alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2016305EN.01000701.xml

| 22.8.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 305/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.8.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/7

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 16 June 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Supreme Court of the Netherlands)) — Universal Music International Holding BV v Michael Tétreault Schilling, Irwin Schwartz, Josef Brož

(Case C-12/15) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 - Special jurisdiction - Article 5(3) - Tort, delict or quasi-delict - Harmful event - Lawyer’s negligence in drafting the contract - Place where the harmful event occurred))

(2016/C 305/10)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Universal Music International Holding BV

Applicant:

Defendants: Michael Tétreault Schilling, Irwin Schwartz, Josef Brož

Defendants:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | Article 5(3) of Regulation No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as meaning that, in a situation such as that in the main proceedings, the ‘place where the harmful event occurred’ may not be construed as being, failing any other connecting factors, the place in a Member State where the damage occurred, when that damage consists exclusively of financial damage which materialises directly in the applicant’s bank account and is the direct result of an unlawful act committed in another Member State. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Article 5(3) of Regulation No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as meaning that, in a situation such as that in the main proceedings, the ‘place where the harmful event occurred’ may not be construed as being, failing any other connecting factors, the place in a Member State where the damage occurred, when that damage consists exclusively of financial damage which materialises directly in the applicant’s bank account and is the direct result of an unlawful act committed in another Member State.

| 2. | In the context of the determination of jurisdiction under Regulation No 44/2001, the court seised must assess all the evidence available to it, including, where appropriate, the arguments put forward by the defendant. |
| --- | --- |

2.

In the context of the determination of jurisdiction under Regulation No 44/2001, the court seised must assess all the evidence available to it, including, where appropriate, the arguments put forward by the defendant.

---

(1)  OJ C 89, 16.3.2015.

1

---
IB 

Union Calendar No. 505 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8112 

[Report No. 118–606] 

To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to further require certain 

additional provider screening under the Medicaid program. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 23, 2024 

Mr. D’ESPOSITO introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

JULY 23, 2024 

Reported with an amendment, committed to the Committee of the Whole 

House on the State of the Union, and ordered to be printed 

[Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the part printed in italic] 

[For text of introduced bill, see copy of bill as introduced on April 13, 2024] 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 8112 RH

A BILL 

To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to further 

require certain additional provider screening under the 

Medicaid program. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 8112 RH

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

3 SECTION 1. MEDICAID PROVIDER SCREENING REQUIRE4 MENTS. 

5 Section 1902(kk)(1) of the Social Security Act (42 

6 U.S.C. 1396a(kk)(1)) is amended— 

7 (1) by striking ‘‘The State’’ and inserting: 

8 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The State’’; and 

9 (2) by adding at the end the following new sub10 paragraph: 

11 ‘‘(B) ADDITIONAL PROVIDER SCREENING.— 

12 Beginning January 1, 2027, as part of the en13 rollment (or reenrollment or revalidation of en14 rollment) of a provider or supplier under this 

15 title, and not less frequently than monthly dur16 ing the period that such provider or supplier is 

17 so enrolled, the State conducts a check of any 

18 database or similar system developed pursuant 

19 to section 6401(b)(2) of the Patient Protection 

20 and Affordable Care Act to determine whether 

21 the Secretary has terminated the participation of 

22 such provider or supplier under title XVIII, or 

23 whether any other State has terminated the par24 ticipation of such provider or supplier under 

25 such other State’s State plan under this title (or 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
4 

•HR 8112 RH

1 waiver of the plan), or such other State’s State 

2 child health plan under title XXI (or waiver of 

3 the plan).’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS

ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
Union Calendar No. 505 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8112 

[Report No. 118–606] 

A BILL 

To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to 

screening under the Medicaid program. further require certain additional provider 

JULY 23, 2024 

Reported with an amendment, committed to the Comand ordered to be printed mittee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
#### § 1.1442-1 Withholding of tax on foreign corporations.

For regulations concerning the withholding of tax at source under section 1442 in the case of foreign corporations, foreign governments, international organizations, foreign tax-exempt corporations, or foreign private foundations, see §§ 1.1441-1 through 1.1441-9.

