alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
28.309 Contract clauses for workers’ compensation insurance.       (a) 						            The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.228-3, Workers’ Compensation Insurance (Defense Base Act), in solicitations and contracts when the Defense Base Act applies (see 28.305) and-                                                         (1) 								                The contract will be a public-work contract performed outside the United States; or                                                            (2) 								                The contract will be approved or financed under the Foreign Assistance Act of1961 (Pub.L.87-195) and is not excluded by 28.305(b)(2).                                                                             (b) 						            The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.228-4, Worker’s Compensation and War-Hazard Insurance Overseas, in solicitations and contracts when the contract will be a public-work contract performed outside the United States and the Secretary of Labor waives the applicability of the Defense Base Act (see 28.305(d)).    **Parent topic:** Subpart 28.3 - Insurance
# L_2021162EN.01000401.xml

| 10.5.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 162/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.5.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 162/4

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2021/757

of 3 May 2021

entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications ‘Ennstaler Steirerkas’ (PDO)

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Austria’s application to register the name ‘Ennstaler Steirerkas’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Austria’s application to register the name ‘Ennstaler Steirerkas’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

| (2) | As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Ennstaler Steirerkas’ should therefore be entered in the register, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Ennstaler Steirerkas’ should therefore be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name ‘Ennstaler Steirerkas’ (PDO) is hereby entered in the register.

The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.3 – Cheeses, as listed in Annex XI to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 (3).

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 3 May 2021.

For the Commission,

On behalf of the President,

Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ C 20, 19.1.2021, p. 11.

2

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).

3

---
#### § 3560.613 [Reserved]
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-7373

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

DAVID M. ROBINSON,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, District Judge.

(CR-95-479-WMN, CA-99-374-WMN)

Submitted: December 16, 1999 Decided: December 30, 1999

Before MURNAGHAN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

David M. Robinson, Appellant Pro Se. Lynne Ann Battaglia, United

States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
* Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on

September 21, 1999, the district court’s records show that it was

entered on the docket sheet on September 22, 1999. Pursuant to

Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is

the date the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as

the effective date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v.

Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).

2

PER CURIAM:

David M. Robinson seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.

1999). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of

the district court. See United States v. Robinson, Nos. CR-95-479-

WMN; CA-99-374-WMN (D. Md. Sept. 22, 1999).* We deny Robinson’s

motions to expedite the appeal, for bail pending appeal, and for

judgment on the pleadings. We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

DISMISSED
#### § 4279.60 Civil rights impact analysis.

Issuance of a Conditional Commitment is conditioned on the Agency being able to satisfactorily complete a civil rights impact analysis.
#### In the Matter of Benedict P. Vuturo, Appellant, v Bonita H. Regan, Respondent, et al., Respondent. In

a proceeding to (1) validate a petition designating petitioner as a candidate in the Conservative Party primary election to be held on September 9, 1980 for the public office of District Court Judge, Fifth District, Suffolk County, and (2) compel the Board of Elections of Suffolk County to place the name of petitioner upon the Conservative Party ballots, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated August 26, 1980, which dismissed the proceeding. Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The order to show cause by which petitioner initiated the instant proceeding permitted service upon the objector in several ways, one of which was by certified mail, return receipt requested, mailed on or before August 18, 1980. The record. shows, however, that the envelope of transmittal was postmarked August 19, 1980. Petitioner thus failed to timely commence the instant proceeding and his petition was properly dismissed (see *Matter of Butler v Hayduk,*37 NY2d 497; *Matter of Radda v Acito,*54 AD2d 531). Gibbons, J. P., Cohalan, O’Connor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.
2006-0498.

#### State Farm Mut. Auto v. Reid.

Cuyahoga App. No. 87729. On motion for stay of court of appeals’ judgment. Motion denied.

Resnick, J., dissents.
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 the
Annual Report on Form 10-K of Alliance Financial Corporation (the Company) for the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, J. Daniel Mohr,
Treasurer 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 the best of my knowledge:



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



|2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: March 12, 2010



/s/ J. Daniel MohrJ. Daniel MohrExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the
electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, 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.
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 1 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 2 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 3 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 4 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 5 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 6 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 7 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 8 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 9 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 10 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 11 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 12 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 13 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 14 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 15 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 16 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 17 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 18 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 19 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 20 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 21 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 22 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 23 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 24 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 25 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 26 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 27 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 28 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 29 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 30 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 31 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 32 of 33
Case 4:20-cv-00410-MW-MAF Document 61 Filed 04/25/22 Page 33 of 33
# L_2021336DE.01005001.xml

| 23.9.2021 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 336/50 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.9.2021

