alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2018137EN.01000101.xml

| 4.6.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 137/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.6.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 137/1

---

COUNCIL IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2018/814

of 1 June 2018

implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1509 concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic People's Republic of Korea

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

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

Having regard to Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1509 of 30 August 2017 concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and repealing Regulation (EC) No 329/2007 (1), and in particular Article 47(5) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 30 August 2017, the Council adopted Regulation (EU) 2017/1509. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 30 August 2017, the Council adopted Regulation (EU) 2017/1509.

| (2) | On 23 May 2018, the United Nations Security Council (‘UNSC’) Committee established pursuant to UNSC Resolution 1718 (2006) amended the listing of an entity subject to restrictive measures. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

On 23 May 2018, the United Nations Security Council (‘UNSC’) Committee established pursuant to UNSC Resolution 1718 (2006) amended the listing of an entity subject to restrictive measures.

| (3) | Annex XIII to Regulation (EU) 2017/1509 should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Annex XIII to Regulation (EU) 2017/1509 should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Annex XIII to Regulation (EU) 2017/1509 is amended as set out in the Annex to this Regulation.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the date 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, 1 June 2018.

For the Council

The President

E. ZAHARIEVA

---

(1)  
  OJ L 224, 31.8.2017, p. 1.

1

---

ANNEX

In Annex XIII to Regulation (EU) 2017/1509, entry 74 under the heading ‘(b) Legal persons, entities and bodies’ is replaced by the following:

| ‘74. | WEIHAI WORLD-SHIPPING FREIGHT | | 419-201, Tongyi Lu, Huancui Qu, Weihai, Shandong 264200, China | 30.3.2018 | Ship and commercial manager of the XIN GUANG HAI, a vessel that on loaded coal at Taean, DPRK on October 27, 2017 and had an ETA of November 14, 2017 to Cam Pha, Vietnam, but it did not arrive.’ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |

‘74.

WEIHAI WORLD-SHIPPING FREIGHT

419-201, Tongyi Lu, Huancui Qu, Weihai, Shandong 264200, China

30.3.2018

Ship and commercial manager of the XIN GUANG HAI, a vessel that on loaded coal at Taean, DPRK on October 27, 2017 and had an ETA of November 14, 2017 to Cam Pha, Vietnam, but it did not arrive.’

---
Exhibit








Exhibit 10.5
Schedule identifying substantially identical agreements, between Visteon Corporation (“Visteon”) and each of the persons named below, to the Change in Control Agreement constituting Exhibit 10.12 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Visteon for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016.


Name
Christian A. Garcia
Sunil K. Bilolikar
Matthew M. Cole
Steven S. Fitzgerald
Brett D. Pynnonen
Markus J. Schupfner
Robert R. Vallance
William M. Robertson
###### Editorial Note on Part 25

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 25 appear at 79 FR 75879, Dec. 19, 2014.

#### § 25.400 Applicant.

*Applicant,* for the purposes of this part, means a non-Federal entity or Federal agency that applies for Federal awards.
#### § 1301.91 Employee responsibility to report drug diversion.

Reports of drug diversion by fellow employees is not only a necessary part of an overall employee security program but also serves the public interest at large. It is, therefore, the position of DEA that an employee who has knowledge of drug diversion from his employer by a fellow employee has an obligation to report such information to a responsible security official of the employer. The employer shall treat such information as confidential and shall take all reasonable steps to protect the confidentiality of the information and the identity of the employee furnishing information. A failure to report information of drug diversion will be considered in determining the feasibility of continuing to allow an employee to work in a drug security area. The employer shall inform all employees concerning this policy.

[40 FR 17143, Apr. 17, 1975]
Exhibit
      32





Certification
      Pursuant to


18
      U.S.C.
      Section 1350,


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








Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002, the undersigned officers of Medialink Worldwide Incorporated (the
      "Company"), hereby certify to such officers’ knowledge, that the Company's
      Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2006 (the
      "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
      applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
      contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
      condition and results of operations of the Company.








Dated:
      May 15, 2006





/s/ Laurence Moskowitz
              Name:
                Laurence Moskowitz
              Title:
                Chief Executive Officer
              
              
              /s/
                Kenneth Torosian
              Name:
                Kenneth Torosian
              Title:
                Chief Financial Officer







The
      foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,
      as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
      2002.
#### McMILLAN *v.*WAYNE CIRCUIT JUDGE.

Mandamus — Setting Aside Judgments — Discretion.

Mandamus will not be granted to compel the setting' aside of . a judgment, where it appears that the trial court did not . abuse his discretion in denying the motion.

Mandamus by Frank McMillan and another to compel George S. Hosmer, circuit judge of Wayne county, to vacate an order denying a motion to set aside a judgment.

Submitted February 23, 1909.

(Calendar No. 22,946.)

