alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 7 July 2011 – Valero Jordana v Commission**

**(Case T-161/04)**

Access to documents – Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 – Reserve list for an open competition and individual decisions concerning the appointment of officials – Refusal of access – Exception concerning privacy and the integrity of the individual – Protection of personal data – Regulation (EC) No 45/2001

1.                     *European Union – Institutions – Right of public access to documents – Regulation No 1049/2001 – Exceptions to the right of
access to documents – Duty to state reasons – Scope (Art. 253 EC; European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1049/2001)
(see paras 48-49)*

2.                     *European Union – Institutions – Right of public access to documents – Regulation No 1049/2001 – Exceptions to the right of
access to documents – Protection of privacy and the integrity of the individual – Scope – Duty to assess in accordance with
EU legislation on the protection of personal data (European Parliament and Council Regulations No 45/2001, Arts 1(1) and 2(a)
and (b), and No 1049/2001, Art. 4(1)(b)) (see paras 87-89, 91, 95-96, 102)*

3.                     *Acts of the institutions – Statement of reasons – Obligation – Scope – Reasoning put forward during proceedings not mentioned
in the contested decision – Not permissible (Art. 253 EC) (see para. 107)*

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | APPLICATION for annulment of the decision of the Commission of 10 February 2004 refusing the applicant’s request for access to the reserve list for open competition A7/A6 COM/A/637 and the individual decisions appointing officials in Grade A 6 from 5 October 1995. |

**Operative part**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | Annuls the decision of the Commission of the European Communities of 10 February 2004 refusing to give Mr Gregorio Valero Jordana access to the reserve list for open competition A7/A6 COM/A/637 and the individual decisions appointing officials in Grade A 6 from 5 October 1995; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Orders the Commission to bear its own costs and to pay Mr Valero Jordana’s costs; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 3. | | Orders the Kingdom of Sweden to bear its own costs; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 4. | | Orders the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) to bear his own costs; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 5. | | Removes the Kingdom of Denmark as an intervener in Case T‐161/04; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 6. | | Orders the Kingdom of Denmark to bear its own costs; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 7. | | Orders Mr Valero Jordana, the Commission, the Kingdom of Sweden and the EDPS to bear their own costs in regard to the Kingdom of Denmark’s intervention. |
Editorial Note on Part 773
Editorial Note: At 82 FR 54938, Nov. 17, 2017, as required by the Congressional Review Act and Public Law 115-5, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement removed all amendments to part 773 made effective on Jan. 19, 2017, at 81 FR 93323-93325, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 773.28 Written agency decision on challenges to ownership or control listings or findings. ( a ) Within 60 days of receipt of your challenge under § 773.26(a) of this part, we, the regulatory authority identified under § 773.26(a) of this part, will review and investigate the evidence and explanatory materials you submit and any other reasonably available information bearing on your challenge and issue a written decision. Our decision must state whether you own or control the relevant surface coal mining operation, or owned or controlled the operation, during the relevant time period.
( b ) We will promptly provide you with a copy of our decision by either— ( 1 ) Certified mail, return receipt requested; or
( 2 ) Any means consistent with the rules governing service of a summons and complaint under Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or its State regulatory program counterparts.
( c ) Service of the decision on you is complete upon delivery and is not incomplete if you refuse to accept delivery.
( d ) We will post all decisions made under this section on AVS.
( e ) Any person who receives a written decision under this section, and who wishes to appeal that decision, must exhaust administrative remedies under the procedures at 43 CFR 4.1380 through 4.1387 or, when a State is the regulatory authority, the State regulatory program counterparts, before seeking judicial review.
( f ) Following our written decision or any decision by a reviewing administrative or judicial tribunal, we must review the information in AVS to determine if it is consistent with the decision. If it is not, we must promptly revise the information in AVS to reflect the decision.
[65 FR 79666, Dec. 19, 2000, as amended at 72 FR 68030, Dec. 3, 2007]
### The Manti, Utah, landslide

By: R. W. FlemingR. B. JohnsonR. L. SchusterG. P. Williams

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1311

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plate:  **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
- NGMDB Index Page:  **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

#### Study Area

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.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

LARRY ROBERTS,

1

Petitioner Below,

Appellant,

v.