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 336/50

---

Berichtigung des Beschlusses (EU) 2021/764 des Rates vom 10. Mai 2021 zur Einrichtung des spezifischen Programms zur Durchführung von „Horizont Europa“, dem Rahmenprogramm für Forschung und Innovation, und zur Aufhebung des Beschlusses 2013/743/EU

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 167 I vom 12. Mai 2021
  )

Seite 4, Artikel 3 Absatz 1 Buchstabe b Ziffer iv:

Anstatt:

| „iv) | Cluster ‚Digitalisierung, Industrie und Raumfahrt‘ gemäß Anhang I Säule II Abschnitt 4;“ |
| --- | --- |

„iv)

Cluster ‚Digitalisierung, Industrie und Raumfahrt‘ gemäß Anhang I Säule II Abschnitt 4;“

muss es heißen:

| „iv) | Cluster ‚Digitalisierung, Industrie und Weltraum‘ gemäß Anhang I Säule II Abschnitt 4;“. |
| --- | --- |

„iv)

Cluster ‚Digitalisierung, Industrie und Weltraum‘ gemäß Anhang I Säule II Abschnitt 4;“.

Seite 5, Artikel 5 Absatz 2 Buchstabe b:

Anstatt:

| „b) | 25 % für das Cluster ‚Digitalisierung, Industrie und Raumfahrt‘;“ |
| --- | --- |

„b)

25 % für das Cluster ‚Digitalisierung, Industrie und Raumfahrt‘;“

muss es heißen:

| „b) | 25 % für das Cluster ‚Digitalisierung, Industrie und Weltraum‘;“. |
| --- | --- |

„b)

25 % für das Cluster ‚Digitalisierung, Industrie und Weltraum‘;“.

---
I-13

CROSS REFERENCE – INTERNATIONAL vs. U.S. RADIO AIDS

Inter. – U.S. – Inter. – U.S. –

2-0001 1055, 1060, 1065, 1066,

1070, 1072, 1073, 1075, 1080,

1082, 1086, 1087, 1088, 1089,

1090, 1091, 1091.2, 1092, 1093,

1094, 1094.1, 1094.2, 1094.5, 1095,

1095.5, 1096, 1097, 1098, 1098.2,

1098.3, 1105, 1105.2, 1106, 1108,

1109, 1115, 1116, 1117, 1120,

1150, 1155, 1160, 1165, 1170,

1172, 1175, 1180

2-0155 1090.5, 1093.5

2-0175 1098.5, 1171

2-0815 1182, 1182.1, 1182.2, 1182.3,

1182.4, 1182.5, 1182.6, 1182.7, 1182.8,

1182.9, 1183, 1183.05, 1183.1, 1183.2,

1183.25, 1183.3, 1183.35, 1183.45, 1183.5,

1183.55, 1183.6, 1183.65, 1183.7, 1183.75,

1183.8, 1183.85, 1183.9, 1183.95, 1184,

1184.05, 1184.1, 1184.15, 1184.2, 1184.3,

1184.4, 1184.45, 1184.5, 1184.55, 1184.6,

1184.65, 1184.75, 1184.8, 1184.82, 1184.85

2-1040 1185.5, 1185.6, 1185.7, 1185.8,

1185.9, 1186, 1186.2, 1186.3, 1186.4,

1186.5, 1186.6, 1186.7, 1186.8, 1186.9,

1187, 1187.1, 1187.2, 1187.3, 1187.4,

1187.5

2-1282 1187.61

2-2147 1188

2-3510 1002.6, 1002.65, 1002.7, 1002.75,

1002.8, 1002.85, 1002.9, 1002.95, 1003

2-4326 1001.3, 1001.35, 1001.45, 1001.6,

1001.85, 1001.9, 1001.95, 1002, 1002.1,

1002.15, 1002.2, 1002.35
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                            3268
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      250
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  3518
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    3518
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              140
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                        3378
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      3518
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   147
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   269
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (122)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (122)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (122)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (0.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.09)


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000793935
<NAME> NASHVILLE LAND FUND, LTD.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                         163,842
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                       4,995,822
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,159,939
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           36,220
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,123,719
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,159,939
<SALES>                                        184,109
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               441,335
<CGS>                                           85,036
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  101,450
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               198,562
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                242,773
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            242,773
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   242,773
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    32.37
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    32.37
        

</TABLE>
Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

LADIES MEMORIAL 

ASSOCIATION INC, et al,

Plaintiffs,

v. Case No. 3:20cv5681-MCR-ZCB

CITY OF PENSACOLA FLORIDA, et al.,

Defendants. 

