and the 
        contributions of educators by encouraging students, parents, 
        school administrators, and public officials to recognize 
        National Teacher Appreciation Week.
                                 <all>
```
§ 2004.20 National Industrial Security Program Executive Agent and Operating Manual. ( a ) The executive agent (EA) for NISP is the Secretary of Defense. The EA: ( 1 ) Provides industrial security services for agencies that are not CSAs but that release classified information to entities. The EA provides industrial security services only through an agreement with the agency. Non-CSA agencies must enter an agreement with the EA and comply with EA industrial security service processes before releasing classified information to an entity;
( 2 ) Provides services for other CSAs by agreement; and
( 3 ) Issues and maintains the National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (NISPOM) in consultation with all affected agencies and with the concurrence of the other CSAs.
( b ) The NISPOM sets out the procedures and standards that entities must follow during all phases of the contracting process to safeguard any classified information an agency releases to an entity. The NISPOM requirements may apply to the entity directly (*i.e.,* through FAR clauses or other contract clauses referring entities to the NISPOM) or through equivalent contract clauses or requirements documents that are consistent with NISPOM requirements.
( c ) The EA, in consultation with all affected agencies and with the concurrence of the other CSAs, develops the requirements, restrictions, and safeguards contained in the NISPOM. The EA uses security standards applicable to agencies as the basis for developing NISPOM entity standards to the extent practicable and reasonable.
( d ) The EA also facilitates the NISPOM coordination process, which addresses issues raised by entities, agencies, ISOO, or the NISPPAC, including requests to create or change NISPOM security standards.
#### § 148.3 Security review.

After initial security authorization, approval, certification, or accreditation, subsequent security reviews shall normally be conducted no more frequently than annually.

Additionally, such reviews shall be aperiodic or random, and be based upon risk management principles. Security reviews may be conducted “for cause”, to follow up on previous findings, or to accomplish close-out actions. Visits may be made to a facility to conduct security support actions, administrative inquiries, program reviews, and approvals as deemed appropriate by the cognizant security authority or agency.
### §302105. Owner participation in nomination process

(a) Regulations.—The Secretary shall promulgate regulations requiring that before any property may be included on the National Register or designated as a National Historic Landmark, the owner of the property, or a majority of the owners of the individual properties within a district in the case of a historic district, shall be given the opportunity (including a reasonable period of time) to concur in, or object to, the nomination of the property for inclusion or designation. The regulations shall include provisions to carry out this section in the case of multiple ownership of a single property.

(b) When Property Shall Not Be Included on National Register or Designated as National Historic Landmark.—If the owner of any privately owned property, or a majority of the owners of privately owned properties within the district in the case of a historic district, object to inclusion or designation, the property shall not be included on the National Register or designated as a National Historic Landmark until the objection is withdrawn.

(c) Review by Secretary.—The Secretary shall review the nomination of the property when an objection has been made and shall determine whether or not the property is eligible for inclusion or designation. If the Secretary determines that the property is eligible for inclusion or designation, the Secretary shall inform the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the appropriate State Historic Preservation Officer, the appropriate chief elected local official, and the owner or owners of the property of the Secretary's determination.

(Pub. L. 113–287, §3, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3193.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 302105(a) | 16 U.S.C. 470a(a)(6) (1st, last sentences). | Pub. L. 89–665, title I, §101(a)(6), Oct. 15, 1966, 80 Stat. 915; Pub. L. 91–383, §11, as added Pub. L. 94–458, §2, Oct. 7, 1976, 90 Stat. 1942; Pub. L. 93–54, §1(d), July 1, 1973, 87 Stat. 139; Pub. L. 96–205, title VI, §608(a)(1), (2), Mar. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 92; Pub. L. 96–515, title II, §201(a), Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 2989. |
| 302105(b) | 16 U.S.C. 470a(a)(6) (2d sentence). | |
| 302105(c) | 16 U.S.C. 470a(a)(6) (3d sentence). | |

Section
EXHIBIT 3.i.c

I, EDWARD J. FREEL, SECRETARY OF STATE OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE, DO
HEREBY CERTIFY THE ATTACHED IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE
CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT OF "THE UNITED STATES BASKETBALL LEAGUE,
INC.", FILED IN THIS OFFICE ON THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY, A.D. 1987,
AT 3 O'CLOCK P.M.