Writ denied March 3, 1909.

*Sloman & Sloman*and *Miner & Anhut,*for relators.

*David E. Heineman,*for respondent.

Grant, J.

Relators ask the writ of mandamus to compel respondent to vacate an order made by him refusing to set aside a judgment rendered against them and their codefendant, one Sloman. Judgment was rendered upon a promissory note executed by Sloman, now deceased, and indorsed by the relators. This note was given in place of another executed by the same parties, upon which suit was brought and discontinued by agreement, and the note involved in this suit given. Suit was commenced by filing declaration and rule to plead. These were duly served upon all the defendants in the suit. Sloman was intrusted with the defense of the suit, and employed the firm of Clark, Jones & Bryant, attorneys, to defend. Subsequently judgment was entered by stipulation. Sloman, it appears, gave notice of set-off, but subsequently withdrew this claim. Relators now insist that, though they charge no intentional wrong upon Sloman or the attorneys who represented them in the suit, yet they were not aware of this judgment, and they, therefore, ask to have *652it set aside so that they may interpose Sloman’s defense of set-off. Affidavits of parties and of their attorneys were presented for the consideration of the respondent in determining the motion. He reached the conclusion that justice did not require that he set aside the judgment. It would afford no valuable precedent to state the claims of each side and the evidence upon which they rely for their contentions. We deem it sufficient to say that the setting aside of judgments is a matter resting in the sound discretion of the circuit judge, and we find no reason for holding that the respondent abused that discretion.

The writ is denied.

Montgomery, Ostrander, Hooker,- and Moore, JJ., concurred.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                      11,246,999
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         500,000
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                            15,225,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                          0
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                      36,298,581
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                        36,165,178
<LOANS>                                    119,842,304
<ALLOWANCE>                                  2,407,118
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             186,986,808
<DEPOSITS>                                 164,533,076
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          2,789,736
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        15,276
<OTHER-SE>                                  19,649,720
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             186,986,808
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              3,190,782
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              687,277
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             3,878,059
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           1,325,476
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,325,476
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        2,552,583
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   75,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                941,690
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,804,130
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   1,804,130
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,159,130
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .85
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .80
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    8.49
<LOANS-NON>                                     37,721
<LOANS-PAST>                                    68,750
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                89,098
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             2,330,733
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                     1,385
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            2,407,118
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           266,000
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                      2,141,118
        

</TABLE>
```

```

**Montana Aeromagnetic and Gravity Maps and Data
by
Anne McCafferty, Viki Bankey, and K.C. Brenner
Open-File-Report 98-3331998

Montana Aeromagnetic Anomaly Map

Non-graphical version of this pageTop ||        Montana mag ||     Minerals ||    Geology ||    USGS This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with U.S. Geological Survey editorialStandards. Use of brand names is for descriptive purposes and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S.Geological Survey.
 U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey
This page is <URL: https://pubsdata.usgs.gov/pubs/of/1998/ofr-98-0333/mt.html>**
San Luis Obispo County APCD 207-1 11/5/91

RULE 207. DENIAL OF APPLICATIONS

 (Adopted 8/2/76; Revised 11/5/91) 

In the event of denial of an Authority to Construct, Permit to Operate or Permit to Sell or Rent, 

the Air Pollution Control Officer shall notify the applicant in writing of the reasons therefore. 

Service of this notification may be made in person or by mail, and such service may be proved by 

the written acknowledgment of the persons served or affidavit of the person making the service. 

The Air Pollution Control Officer shall not accept a further application unless the applicant has 

complied with the objections specified by the Air Pollution Control Officer as his reasons for 

denial of the Authority to Construct, the Permit to Operate or the Permit to Sell or Rent.
# L_2018159EN.01003001.xml

| 22.6.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 159/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.6.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 159/30

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2018/892

of 21 June 2018

on the minimum selling price for skimmed milk powder for the 21st partial invitation to tender within the tendering procedure opened by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2080

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (1),

Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1240 of 18 May 2016 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to public intervention and aid for private storage (2), and in particular Article 32 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2080 (3) has opened the sale of skimmed milk powder by a tendering procedure. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2080 (3) has opened the sale of skimmed milk powder by a tendering procedure.

| (2) | In the light of the tenders received for the 21st partial invitation to tender, a minimum selling price should be fixed. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

In the light of the tenders received for the 21st partial invitation to tender, a minimum selling price should be fixed.

| (3) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for the Common Organisation of the Agricultural Markets, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for the Common Organisation of the Agricultural Markets,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the 21st partial invitation to tender for the selling of skimmed milk powder within the tendering procedure opened by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2080, in respect of which the period during which tenders were to be submitted ended on 19 June 2018, the minimum selling price shall be 119,50 EUR/100 kg.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day 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, 21 June 2018.