_________________________________/

ORDER

Pending is an Application for Attorney’s Fees, which was transferred to this 

Court by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. ECF No. 60. The Court finds it 

appropriate to refer this matter to the assigned magistrate judge for further 

proceedings, if necessary, and the preparation of a report and recommendation.

Accordingly, the Application for Attorney’s Fees, ECF No. 60, is referred to 

Magistrate Judge Zachary C. Bolitho for the preparation of a report and 

recommendation pursuant to Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See 

also N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 72.3; 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). 

DONE AND ORDERED this 5th day of August 2022.

M. Casey Rodgers M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:20-cv-05681-MCR-ZCB Document 61 Filed 08/05/22 Page 1 of 1
##### 



Exhibit 35.1
 SERVICER COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE
PURSUANT TO ITEM 1123 OF REGULATION AB UNDER THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 Re: Turquoise Card Backed Securities plc  Series 2006  2
  (i)
    
    the Receivables Trust Deed and Servicing Agreement (the RTSA Agreement) dated May 23, 2006
among Turquoise Receivables Trustee Limited, as Receivables Trustee, Turquoise Funding 1
Limited, as Loan Note Issuing Entity and Series 2006-2 Investor Beneficiary, Turquoise Funding
2 Limited, as Dormant Investor Beneficiary and the Company, as Servicer,(ii)
    
    the Series 2006-2 Supplement to the RTSA Agreement (the Series 2006-2 Agreement) dated
November 22, 2007, among Turquoise Receivables Trustee Limited, as Receivables Trustee,
Turquoise Funding 1 Limited, as Loan Note Issuing Entity and Series 2006-2 Investor
Beneficiary, Turquoise Funding 2 Limited, as Dormant Investor Beneficiary and the Company, as
Servicer, and(iii)
    
    the Letter Supplementing Servicing Provisions from the Company, dated October 26, 2007 to
and agreed by each of Turquoise Receivables Trustee Limited, as Receivables Trustee, Turquoise
Funding 1 Limited, as Loan Note Issuing Entity and Series 2006-2 Investor Beneficiary,
Turquoise Funding 2 Limited, as Dormant Investor Beneficiary, the Law Debenture Trust Company
of New York, as Securities Trustee and the Note Trustee and the Company (the Servicing
Supplement and together with the RTSA Agreement and the Series 2006-2 Agreement, the
Agreements)
  1.
    
    a review of the activities of the Company from November 22, 2006 to December 31, 2006 and of
its performance under each of the Agreements has been completed under my supervision; and
 2.
    
    to the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Company has fulfilled all of its
obligations under each of the Agreements in all material respects throughout the reporting
period referred to above except as set forth below:
  th
 By:
    
    /s/ Roger K McGregorName:
    
    Roger K. McGregorTitle:
    
    Chief Financial Officer, HSBC Bank plc
 32
9.109 Prohibition on contracting with an

entity involved in activities that violate arms

control treaties or agreements with the

United States.

9.109-1 Authority.

9.109-2 Prohibition.

9.109-3 Exception.

9.109-4 Certification by the offeror.

9.109-5 Solicitation provision.

Parent topic: Subpart 9.1 - Responsible Prospective Contractors
Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

STONEY GLENN,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 3:20cv5603-MCR-EMT

CAPTAIN SMITH,

Defendant.

_________________________________/

O R D E R

The chief magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation on January 

4, 2021. ECF No. 22. Plaintiff was furnished a copy of the Report and 

Recommendation and afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, 

United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). I have made a de novo determination of all 

timely filed objections.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and any timely filed 

objections thereto, I have determined the Report and Recommendation should be 

adopted.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The chief magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 

22) is adopted and incorporated by reference in this Order.

Case 3:20-cv-05603-MCR-EMT Document 27 Filed 03/29/21 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No. 3:20cv5603-MCR-EMT

2. Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Captain Smith are DISMISSED 

with prejudice as time-barred.

3. Plaintiff’s claims against A. Powell are DISMISSED without 

prejudice as duplicative.

4. The clerk of court is directed to close this case.

DONE AND ORDERED this 29th day of March 2021.

 s/ M. Casey Rodgers

M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:20-cv-05603-MCR-EMT Document 27 Filed 03/29/21 Page 2 of 2