alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2014235EN.01001901.xml

| 8.8.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 235/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.8.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 235/19

---

Corrigendum to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 887/2013 of 11 July 2013 replacing Annexes II and III to Regulation (EU) No 211/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the citizens' initiative

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 247 of 18 September 2013
  )

On page 18 (Annex II) under ‘CROATIA’ in Annex III(C)(2):

for:

‘Ozone ...’,

read:

‘Osobni ...’.

---
Exhibit 13.2

Certification by the Principal Financial Officer

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of New Oriental Education & Technology Group Inc. (the Company) on Form 20-F
for the year ended May 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Louis T. Hsieh, President and Chief Financial 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 to my knowledge:



| | (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 the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: October 14, 2010



By:

/s/    Louis T. HsiehName:

Louis T. HsiehTitle:

President and Chief Financial Officer
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

December 8, 2017

No. 04-17-00337-CV

Charles SCHWARTZ, III, D.O.,

Appellant

v.

Jake FIPPS and Wife, Miriam Fipps,

Appellees

From the 49th Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015-CVT-003956 D1

Honorable Joe Lopez, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Appellees’ brief in this accelerated appeal was originally due August 15, 2017. After this 

court granted several extensions of time, we issued an order advising appellees that their brief 

was due November 27, 2017. We further advised appellees that no further extensions of time to 

file the brief would be permitted, and if the brief was not filed on or before November 27, 2017, 

the matter would be submitted without an appellees’ brief. No brief was filed on November 27, 

2017. Rather, on December 6, 2017, appellees filed yet another motion for extension of time 

asking for more time in which to file the brief. Based on our prior order and after reviewing 

appellees’ motion, we DENY appellees’ request for an extension of time.

_________________________________

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 8th day of December, 2017.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
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 Annual Report of Terra Media, Ltd. (the "Company") on Form 10-K/A for the year ending December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Thomas Monahan, Principal Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.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 result of   operations of the Company.  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the 12th day of September, 2008.   /s/ Thomas Monahan ----------------------------------- President, Secretary, Treasurer, Director, and Chief Financial Officer and Controller (Principal Accounting Officer)
Exhibit 23.2





Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm











The Board of Directors and Stockholders


Animal Health International, Inc.:





We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No. 333-142521) on Form S-8 of Animal Health International, Inc. of our report dated September 9, 2008, with respect to the consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity and comprehensive income (loss), and cash flows of Animal Health International, Inc. and subsidiaries for the year ended June 30, 2008, which report appears in the 2010 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Animal Health International, Inc.
 /s/ KPMG LLP
 
 Dallas, Texas
 September 10, 2010
114 STAT. 460 PUBLIC LAW 106–227—JUNE 28, 2000

Public Law 106–227

106th Congress

Joint Resolution

Recognizing the 225th birthday of the United States Army.

Whereas on June 14, 1775, the Second Continental Congress, representing the citizens of 13 American colonies, authorized the

establishment of the Continental Army;

Whereas the collective expression of the pursuit of personal freedom

that caused the authorization and organization of the United

States Army led to the adoption of the Declaration of Independence and the codification of the new Nation’s basic principles

and values in the Constitution;

Whereas for the past 225 years, the Army’s central mission has

been to fight and win the Nation’s wars;

Whereas whatever the mission, the Nation turns to its Army for

decisive victory;

Whereas the 172 battle streamers carried on the Army flag are

testament to the valor, commitment, and sacrifice of the brave

soldiers who have served the Nation in the Army;

Whereas Valley Forge, New Orleans, Mexico City, Gettysburg,

Verdun, Bataan, Normandy, Pusan, the Ia Drang Valley, Grenada, Panama, and Kuwait are but a few of the places where

soldiers of the United States Army have won extraordinary

distinction and respect for the Nation and its Army;

Whereas the motto of ‘‘Duty, Honor, Country’’ is the creed by

which the American soldier lives and serves;

Whereas the United States Army today is the world’s most capable

and respected ground force;

Whereas future Army forces are being prepared to conduct quick,

decisive, highly sophisticated operations anywhere, anytime; and

Whereas no matter what the cause, location, or magnitude of future

conflicts, the Nation can rely on its Army to produce well-trained,

well-led, and highly motivated soldiers to carry out the missions

entrusted to them: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the

United States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress,

recognizing the historic significance of the 225th anniversary of

the United States Army—

(1) expresses the appreciation of the people of the United

States to the Army and the soldiers who have served in it

for 225 years of dedicated service;

June 28, 2000

[H.J. Res. 101]

PUBLIC LAW 106–227—JUNE 28, 2000 114 STAT. 461

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.J. Res. 101 (S.J. Res. 46):

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 146 (2000):

June 13, considered and passed House.

June 15, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

(2) honors the valor, commitment, and sacrifice that American soldiers have displayed throughout the history of the Army;

and

(3) calls upon the President to issue a proclamation—

(A) recognizing the 225th birthday of the United States

Army and the dedicated service of the soldiers who have

served in the Army; and

(B) calling upon the people of the United States to

observe that anniversary with appropriate ceremonies and

activities.