KASSIE ROBERTS,

Respondent Below, Appellee.

§ No. 389, 2018

§ 

§ Court Below—Family Court

§ of the State of Delaware

§ 

§ File No. CN07-02922 

§ Petition Nos. 17-35828

§ 17-35905

§ 

§ 

 Submitted: April 12, 2019

 Decided: May 21, 2019

Before STRINE, Chief Justice; SEITZ and TRAYNOR, Justices.

O R D E R

Upon consideration of the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal, the Court 

has concluded that the judgment of the Family Court should be affirmed for the 

reasons stated in its June 27, 2018 decision denying the appellant’s motion to modify 

visitation with his child (born January 11, 2002). A parent’s right to visitation is “an 

important, natural and legal right; however, it is not an absolute right but one which 

must yield to the good of the child.”2 The Family Court did not abuse its discretion 

by concluding that the best interest factors set forth in 13 Del. C. § 722(a) weighed 

 

1 The Court previously assigned pseudonyms to the parties under Supreme Court Rule 7(d).

2 Winter v. Charles, 1992 WL 53404 (Del. Feb. 3, 1992) (internal quotations omitted).
2

in favor of maintaining the visitation arrangement set forth in the court’s August 1, 

2016 order, nor by giving great weight to the wishes of the sixteen-year-old child

concerning visitation with her father. 

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Family 

Court is AFFIRMED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Gary F. Traynor

Justice
Unassociated Document


    PROMISSORY
      NOTE

    


    December
      3, 1999

    


    FOR
      VALUE
      RECEIVED, the undersigned (“Maker”) hereby promises to pay to the order of
      Electric Fuel Corporation, a Delaware corporation (“EFC”), on the earlier of (a)
      ten years from the date of this note or (b) the date of termination of the
      Maker’s employment with EFC, the principal sum of One Hundred Sixty-Seven
      Thousand Nine Hundred Seventy-Five dollars (U.S. $167,975), together with simple
      interest from the date hereof on the principal amount at a per annum rate equal
      to 2%. Simple interest on this note will be calculated and charged, in advance,
      based on a term of ten years, and will be due and payable in proportional
      payments when principal is paid. This note may be prepaid in whole or in part
      at
      any time, without premium, penalty or prior notice.

     

    This
      note
      is secured by a pledge to EFC of the 125,000 shares of EFC’s common stock, par
      value$.01 per share (the “Common Stock”), acquired with this note (the “Pledged
      Shares”). The recourse under this note shall only be to the Pledged
      Shares.

     

    To
      perfect EFC’s security interest in the Pledged Shares, the Maker shall deliver
      to EFC the stock certificate or certificates representing the Pledged Shares,
      together with stock powers duly endorsed in blank. EFC shall release its
      security interest in the Pledged Shares in proportion to payment of principal
      and interest owed hereunder.

     

    This
      note
      shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws (other than
      the
      conflict of law rules) of the State of New York.

     

    IN
      WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand as of this 3rd
      day of
      December, 1999.

     

    


    Robert
      S.
      Ehrlich

                                                                        ______________________
### §441d. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 441d, comprising former section 905 of the National Security Act of 1947, act July 26, 1947, ch. 343, was editorially reclassified as section 3175 of this title.
#### § 1800.45 Notification of decision and right of judicial review.

The Coordinator shall promptly prepare and communicate the decision of the Director, NACIC to the requester. With respect to any decision to deny information, that correspondence shall state the reasons for the decision, identify the officer responsible, and include a notice of a right to judicial review.
Exhibit 23.1

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The
Board of Directors
Cyanotech Corporation:

We
have issued our report dated June 24, 2010, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule listed in index appearing under 15(a)(2) in the Annual
Report of Cyanotech Corporation and subsidiary on Form 10-K for each of the two years in the period ended March 31, 2010. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference
of said report in the Registration Statements of Cyanotech Corporation and subsidiary on Form S-3 (File Nos. 333-42486, 333-97755, and
333-101401) and on Forms S-8 (File Nos. 33-63789, 333-42484, 333-141911, 333-141912 and 333-154165).

