alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# EUR-Lex - 31991R0837 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31991R0837

**Commission Regulation (EEC) No 837/91 of 4 April 1991 amending Regulation (EEC) No 2742/90 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2204/90 **

*
Official Journal L 085 , 05/04/1991 P. 0015 - 0015 *

COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 837/91 of 4 April 1991 amending Regulation (EEC) No 2742/90 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2204/90

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2204/90 of 24 July 1990 laying down additional general rules on the common organization of the market in milk and milk products as regards cheese (1), and in particular the second paragraph of Article 1 and the second subparagraph of Article 3 (3) thereof,

Whereas Article 4 (1) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2742/90 (2) fixes the sum due for quantities of casein and/or caseinates used without authorization having regard to the prices for casein and caseinates recorded on the markets in the second quarter of 1990; whereas the downward trend in those prices during the second half of 1990 requires that sum to be increased;

Whereas the Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 2742/90 gives the maximum percentages of casein and/or caseinates to be incorporated in cheese; whereas Article 2 (2) of that Regulation provides that the Annex may be amended to take account of reasoned applications providing evidence that there is a technical need for the addition of casein or caseinates; whereas the examination of two applications has enabled such a need to be demonstrated as regards powdered processed cheese and grated processed cheese; whereas that Annex should be supplemented accordingly;

Whereas the Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its chairman,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1

Regulation (EEC) No 2742/90 is hereby amended as follows:

1. Article 4 (1) is replaced by the following:

'1. The sum due in accordance with Article 3 (3) of Regulation (EEC) No 2204/90 shall be ECU 350 per 100 kilograms of casein and/or caseinates, having regard to the price for casein and caseinates recorded on the markets in the fourth quarter of 1990.'

2. The following is added to the Annex:

'- grated processed cheese covered by CN code ex 0406 20: 5 % (1)

- processed cheese in powdered form covered by CN code ex 0406 20: 5 % (1).

(1) Manufactured by a continuous process, without addition of already manufactured processed cheese.' Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 4 April 1991. For the Commission

Ray MAC SHARRY

Member of the Commission (1) OJ No L 201, 31. 7. 1990, p. 7. (2) OJ No L 264, 27. 9. 1990, p. 20.
Page 1 of 3

Disposition Comments

Docket No: FAA-2013-0524 These comments are in

Directorate ID: 2012-SW-084-AD response to an SNPRM

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

Next Step: FRAN SNPRM

 No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are 

required.

No Has the referenced service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? If yes, 

list latest revision and attach a copy. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously 

published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance.

Instructions: Summarize all comments by issue (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of 

each issue. All comments relating to the same issue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues 

from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and 

describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA-IR-M-8040.1C Chapter 9.

ISSUE 1: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD: 

If NO, we don’t agree because 

ISSUE 2: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD:
Page 2 of 3

If NO, we don’t agree because 

For additional issues, double-click here
Page 3 of 3

Signature Section

Signature indicates concurrence with this action.

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

ASE Printed Name: Date

Branch Manager Date
i i i i i i

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-10-00361-CR

Andre DENNIS,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 227th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2009-CR-5269A

Honorable Philip A. Kazen, Jr., Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Rebecca Simmons, Justice

Delivered and Filed: June 16, 2010

DISMISSED

Defendant Andre Dennis pled nolo contendere to aggravated robbery and was sentenced

within the terms of a plea bargain. The trial court’s Certification of Defendant’s Right of Appeal

states: “the defendant has waived the right of appeal” and that this “is a plea-bargain case, and the

defendant has NO right of appeal.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). Defendant filed a pro se notice

of appeal in which he asserts the trial court overruled his motion to suppress. “In a plea bargain case
04-10-00361-CR

-2-

. . . a defendant may appeal only: (A) those matters that were raised by written motion filed and ruled

on before trial, or (B) after getting the trial court’s permission to appeal.” TEX.R.APP.P. 25.2(a)(2).

The clerk’s record does not contain a written motion ruled on before trial nor does it indicate the trial

court granted defendant permission to appeal. 