[T.D. 8734, 62 FR 53466, Oct. 14, 1997]
U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Management System 

1200 New Jersey Ave., S.E. 

Washington, DC 20590 "•:'.'·' lUlJ 

Petition for Exemption Under 14 CFR § 11.81 

to Atlow Commercial Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems 

Petitioner: 

William J. Powless 

PO Box456 

207- S.-Perry St. ...... . 

Medora, Indiana 47260 

Tel. 812.966.0079 

Cell. 812.216.6469 

Email: BikerBill63@comcast.net 

Sections William J. Powless seeking relief: 

FAA Modernization and Reform Act of2012, PL 112-95 FEB. 14, 2012, Section 333, 14 

CFR Part21, subpart H, 14 CFR Part 61.113(a} and (b), 14 CFT Part 91: 91.103(b)(2), 

91,105, 91.109, 91.119; 91.121,91:151, 1.405, 91.401, 91.409,91.417 

1, William J. Powless, am seeking exemption in order to operate small 

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUAS) for commercial purposes and to comply with FAA 

regulations. · · 

Commercial purposes include: aerial videography and photography services, agriculture 

surveying, search and rescue assistance, real estate, cinematography, corporate videos, 

sporting events, and special events. 

The use of sUAS technology for these commercial purposes positively effect the public 

interest. Human life is not required on board sUAS reducing risk of manned aircraft 

accidents, environment emissions are reduced, and new markets are emerging increasing 

local economies. · 

sUAS aircraft used in these commercial operations will be the DJI Phantom3 Advanced. The DJI 

Phantom3 Advanced weighs less than 55 pounds, has GPS abilities, and is a common aircraft 

used in similar exempt businesses. 

The aircraft\will be registered in accordance with 14 CFR Part 48 and not used for commercial 

purposes until after March 31, 2016. 

!,William J. Powless, will require maintenance and inspections to be 

performed based on the requirements af the manufacturer ta maintain air worthiness, All 

repair atld maintenance will be performed by qualified personnel. 

I, William J Powless,wish to be a·good steward of this emerging technology 

and will require sUAS training and test flights of aU Pilots in Command (PIC) before any 

commercial flight, and will conduct all flights inaccordance with the FAA standards and 

regulations set forth by the exemption if granted. 
I, William J. Powless, respectfully request that the FAA grant its exemption 

within it's authority pursuant to the Federal Aviation Act, 85 P.L. 726 (1958). 

Respectfully, 

PO 

!d~ Box456 

207 S. Perry St. 

Medora, Indiana 47260 

Submitted December 21, 2015
Editorial Note on Part 870
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 870 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 870.2920 Telephone electrocardiograph transmitter and receiver. ( a ) *Identification.* A telephone electrocardiograph transmitter and receiver is a device used to condition an electrocardiograph signal so that it can be transmitted via a telephone line to another location. This device also includes a receiver that reconditions the received signal into its original format so that it can be displayed. The device includes devices used to transmit and receive pacemaker signals.
( b ) *Classification.* Class II (performance standards).
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration

          - [TA-W-71,621]

Pursuant to Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on July 9, 2009 in response to a worker petition filed on behalf of workers of Sealy Mattress Company, Clarion, Pennsylvania.

The petitioning group of workers is covered by an earlier petition (TA-W-71,415) filed on June 26, 2009 that is the subject of an ongoing investigation for which a determination has not yet been issued. Consequently, further investigation in this case would serve no purpose, and the investigation under this petition has been terminated.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 14th day of July 2009.