Approved June 28, 2000.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v William Perry, Appellant.

— Application by assigned counsel for "permission to withdraw as counsel for appellant,” based upon the conclusory statement in his perfunctory brief, that he "found no non-frivolous issues to be raised on appeal,” granted only to the extent of assigning alternate counsel *to*prosecute expeditiously the appeal by whatever means deemed appropriate. Present counsel has totally failed to comply with or even attempt to follow the "guidelines” provided in *People v Saunders*(52 AD2d 833) *(People v Carroll,*72 AD2d 710). By so doing, he has rendered himself ineligible for compensation for such efforts. Concur — Fein, J. P., Sullivan, Markewich, Silverman and Ross, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended June 30, 1997 for May Limited Partnership 1984-2 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such Form 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000757385
<NAME>                        May Limited Partnership 1984-2
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Dec-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   Jun-30-1997
<CASH>                                         299
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  178
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               477
<PP&E>                                         10,436
<DEPRECIATION>                                 10,382
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 531
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          37
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     494
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   531
<SALES>                                        649
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               667
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  102
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                565
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            565
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   565
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  44.13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  44.13
        


</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Frank Anthony Ciavarelli, Appellant, v. Ross E. Herold, as Director of Dannemora State Hospital, Respondent.

Herlihy, J. P.

Appeal by the relator from a judgment of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered May 31, 1968, which denied a writ of habeas corpus without a hearing. Special Term dismissed the petition *“*without prejudice to a renewal of this motion if and when the petitioner is certified as sane”. (Citations omitted.) In the case of *People*v. *Booth*(17 N Y 2d 681, 682) the court denied a writ of error *coram, nobis*until the petitioner’s sanity was restored. It appears that the *Booth*case prevents *693the granting of *coram nobis*relief to a prima facie insane prisoner. The present proceeding involves the constitutional right to a writ of habeas corpus. (N. Y. Const., art. I, § 4.) It has been held that the writ of 'habeas corpus “ can be invoked to obtain a hearing to test the validity of a commitment in an institution for the criminally insane ”. *(People ex rel. Brown*v. *Johnston,*9 N Y 2d 482, 485.) It does not appear that *People*v. *Booth (supra)*was intended to preclude hearings in habeas corpus proceedings brought by an allegedly or in fact insane person and, under the circumstances, it was error to require certification that the appellant was sane as a condition to a hearing. The writ was, however, properly denied without a hearing. The relator’s petition alleges that his conviction was illegal because the foreman of the jury upon the recording of the guilty verdict stated: “We found the defendant guilty because he knew the other defendant!”. This statement was unnecessary and gratuitous on the part of the foreman, but there is no justification for concluding on the present record that the jury proceeded upon an erroneous theory. The method of reporting the verdict did not affect any substantial rights of the defendant. (Code Crim. Pro., § 542; cf. *People*v. *Darling,*8 A D 2d 641.) The petition fails to state sufficient facts upon which relief could be granted. We note that the Attorney-General in his brief alleges that the same issue was presented to the court in a prior petition and that a hearing was held. Judgment modified, on the law and the facts, by striking the words “ if and when the petitioner is certified as sane” and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs. Herlihy, J. P., Reynolds, Aulisi, Cooke and Greenblott, JJ., concur in memorandum by Herlihy, J. P.
#### Reese v. The State.

Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court..

Tried before the Hon. James J. Banks.

No counsel marked as appearing for appellant.

William C. Fitts, Attorney-General, for the State.

The appellant, John Reese, was indicted, tried and convicted for larceny from a dwelling house.’ The prop*666erty alleged to have been stolen was that of J. 0. Bartlett. Upon the trial of the cause, J. C. Bartlett, as a witness testified that at the time of the larceny he had a pair of pants stolen from'him.; that-said pants were taken from the outside of a dairy that was attached to his dwelling house ; that the pants were hung on the side of said dairy ; that said dairy was built at the end of the veranda of said house, and that the roof of the veranda covered the dairy, and the pants could have been reached by a person standing on the ground; that after the loss of said pants he saw the defendant with them on. The venue of the offense and the time were properly provéh. This -^as substantially all of the evidence. The defendant requested the court to give the general affirmative charge in his behalf, and duly excepted to the court’s refusal to give such charge. The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Opinion by

.McClellan., J.
§ 4274.351 Loan approval and obligating funds. ( a ) The loan will be considered approved on the date that the obligation of funds document (*Form RD 1940-1, Request for Obligation of Funds*), is signed by the Agency. Agency IRP loans not closed within six months of approval by the Agency will be deobligated and the loan funds will no longer be available to the intermediary.
( b ) An obligation of funds established for an intermediary may be transferred by the Agency to a different (substituted) intermediary provided: ( 1 ) The substituted intermediary is eligible to receive the assistance approved for the original intermediary;
( 2 ) The substituted intermediary bears a close and genuine relationship to the original intermediary; and
( 3 ) The need for and scope of the project and the purposes for which Agency IRP loan funds will be used remain substantially unchanged.
#### § 51.2004 Reasonably well developed.