This court must dismiss an appeal “if a certification that shows the defendant has the right

of appeal has not been made a part of the record.” TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). Accordingly, on May

24, 2010, this court issued an order stating this appeal would be dismissed pursuant to Rule 25.2(d)

unless an amended trial court certification that shows defendant has the right of appeal was made

part of the appellate record. See Daniels v. State,110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003,

order); TEX.R. APP. P. 25.2(d); 37.1. On May 25, 2010, defendant’s appellate counsel filed a letter

stating “this court has no choice but to dismissthe appeal.” In light of the record presented, we agree

with defendant’s counsel that Rule 25.2(d) requires this court to dismiss this appeal. Accordingly,

this appeal is dismissed.

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH
Exhibit 32



                        President's Written Certification
                             Of Financial Statements
                       Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Statute 1350



     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Statute 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned hereby certifies in his capacity
as president of 4net Software, Inc. (the "Company") that

     (a)  the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-QSB for the period
          ended December 31, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of
          Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and

     (b)  the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition of the Company at the end
          of such period and the results of operations of the Company for such
          period.



Dated: February 10, 2006



                                            /s/ Steven N. Bronson
                                            ----------------------------------
                                            Steven N. Bronson, President
### Page 1 of 3 **Disposition Comments Docket No:**  

### FAA - 2013 - 0524 These comments are in **Directorate ID:** 

### 2012 - SW - 084 - AD response to an SNPRM Originating Office Tracking No.: **Next Step:** FRAN SNPRM 

### N o C omments/Only

Supportive Comments Received

– If this box is checked, no signatures are required. No 

### Has the reference d service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? I f ye s, lis t latest revision and attach a cop y. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance. Instructions: Summarize all comments **by issue** (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of each issue. **All comments relating to the sam e issue should be discussed together.**  Do not list all of the issues from one commenter togeth er. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA - IR- M - 8040.1C Chapter 9. **ISSUE 1:** Select one o

f the following : If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD: If **NO** , we don’t agree because **ISSUE 2**  **:** Select one of the following :

If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because Make the following changes to the AD:

### Page 2 of 3

If **NO** , we don’t agree because **For additional issues, do uble**  **- click**  **here**

### Page 3 of 3 **S ignature Section**  Signature indicates concurrence with this action. Originating Office Tracking No.: **ASE** Printed Name **: Date** 

**Branch M anager**  **Date**
IV 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 928 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that a National 

Historically Black Colleges and Universities Week should be established. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 19, 2006 

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas (for herself, Mr. WILSON of South 

Carolina, Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania, and Mr. HALL) submitted the 

following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Education 

and the Workforce 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that 

a National Historically Black Colleges and Universities 

Week should be established. 

Whereas there are 105 historically Black colleges and universities in the United States; 

Whereas historically Black colleges and universities provide 

the quality education essential to full participation in a 

complex, highly technological society; 

Whereas historically Black colleges and universities have a 

rich heritage and have played a prominent role in the history of the United States; 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 928 IH 

Whereas historically Black colleges and universities have allowed many underprivileged students to attain their full 

potential through higher education; 

Whereas the achievements and goals of historically Black colleges and universities are deserving of national recognition; and 

Whereas the Senate, in S. Res. 528 passed on July 13, 2006, 

designated the week beginning September 10, 2006, as 

‘‘National Historically Black Colleges and Universities 

Week’’: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) recognizes the achievements and goals of 

3 historically Black colleges and universities in the 

4 United States; 

5 (2) supports the designation of an appropriate 

6 week as ‘‘National Historically Black Colleges and 

7 Universities Week’’; and 

8 (3) requests the President to issue a proclama9 tion designating such a week, and calling on the peo10 ple of the United States and interested groups to ob11 serve such week with appropriate ceremonies, activi12 ties, and programs to demonstrate support for his13 torically Black colleges and universities. 

Æ 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
Skip Navigation

#         Archive-It      

Login

      - HOME
      - EXPLORE
      - LEARN MORE
      - CONTACT US

### The leading web archiving service for collecting and accessing cultural heritage on the web 

Built at the Internet Archive

        - Explore
        - Federal Depository Library Program Web Archive
        - Alaska Federal Executive Association

#  Alaska Federal Executive Association 

**Collected by:** Federal Depository Library Program Web Archive 

**Archived since:**Jan, 2019

**Description:**
The Alaska Federal Executive Association (AFEA) is an organization comprised of Department or Agency Heads or their delegates within the state of Alaska. The purpose of the AFEA is to improve coordination of Government activity within Alaska through cooperative action between agencies. The AFEA was created to focus on general management, public & community affairs, and regional comprehensive planning but is not limited to these activities. In addition, the AFEA has been tasked with assisting agencies by directing its cooperative activity to specific programs of current Presidential interest.