/s/
Grant Thornton LLP

Honolulu,
Hawaii
June 24, 2010

---



QuickLinks
§ 57.11052 Refuge areas. Refuge areas shall be— ( a ) Of fire-resistant construction, preferably in untimbered areas of the mine;
( b ) Large enough to accommodate readily the normal number of persons in the particular area of the mine;
( c ) Constructed so they can be made gastight; and
( d ) Provided with compressed air lines, waterlines, suitable handtools, and stopping materials.
§ 310.19 Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) exemptions. ( a ) Section 5 U.S.C. 552a(3)(j) and (3)(k) authorize an agency head to exempt certain systems of records or parts of certain systems of records from some of the requirements of the act. This part reserves to the Director, DISA, as head of an agency, the right to create exemptions pursuant to the exemption provisions of the act. All systems of records maintained by DISA shall be exempt from the requirements of 5 U.S.C. 552a(d) pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(1) to the extent that the system contains any information properly classified under Executive Order 11652, “Classification and Declassification of National Security Information and Material,” dated March 8, 1972 (37 FR 10053, May 19, 1972) and which is required by the executive order to be kept secret in the interest of national defense or foreign policy. This exemption, which may be applicable to parts of all systems of records, is necessary because certain record systems not otherwise specifically designated for exemptions may contain isolated information which has been properly classified. ( 1 ) *System identifier and name.* K890.23, DISA Inspector General Investigative Tracker (DIGit). ( i ) *Exemption.* Any portion of this record system which falls within the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), (k)(2)and (k)(5) may be exempt from the following subsections of 5 U.S.C. 552a: (c)(3), (d), (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), (e)(4)(I).
( ii ) *Authority.* 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), (k)(2), and (k)(5).
( iii ) *Reasons.* To ensure the integrity of the privacy and civil liberties process. The execution requires that information be provided in a free and open manner without fear of retribution or harassment in order to facilitate a just, thorough, and timely resolution of the complaint or inquiry. Disclosures from this system can enable individuals to conceal their wrongdoing or mislead the course of the investigation by concealing, destroying, or fabricating evidence or documents. In addition, disclosures can subject sources and witnesses to harassment or intimidation which may cause individuals not to seek redress for wrongs through privacy and civil liberties channels for fear of retribution or harassment.
( 2 ) [Reserved]
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 99.1

              CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.ss.1350 AS ADOPTED
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB/A of AccuPoll
Holding Corp. (the "Company") for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2002, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer and
principal financial officer of the Company hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:


         1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

         2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects the financial condition and results of operations of AccuPoll
Holding Corp.


Dated: May 8, 2003


                                       By:  /s/ Dennis Vadura
                                            ----------------------------------
                                            Dennis Vadura,
                                            Chief Executive Officer

                                       By:  /s/ Craig A. Hewitt
                                            ----------------------------------
                                            Craig A. Hewitt
                                            Chief Financial Officer and
                                            Principal Financial and Accounting
                                            Officer
#### Walter W. Tackett, appellee, v. Ward M. Jones et al., appellants.

Gen. No. 29,519.

Suit for money had and received. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John Richardson, Judge, presiding. Heard in the second division of this court for the first district at the October term, 1924.

Reversed and remanded.

Opinion filed March 3, 1925.

Rehearing denied March 16, 1925.

Litsinger, Healy *&*Reid, for appellants.

Beckman, Olson & Hough, for appellee; Charles E. Carnahan, of counsel.

Mr. Presiding Justice Fitch

delivered the opinion of the court.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

ARON LUNA

,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 18

- 2584

[ February 28, 2019 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for

the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County ; Dan L. Vaughn , Judge;

L.T. Case No s

. 2008CF001915A and 2008CF001938A

.

David M. Lamos, Fort Pierce, for appellant.

No app earance required for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

D AMOORGIAN

, C IKLIN and K UNTZ

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
### §1166. Railroad carrier exercises

#### (a) In general

The Secretary shall establish a program for conducting security exercises for railroad carriers for the purpose of assessing and improving the capabilities of entities described in subsection (b) to prevent, prepare for, mitigate, respond to, and recover from acts of terrorism.