Richard Church,

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. E9-18039 Filed 7-28-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
§ 1.108-4 Election to reduce basis of depreciable property under section 108(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code . ( a ) *Description.* An election under section 108(b)(5) is available whenever a taxpayer excludes discharge of indebtedness income (COD income) from gross income under sections 108(a)(1)(A), (B), or (C) (concerning title 11 cases, insolvency, and qualified farm indebtedness, respectively). See sections 108(d)(2) and (3) for the definitions of *title 11 case* and *insolvent.* See section 108(g)(2) for the definition of *qualified farm indebtedness.*
( b ) *Time and manner.* To make an election under section 108(b)(5), a taxpayer must enter the appropriate information on Form 982, *Reduction of Tax Attributes Due to Discharge of Indebtedness (and Section 1082 Basis Adjustment),* and attach the form to the timely filed (including extensions) Federal income tax return for the taxable year in which the taxpayer has COD income that is excluded from gross income under section 108(a). An election under this section may be revoked only with the consent of the Commissioner.
( c ) *Effective date.* This section applies to elections concerning discharges of indebtedness occurring on or after October 22, 1998.
[T.D. 8787, 63 FR 56562, Oct. 22, 1998]
(logo) ncbNational Cooperative Bank 2011 Crystal DriveSuite, 800Arlington, VA 22202 February 29, 2016 Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc. as DepositorAttn: AJ Sfarra375 Park Avenue, 2nd FloorJ0127-023New York, NY 10152 RE: Annual Statement as to Compliance WFCM 2015 LC22  Dear Sir/Madam: In accordance with the Pooling and Servicing Agreement entered into in connection with the issuance of the Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2015-LC22, as an authorized officer of National Cooperative Bank, N.A., formerly NCB, FSB (the “NCB Master Servicer”), I hereby certify pursuant to Section 11.12 thereof that: a. A review of the activities of the NCB Master Servicer during the preceding calendar year (the “Reporting Period”) and of its performance under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement has been made under my supervision. b. To the best of my knowledge, based on these reviews, the NCB Master Servicer has fulfilled all obligations under this agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period. Please note that the annual financial statement will be sent under separate cover on or before March 31, 2016.  Best regards,/s/ Karyn MannKaryn MannSenior Vice President, Investor ComplianceNational Cooperative Bank, N.A.
Exhibit 35.6



|     |  |                                                                                                             
|---- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|LOGO |  | Commercial Mortgage Servicing D1050-084, 8th Floor 401 South Tryon Street
Charlotte, NC 28202 1-800-326-1334

ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE

Reference is hereby made to that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of August 1, 2015, by and among DEUTSCHE
MORTGAGE & ASSET RECEIVING CORPORATION, as Depositor, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Master Servicer, LNR PARTNERS, LLC, as Special Servicer, WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee, and WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION, as Certificate Administrator, Paying Agent and Custodian, and PARK BRIDGE LENDER SERVICES LLC, as Operating Advisor with respect to Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, COMM 2015-CCRE24 (the Agreement). Capitalized
terms used herein not otherwise defined shall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.

Pursuant to Section 10.11 of this
Agreement, I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice President of Commercial Mortgage Services do hereby certify that:



| | 1. | A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the period from January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2017 (the Reporting Period), and of its performance per the Agreement during such
period has been made under my supervision, and
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 28th day of
February 2018.



|                        
|------------------------
|LOGO                    
|Daniel Bober            
|Executive Vice President
|Wells Fargo Bank        



|                       |  |     
|---------------------- |  | ----
|Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. |  | LOGO
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A24A1346. SIDNEY WENDELL LAMB v. THE STATE.

In 2022, Sidney Wendell Lamb pled guilty to possession of cocaine with intent to

distribute. OnFebruary7,2024,the trial courtenteredanamendedjudgmentof convictionand

sentence. On April 11, 2024, Lamb, proceeding pro se, filed a notice of appeal. We lack

jurisdiction because the appeal is untimely. 

To be timely, a notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days after entry of the order on

appeal. OCGA § 5-6-38 (a). The proper and timely filing of a notice of appeal is an absolute

requirement to confer jurisdiction on this Court. Davis v. State, 330 Ga. App. 711, 711 (769

SE2d 133) (2015). Lamb’s notice of appeal was filed 64 days after entry of the trial court’s

amendedjudgment.The certificate ofservice attachedto thenotice is datedFebruary 27, 2024

— before the expiration of Lamb’s 30-day appeal period — but the notice was not stamped

“filed” by the trial court clerk until April 11. We recognize that, as a pro se prisoner, Lamb

likely depends upon correctional personnel to dispatch his mail. Nevertheless, even though

Lambmay have acted promptly afterreceiving the trial court’s order, “hisfiling did not get to

the superior courtin time. Sowe have no jurisdiction over his appeal.”Ebeling v. State, 355Ga.

App. 469, 470 (844 SE2d 518) (2020). 

Accordingly, this appeal is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

April 24, 2024

04/24/2024
# C_2015056EN.01000901.xml

| 16.2.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 56/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.2.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 56/9

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Østre Landsret (Denmark) lodged on 28 November 2014 — Envirotec Denmark ApS v Skatteministeriet

(Case C-550/14)

(2015/C 056/11)

Language of the case: Danish

Referring court

Referring court

Østre Landsret

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Envirotec Denmark ApS

Applicant:

Defendant: Skatteministeriet

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Are bars consisting of a random, rough fusion of various scrapped, gold-bearing metal objects covered by the terms ‘gold material or semi-manufactured products’ within the meaning of Article 198(2) of the VAT Directive (1)?