**Subject:**    	    Government - US Federal,     	    American History & Political Science

**Creator:**    	    Alaska Federal Executive Association

**Language:**    	    English

**Collector:**    	    U.S. Government Publishing Office

## Narrow Your Results

### 

            There are no further ways to narrow your results.           

Sites for this collection are listed below. Narrow your results at left, or enter a search query below to		      find a site, specific URL or to search the text of archived webpages.
Clear

              - Sites
              - Search Page Text

Page 1 of 1  (1 Total Results)

**Sort By:**
                - Title (A-Z)
                - Title (Z-A)
                - URL (A-Z)
                - URL (Z-A)

### URL:     http://www.fea.gov/

	  	Loading Wayback Capture Info...	  

Loading video data...

Page 1 of 1  (1 Total Results)

Archive It

#### Archive-It 

*Built at the Internet Archive*
2014 Archive-ItThe leading web archiving service for collecting and accessing  cultural heritage on the web 

      - Home
      - Learn More         - About Archive-It
        - News/Press
        - Meet the Team
        - Publications
      - Contact Us
§ 1250.84 Water in galleys and medical care spaces. ( a ) Potable water, hot and cold, shall be available in the galley and pantry except that, when potable water storage is inadequate, nonpotable water may be piped to the galley for deck washing and in connection with garbage disposal. Any tap discharging nonpotable water which is installed for deck washing purposes shall not be more than 18 inches above the deck and shall be distinctly marked “For deck washing only”.
( b ) In the case of existing vessels on which heat treated wash water has been used for the washing of utensils prior to the effective date of the regulations in this part, such water may continue to be so used provided controls are employed to insure the heating of all water to at least 170 °F before discharge from the heater.
( c ) Potable water, hot and cold, shall be available in medical care spaces for hand-washing and for medical care purposes excluding hydrotherapy.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1072 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1072

    To extend the temporary suspension of duty on cases for certain 
                          children's products.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 18, 2005

Mrs. Feinstein introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To extend the temporary suspension of duty on cases for certain 
                          children's products.

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

SECTION 1. CASES FOR CERTAIN CHILDREN'S PRODUCTS.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.01.81 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States is amended by striking ``12/31/2006'' and 
inserting ``12/31/2008''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         732,989
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,004,788
<ALLOWANCES>                                    44,372
<INVENTORY>                                  2,176,892
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             8,693,998
<PP&E>                                      11,398,999
<DEPRECIATION>                               6,210,917
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              45,645,925
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       12,870,037
<BONDS>                                     30,461,726
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       20,463,381
<PREFERRED>                                          5
<COMMON>                                         1,092
<OTHER-SE>                                (16,392,573)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                45,645,925
<SALES>                                      4,184,287
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,463,616
<CGS>                                        2,847,232
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,841,136
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            44,212,267
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                15,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             788,019
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (42,592,806)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (42,592,806)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (42,592,806)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (3.97)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (3.97)
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 302 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Steven M. Goldschein, Chief Financial Officer of Systemax
Inc., certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Systemax
Inc. (the registrant);

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain
any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact
necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which
such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by
this annual report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other
financial information included in this annual report, fairly present in all
material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows
of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual
report;

4. The registrants other certifying officer and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures
(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant
and (except as disclosed in Item 9A of this annual report on Form 10-K) we
have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused
such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
reasonably ensure that material information relating to the registrant,
including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within
these entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is
being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants
disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions
about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end
of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrants
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
registrants fourth fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants control over
financial reporting.

5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee
of the registrants board of directors:

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
design or operation of internal control over financial reporting known to me
which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management
or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal
controls over financial reporting.

Date: April 15, 2005

/s/ STEVEN M. GOLDSCHEIN
Steven M. Goldschein, Chief Financial Officer