#### (b) Covered entities

Entities to be assessed under the program shall include—

(1) Federal, State, and local agencies and tribal governments;

(2) railroad carriers;

(3) governmental and nongovernmental emergency response providers, law enforcement agencies, and railroad and transit police, as appropriate; and

(4) any other organization or entity that the Secretary determines appropriate.

#### (c) Requirements

The Secretary shall ensure that the program—

(1) consolidates existing security exercises for railroad carriers administered by the Department and the Department of Transportation, as jointly determined by the Secretary and the Secretary of Transportation, unless the Secretary waives this consolidation requirement as appropriate;

(2) consists of exercises that are—

(A) scaled and tailored to the needs of the carrier, including addressing the needs of the elderly and individuals with disabilities;

(B) live, in the case of the most at-risk facilities to a terrorist attack;

(C) coordinated with appropriate officials;

(D) as realistic as practicable and based on current risk assessments, including credible threats, vulnerabilities, and consequences;

(E) inclusive, as appropriate, of railroad frontline employees; and

(F) consistent with the National Incident Management System, the National Response Plan, the National Infrastructure Protection Plan, the National Preparedness Guidance, the National Preparedness Goal, and other such national initiatives;

(3) provides that exercises described in paragraph (2) will be—

(A) evaluated by the Secretary against clear and consistent performance measures;

(B) assessed by the Secretary to identify best practices, which shall be shared, as appropriate, with railroad carriers, nonprofit employee organizations that represent railroad carrier employees, Federal, State, local, and tribal officials, governmental and nongovernmental emergency response providers, law enforcement personnel, including railroad carrier and transit police, and other stakeholders; and

(C) used to develop recommendations, as appropriate, from the Secretary to railroad carriers on remedial action to be taken in response to lessons learned;

(4) allows for proper advanced notification of communities and local governments in which exercises are held, as appropriate; and

(5) assists State, local, and tribal governments and railroad carriers in designing, implementing, and evaluating additional exercises that conform to the requirements of paragraph (1) 1.

#### (d) National Exercise Program

The Secretary shall ensure that the exercise program developed under subsection (c) is a component of the National Exercise Program established under section 748 of this title.

(Pub. L. 110–53, title XV, §1516, Aug. 3, 2007, 121 Stat. 438.)

1 So in original. Probably should be "(2)".
<Page>

EXHIBIT 12.1

                COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                              FOR THE PERIODS ENDED

<Table>
<Caption>
                                                Company                                 Predecessor
                                             ----------------   -------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Nine Months     Three Months                       Years ended
                                                  ended            ended                           December 31,
                                                                                  -------------------------------------------------
                                             December 31, 2001  March 31, 2001     2000          1999          1998           1997
                                             -----------------  --------------    -------------------------------------------------
<S>                                             <C>           <C>               <C>        <C>           <C>           <C>
Earnings:
   Income before income taxes and
    extraordinary items                         $    21,815   $     6,201       $ 73,600   $    74,666   $    69,417   $     55,449
Add:
   Fixed charges                                     46,045         3,692         15,315        14,514        13,355         13,611
   Amortization of capitalized interest                 429           143            572           572           572            572
Subtract:
   Interest capitalized                                (196)            -           (224)       (1,054)       (1,048)          (720)
                                                -----------   -----------       ---------------------------------------------------
     Adjusted Earnings                               68,093        10,036         89,263        88,698        82,296         68,912
                                                ===========   ===========       ===================================================

Fixed Charges:
   Interest expensed and capitalized                 42,531         3,292         13,715        12,972        11,638         12,024
   Interest portion of rentals                        1,155           375          1,500         1,442         1,617          1,487
   Amortization of capitalized debt expense           2,359            25            100           100           100            100
                                                -----------   -----------       ---------------------------------------------------
                                                     46,045         3,692         15,315        14,514        13,355         13,611
                                                ===========   ===========       ===================================================

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                     1.48          2.72           5.83          6.11          6.16           5.06
                                                ===========   ===========       ===================================================
</Table>