                                            /S/ Edward J. Freel
                                            Edward J. Freel, Secretary of State
2036407 8100

001253249
                                           Authentication 0446456
                                           Date: 05-18-00

<PAGE>


                                                              877050064
                                                              Feb. 19, 1987
                              CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                                        OF
                            CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION
                              (Pursuant to Section 242)

THE UNITED STATES BASKETBALL LEAGUE, INC., a corporation organized and existing
under and by virtue of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware,
DOES HEREBY CERTIFY:

FIRST: That the written consent of the necessary number of shares required by
statute of the stockholders of THE UNITED STATES BASKETBALL LEAGUE, INC., was
given in accordance with Section 228 of the General Corporation Law of Delaware,
setting forth an amendment to the Certificate of Incorporation of said
corporation. The amendment to the Certificate of Incorporation is as follows:

Article FOURTH of the Certificate of Incorporation of this corporation is hereby
amended to read as follows:

"FOURTH: (a) The total number of shares of Common, Stock which the corporation
is authorized to issue is Thirty Million (30,000,000) shares of voting Common
Stock, each of which shall have a par value of $.00l; and (b) The total number
of shares of Preferred Stock which the corporation is authorized to issue is One
Million (1,000,000) shares of non-voting Preferred Stock, each of which is
convertible into Common Stock at $.50 per share, and callable by the corporation
at any time after March 1, 1988 at $1.20 per share. The Preferred Stock shall
bear a 6% non-cumulative annual dividend."

SECOND: Prompt notice of the taking of the corporate action amending the
Certificate of Incorporation in the manner set forth above is being given to all
stockholders who have not consented in writing, as provided by Section 228 of
the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.

                   IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said corporation has caused this
Certificate to be signed by Daniel T. Meisenheimer III, its President, and
attested by Richard C. Meisenheimer, its Secretary, this 13th day of February,
1987.

                                   THE UNITED STATES BASKETBALL LEAGUE, INC.
                                   By:   /S/  Daniel T. Meisenheimer III,
                                   Daniel T. Meisenheimer III, President
ATTEST:
By:         /S/  Richard C. Meisenheimer
         Richard C. Meisenheimer, Secretary
Clinical Guide > The HIV Clinic

# Guide for HIV/AIDS Clinical CareSection 1: The HIV Clinic: Providing Quality Care- Supporting Patients in Care
- Clinic Management
- Quality Improvement
- Health Resources and Services Administration HIV/AIDS Bureau Performance Measures
- HIV Care in Correctional Settings
- Patient Education
### Physical stratigraphy of the Genesee Formation (Devonian) in western and central New York

By: Wallace De Witt Jr.George Willis Colton

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1032A

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 2**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 3**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 4**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 5**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 6**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 7**                            (pdf) 
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

	NO. 2-07-179-CV

COREY TAYLOR BEASLEY	APPELLANT

	V.

FORT WORTH POLICE OFFICERS						APPELLEES

MR. TIGNETTE AND R.D. GLIFOUR	

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

	FROM THE 348TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

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

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

	On June 4, 2007, we notified Appellant that we were concerned this court may not have jurisdiction over this appeal because it appeared that the notice of appeal was not timely filed.  We stated that the appeal might be dismissed for want of jurisdiction unless Appellant or any party desiring to continue the appeal filed with the court a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 44.3.  Although Appellant filed a response, it does not show grounds for continuing the appeal.