For the Commission,

On behalf of the President,

Jerzy PLEWA

Director-General

Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 206, 30.7.2016, p. 71.

2

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2080 of 25 November 2016 opening the sale of skimmed milk powder by a tendering procedure (OJ L 321, 29.11.2016, p. 45).

3

---
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 714 

To amend the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 to extend the feral 

swine eradication and control pilot program. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 1, 2023 

Ms. DE LA CRUZ (for herself, Mr. TONY GONZALES of Texas, Mr. FALLON, 

Mr. PFLUGER, Ms. CROCKETT, Mr. MCCAUL, Mr. JACKSON of Texas, 

Ms. SALAZAR, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. CUELLAR, Mr. GOODEN of Texas, Mr. 

ELLZEY, and Mr. MOORE of Alabama) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture 

A BILL 

To amend the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 to 

extend the feral swine eradication and control pilot program. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Feral Swine Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 714 IH

1 SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF FERAL SWINE ERADICATION AND 

2 CONTROL PILOT PROGRAM. 

3 Section 2408(g)(1) of the Agriculture Improvement 

4 Act of 2018 (7 U.S.C. 8351 note; Public Law 115–334) 

5 is amended by striking ‘‘2023’’ and inserting ‘‘2028’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


     We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
333-57441, 333-39898, 333-46140, 333-46144 on Form S-8 and No. 333-55662 on Form
S-3 of Com21, Inc. and its subsidiaries of our reports dated March 26, 2001
appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Com21, Inc. for the year ended
December 31, 2000.


DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

San Jose, California

July 25, 2001
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Women's Wages in Kansas

              																	United States. Women's Bureau. 						*Women's Wages in Kansas : Women's Bureau Bulletin, No. 17*,												Washington: 								Govt. Print. Off., 										1921,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/5342,			accessed on September 20, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JOSAIA SARO, AKA Joe Tagiciverata,

 Petitioner,

 v.

LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 10-73598

Agency No. A077-305-082

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submission Deferred August 8, 2013

Submitted November 1, 2015** 

Pasadena, California

Before: SILVERMAN and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges, and GEORGE, Senior

District Judge.

*** 

FILED

NOV 04 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

 *** The Honorable Lloyd D. George, Senior District Judge for the U.S.

District Court for the District of Nevada, sitting by designation.
Josaia Saro, a native and citizen of Fiji, petitions for review of the Board of

Immigration Appeals’ denial of his 2009 motion to reopen a 2002 in absentia

removal order. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 and deny in part

and dismiss in part the petition for review.

Saro argues that the Board abused its discretion by holding that he received

proper notice of his rescheduled hearing. However, the immigration court satisfied

both the statute and due process by mailing the notice of changed hearing to the

exact address provided by Saro in his written motion to change venue. 8 U.S.C. §

1229a(b)(5)(A); Popa v. Holder, 571 F.3d 890, 897-98 (9th Cir. 2009). 

Nor did the BIA abuse its discretion by holding that Saro’s motion to reopen

to seek adjustment of status was untimely because it was filed seven years after the

final removal order. 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C), formerly codified at 8 U.S.C. §

1229a(c)(6)(C) (2002); 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(1); Matter of Monges-Garcia, 25 I.

& N. Dec. 247, 250-51 (BIA 2010).

We lack jurisdiction to consider, and therefore dismiss, Saro’s ineffective

assistance of counsel claim because it was not raised to the Board. Barron v.

Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004). 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED IN PART AND DISMISSED IN

PART.

2
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 94-7083
MICHAEL W. SLOAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus EDWARD W. MURRAY; VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA; R. F. WILSON; SARA THOMAS; LOU ANN WHITE, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-93-314-R) Submitted: March 21, 1996 Decided: March 29, 1996 Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael W. Sloan, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Elizabeth Shea, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Sloan v. Murray , No. CA-93-314-R (W.D. Va. Nov. 30, 1993 & Aug. 31, 1994). We further deny Appellant's "Motion for Judgment."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.

AFFIRMED
Editorial Note on Part 172
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 172 appear at 61 FR 14482, Apr. 2, 1996; 66 FR 56035, Nov. 6, 2001; 66 FR 66742, Dec. 27, 2001; 68 FR 15355, Mar. 31, 2003; 70 FR 40880, July 15, 2005; 70 FR 67651, Nov. 8, 2005; 70 FR 72074, Dec. 1, 2005; and 81 FR 49896, July 29, 2016.

§ 172.410 Calcium silicate. Calcium silicate, including synthetic calcium silicate, may be safely used in food in accordance with the following prescribed conditions: ( a ) It is used as an anticaking agent in food in an amount not in excess of that reasonably required to produce its intended effect.
( b ) It will not exceed 2 percent by weight of the food, except that it may be present up to 5 percent by weight of baking powder.