1

It can be taken as established that the bars consist of a random, rough fusion of various scrapped, gold-bearing metal objects and they can contain, in addition to gold, also organic materials, such as teeth, rubber, PVC and metals/materials such as copper, tin, nickel, amalgam, the remains of batteries containing mercury and lead, and various toxic substances, etc. There is thus no question of it being a gold-bearing product which is being processed directly into a finished product. On the other hand, the bar is a processed product (a fusion), which — as a form of intermediate stage — is created with a view to extracting the gold content. The bars have a high gold content, on average between 500 and 600 thousandths, and thus substantially over 325 thousandths gold. After extraction the gold content is to be used to manufacture (gold/gold-bearing) products.

In answering the question, it can also be taken as established that the bars cannot directly form part of other products, since first the bars must be subjected to processing in which the metals are separated and the non-metals and hazardous substances etc., are melted away/excreted.

---

(1)  Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).

1

---
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 144 (Wednesday, July 29, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 37738]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-18039]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-71,621]


Sealy Mattress Company, Clarion, PA; Notice of Termination of 
Investigation

    Pursuant to Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an 
investigation was initiated on July 9, 2009 in response to a worker 
petition filed on behalf of workers of Sealy Mattress Company, Clarion, 
Pennsylvania.
    The petitioning group of workers is covered by an earlier petition 
(TA-W-71,415) filed on June 26, 2009 that is the subject of an ongoing 
investigation for which a determination has not yet been issued. 
Consequently, further investigation in this case would serve no 
purpose, and the investigation under this petition has been terminated.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 14th day of July 2009.
Richard Church,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-18039 Filed 7-28-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
AFS-11-018-E 

November 22, 2010 

 Exemption No. 10169 

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2010-1061 

Mr. Gerald Yagen 

President 

Aviation Institute of Maintenance 

4455 South Boulevard 

Virginia Beach, VA 23452-1159 

Dear Mr. Yagen: 

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your request for exemption. It transmits our 

decision, explains its basis, and gives you the date it ends. 

The Basis for Our Decision 

By letter dated October 13, 2010, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 

on behalf of Technical Education Services, Inc., d.b.a. Aviation Institute of Maintenance 

(AIM) (operating under Air Agency Certificate X88T58K) for an exemption from § 65.75(a) 

of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) to the extent necessary to allow AIM to 

allow students enrolled in its part 147 aviation maintenance technician school to take the 

aviation mechanic written tests (aviation mechanic general (AMG), aviation mechanic 

airframe (AMA), and aviation mechanic powerplant (AMP)) after completing the 

corresponding portion of the curriculum, prior to meeting the experience requirements 

of § 65.77. 

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a precedent, and any 

delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to AIM. 

The FAA has issued grants of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to 

those presented in your petition. In Grant of Exemption No. 8845 (copy enclosed), the FAA 

found that testing immediately after learning was a universally accepted instructional 
2 

principle that reinforces learning. Therefore, we allow the petitioner to test students 

immediately after successfully completing the general curriculum but before the requirements 

of § 65.77. 

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that— 

 they do not differ materially from those presented by the petitioner in the enclosed grant 

of exemption; 

 the reasons stated by the FAA for granting the enclosed exemption also apply to the 

situation you present; and 

 a grant of exemption is in the public interest. 

Our Decision 

Under the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator 

has delegated to me, I hereby grant Technical Education Services, Inc., d.b.a. Aviation 

Institute of Maintenance (AIM) (operating under Air Agency Certificate X88T58K) an 

exemption from 14 CFR § 65.75(a) to the extent necessary to allow students enrolled in its 

part 147 aviation maintenance technician school to take the aviation mechanic written tests 

(AMG, AMA, and AMP) after completing the corresponding portion of the curriculum, prior 

to meeting the experience requirements of § 65.77. 

This exemption terminates on November 30, 2012, unless sooner superseded or rescinded. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

John W. McGraw 

Acting Director, Flight Standards Service 

Enclosure