	On October 5, 2006, the trial court dismissed the underlying case pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 165a.  See Tex. R. Civ. P. 165a.  No post-judgment motion was filed to extend the appellate deadline; therefore, Appellant’s notice of appeal was due December 4, 2006.  See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(a)(1).  However, Appellant did not file his notice of appeal until May 30, 2007.	

	The time for filing a notice of appeal is jurisdictional in this court, and absent a timely-filed notice of appeal or extension request, we must dismiss the appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 2, 25.1(b), 26.3; Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997) (holding that once extension period has passed, a party can no longer invoke an appellate court’s jurisdiction).

	Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f).  

							PER CURIAM

PANEL D:  HOLMAN, GARDNER, and WALKER, JJ.

DELIVERED:  July 26, 2007
#### § 21.455 Who can sign, administer, or terminate assistance instruments?

Only grants officers are authorized to sign, administer, or terminate grants or cooperative agreements (other than technology investment agreements) on behalf of the Department of Defense. Similarly, only agreements officers may sign, administer, or terminate technology investment agreements.
Exhibit 32.01

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the annual report of Sbarro, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Peter Beaudrault, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that to my knowledge:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 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: March 31, 2008



|                                                                                                                        
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Peter Beaudrault                                                                                                    
|Peter Beaudrault Chairman of the Board of Directors, President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive
Officer)

NOTE: A signed original of this certification has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
### §578. Authority of the arbitrator

An arbitrator to whom a dispute is referred under this subchapter may—

(1) regulate the course of and conduct arbitral hearings;

(2) administer oaths and affirmations;

(3) compel the attendance of witnesses and production of evidence at the hearing under the provisions of section 7 of title 9 only to the extent the agency involved is otherwise authorized by law to do so; and

(4) make awards.

(Added Pub. L. 101–552, §4(b), Nov. 15, 1990, 104 Stat. 2742, §588; renumbered §578, Pub. L. 102–354, §3(b)(2), Aug. 26, 1992, 106 Stat. 944.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1992—Pub. L. 102–354 renumbered section 588 of this title as this section.
### §605. Avoidance of duplicative or unnecessary analyses

(a) Any Federal agency may perform the analyses required by sections 602, 603, and 604 of this title in conjunction with or as a part of any other agenda or analysis required by any other law if such other analysis satisfies the provisions of such sections.

(b) Sections 603 and 604 of this title shall not apply to any proposed or final rule if the head of the agency certifies that the rule will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. If the head of the agency makes a certification under the preceding sentence, the agency shall publish such certification in the Federal Register at the time of publication of general notice of proposed rulemaking for the rule or at the time of publication of the final rule, along with a statement providing the factual basis for such certification. The agency shall provide such certification and statement to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

(c) In order to avoid duplicative action, an agency may consider a series of closely related rules as one rule for the purposes of sections 602, 603, 604 and 610 of this title.

(Added Pub. L. 96–354, §3(a), Sept. 19, 1980, 94 Stat. 1167; amended Pub. L. 104–121, title II, §243(a), Mar. 29, 1996, 110 Stat. 866.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1996—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 104–121 amended subsec. (b) generally. Prior to amendment, subsec. (b) read as follows: "Sections 603 and 604 of this title shall not apply to any proposed or final rule if the head of the agency certifies that the rule will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. If the head of the agency makes a certification under the preceding sentence, the agency shall publish such certification in the Federal Register, at the time of publication of general notice of proposed rulemaking for the rule or at the time of publication of the final rule, along with a succinct statement explaining the reasons for such certification, and provide such certification and statement to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration."

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

#### Effective Date of 1996 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 104–121 effective on expiration of 90 days after Mar. 29, 1996, but inapplicable to interpretative rules for which a notice of proposed rulemaking was published prior to Mar. 29, 1996, see section 245 of Pub. L. 104–121, set out as a note under section 601 of this title.

#### Effective Date

Section effective Jan. 1, 1981, see section 4 of Pub. L. 96–354, set out as a note under section 601 of this title.