*Reasonably well developed* means that the kernel fills one-half or more of the capacity of the shell.
# C_2014080EN.01000601.xml

| 19.3.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 80/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 80/6

---

Statement of the Commission

2014/C 80/03

The Commission hereby declares that it intends to implement the Connecting Europe Facility — transport sector in line with the indicative amounts per funding priorities contained in the Commission's Communication (COM(2013) 940) (1), without prejudice to the necessary flexibility needed for budgetary implementation.

1

The indicative amounts may be revised following the mid-term evaluation of the Connecting Europe Facility to be prepared by the Commission before 31 December 2017, as stated in Article 27(1) of the Connecting Europe Facility Regulation (2).

2

---

(1)  Commission Communication ‘Building the Transport Core Network: Core Network Corridors and Connecting Europe Facility’, COM(2013) 940.

1

(2)  Regulation (EU) No 1316/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 establishing the Connecting Europe Facility, amending Regulation (EU) No 913/2010 and repealing Regulations (EC) No 680/2007 and (EU) No 67/2010 (OJ L 348, 20.12.2013).

2

---
Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

DAESHAWN FREEMAN,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 5:20cv257-TKW-MJF

CAPTAIN BROWN and LT. BRANCH,

Defendants.

_______________________________/

ORDER

This case is before the Court based on the magistrate judge’s Report and 

Recommendation (Doc. 20). No objections were filed. Upon due consideration of 

the Report and Recommendation and the entire case file, the Court agrees with the 

magistrate judge’s determination that this case should be dismissed based on 

Plaintiff’s failure to comply with court orders. Accordingly, it is 

ORDERED that:

1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and

incorporated by reference in this order.

2. This case is DISMISSED without prejudice based on Plaintiff’s failure

to comply with court orders.

Case 5:20-cv-00257-TKW-MJF Document 21 Filed 01/31/22 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

3. The Clerk shall close the case file

DONE and ORDERED this 31st day of January, 2022.

T. Kent Wetherell, II 

T. KENT WETHERELL, II

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 5:20-cv-00257-TKW-MJF Document 21 Filed 01/31/22 Page 2 of 2
Page 1 of 1

ICR Change Worksheet 

1. Identification of the Information Collection

Title: Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Critical Use Exemption from the Phaseout of Methyl 

Bromide (renewal)

EPA Number: 2031.06

OMB Control Number: 2060-0482

2. Description of the change in requirements

EPA took comment in the proposed rule on removing all of the remaining references to 

critical stock allowances in 40 CFR Part 82. EPA believes these provisions are no longer 

necessary if the agency is not allocating separate critical stock allowances. EPA received one 

comment and it was in support of this action. Specifically as it relates to reporting and 

recordkeeping, this final rule removes requirements related to critical stock allowances in 40 

CFR 82.13 as follows:

82.13(f)(3)- Quarterly reporting from producers of methyl bromide regarding the number 

of expended and unexpended critical stock allowances;

82.13(g)(4)- Quarterly reporting from importers of methyl bromide regarding the number 

of expended and unexpended critical stock allowances;

82.13(bb)(2)(iv)- Annual reporting from distributors of methyl bromide regarding the 

number of expended and unexpended critical stock allowances; and

82.13(cc)(2)(iv)- Annual reporting from third party applicators of methyl bromide 

regarding the number of expended and unexpended critical stock allowances.

3. Description of the burden

There are two dozen companies that had received critical stock allowances under the 

critical use exemption program. Many of these companies have merged or have sold their stocks 

of methyl bromide and thus did not have critical stock allowances to report. At most, EPA 

estimates that ten companies may have their burden reduced by half an hour annually, for a 

reduction of 5 hours total. This is negligible in comparison to the 3,258 hours detailed in the 

supporting statement. There is no change to the capital and operating costs, which remain at zero.
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

v. CASE NO. 1:96-cr-00020-MP-AK

JOHN CALVIN EVERETT,

Defendant.

___________________________/

O R D E R 

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 459 and Doc. 461, the latest in a series of motions

to reconsider filed by John Calvin Everett. For the reasons given in the orders at docs. 456, 453,

451, 441, 432, 421, 418, and 413, the motions are denied.

DONE AND ORDERED this 13th day of June, 2007

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case 1:96-cr-00020-MW-GRJ Document 463 Filed 06/13/07 Page 1 of 1
159 So.2d 699

#### STATE of Louisiana v. Robert Lee JOHNSON.

No. 47094.

Jan. 29, 1964.

In re: Robert Lee Johnson applying for writs of habeas corpus and certiorari.

Writs refused. The. application is now moot. (See attached certified copy of $25000.00 bond).
11 TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND

, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Brandy Smythe a/k/a Brandi * From the 104 th District Court

Lynn Smythe o f Taylor County,

Trial Court No

. 21096

- B

Vs. No. 11

- 21

- 00 2 38

- CR * June 29 , 2023

The State of Texas

, * Memorandum Opinion by Bailey

, C. J

. (P anel consists of: Bailey , C.J.,

Trotter, J., and Williams, J. )

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is no

error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court ’ s opi nion,

the judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed.