alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 576.506 Investment and reinvestment of certain funds. Subject to the requirements of § 576.203, U.S. financial institutions are authorized to invest and reinvest assets blocked pursuant to § 576.201, subject to the following conditions: ( a ) The assets representing such investments and reinvestments are credited to a blocked account or subaccount that is held in the same name at the same U.S. financial institution, or within the possession or control of a U.S. person, but funds shall not be transferred outside the United States for this purpose;
( b ) The proceeds of such investments and reinvestments shall not be credited to a blocked account or subaccount under any name or designation that differs from the name or designation of the specific blocked account or subaccount in which such funds or securities were held; and
( c ) No immediate financial or economic benefit accrues (*e.g.,* through pledging or other use) to a person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to § 576.201(a).
HomeSudan

# Sudan

248 items

        -    Remarks to the Press  		Secretary Antony J. Blinken at a Press Availability	  Antony J. BlinkenMay 26, 2021St. Regis HotelAmman, Jordan 
        -    Media Note  		Travel by U.S. Special Envoy for the Horn of Africa Jeffrey Feltman	  May 14, 2021 
        -    Report  		2020 Report on International Religious Freedom: Sudan	  May 12, 2021 
        -    Media Note  		Travel of Special Envoy for Sudan and South Sudan	  May 8, 2021 
        -    Media Note  		Travel of Special Envoy for the Horn of Africa to Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, and Sudan 	  May 3, 2021 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – April 20, 2021	  Ned PriceApril 20, 2021 
        -    Readout  		Secretary Blinken’s Call with Sudanese PM Hamdok	  April 5, 2021 
        -    Press Statement  		Receipt of Funds for Resolution of Certain Claims Against Sudan	  Antony J. BlinkenMarch 31, 2021 
        -    Report  		2020 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Sudan	  March 30, 2021 
        -    DipNote: Military and Security  		Exploring New Security Partnerships with Sudan	  March 23, 2021 

previous page1…202122232425next page

Back to Top
_______________________________________ __ ___________________ ________________ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order
Lansing, Michigan
February 21, 2008

135406

AUBREY STANLEY, #257143

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

Defendant-Appellee. Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

SC: 135406 CoA: 278194

On order of the Chief Justice, plaintiff-appellant having failed to pay the partial filing fee as required by the order of January 3, 2008 , the Clerk of the Court is hereby directed to close this file.

jm I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.
February 21, 2008
Clerk
**EXHIBIT 35.1**

 

**SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT**

**New Holland Credit Company, LLC**

 

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of New Holland Credit Company, LLC (“NHCC”), as Servicer pursuant to the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of March 1, 2017 (as amended from time to time, the “Sale and Servicing Agreement”) by and among NHCC, CNH Capital Receivables LLC and CNH Equipment Trust 2017-A, does hereby certify that:

 

1.                                      NHCC is Servicer under the Sale and Servicing Agreement.

 

2.                                      The undersigned is duly authorized as required pursuant to the Sale and Servicing Agreement to execute and deliver this Certificate to the Indenture Trustee.

 

3.                                      This Certificate is delivered pursuant to Section 4.9(a) of the Sale and Servicing Agreement and Item 1123 of Regulation AB.

 

4.                                      A review of the Servicer’s activities during the 12 month period ending (and including) December 31, 2018 and of its performance under the Sale and Servicing Agreement has been made under my supervision.

 

5.                                      To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Sale and Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout the 12 month period ending (and including) December 31, 2018.

 

6.                                      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate this 25th day of March, 2019.

 

March 25, 2019

 
|   | By:    | /s/ Brett D. Davis |
|--------|--------|--------------------|
|   | Name:  | Brett D. Davis     |
|   | Title: | President          |

 

----
# C_2005239EN.01001201.xml

| 29.9.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 239/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.9.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 239/12

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.3732 — Procter & Gamble/Gillette)

(2005/C 239/06)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 15 July 2005, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32005M3732. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32005M3732. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex)

---
#### § 21.53 Examination.

The examination of candidates for original appointment as officers to any grade in the Reserve Corps shall consist of a review and evaluation of their academic and other education and their training and experience. In the discretion of the Surgeon General the examination of any such candidate may include an oral interview, a written examination, or both.
# C_2005240EN.01004201.xml

| 30.9.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 240/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.9.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 240/42

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.3938 — CRH/Quester)

(2005/C 240/10)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 15 September 2005, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32005M3938. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32005M3938. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex)

---
# Georgia

164 items

        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – May 22, 2023	  Matthew MillerMay 22, 2023 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – May 16, 2023	  Vedant PatelMay 16, 2023 
        -    Report  		2022 Report on International Religious Freedom: Georgia	  May 15, 2023 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – May 11, 2023	  Vedant PatelMay 11, 2023 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – May 3, 2023	  Vedant PatelMay 3, 2023 
        -    DipNote: Global Women's Issues  		Narrowing the Gender Digital Divide: Empowering Girls Around the Globe to Build Digital Skills for a Lifetime 	  April 27, 2023 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – April 6, 2023	  Vedant PatelApril 6, 2023 
        -    Press Statement  		Public Designations of Mikheil Chinchaladze, Levan Murusidze, Irakli Shengelia, and Valerian Tsertsvadze, Due to Involvement in Significant Corruption	  Antony J. BlinkenApril 5, 2023 
        -    Report  		2022 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Georgia	  March 20, 2023 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – March 9, 2023	  Ned PriceMarch 8, 2023Washington, D.C. 

previous page1…45678…17next page

Back to Top
#### § 583.411 Entities owned by one or more persons whose property and interests in property are blocked.

Persons whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to § 583.201 have an interest in all property and interests in property of an entity in which such persons directly or indirectly own, whether individually or in the aggregate, a 50 percent or greater interest. The property and interests in property of such an entity, therefore, are blocked, and such an entity is a person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to § 583.201, regardless of whether the name of the entity is incorporated into OFAC's Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List (SDN List).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM SOUTHSIDE
BANCSHARES CORP'S ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH DOCUMENT.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          17,924
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                29,900
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     97,895
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          84,036
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            85,841
<LOANS>                                        356,988
<ALLOWANCE>                                      6,192
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 610,293
<DEPOSITS>                                     523,289
<SHORT-TERM>                                     2,949
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              4,804
<LONG-TERM>                                     14,287
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         8,985
<OTHER-SE>                                      55,979
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 610,293
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 30,259
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               10,707
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                 1,261
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                42,227
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              19,101
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              19,857
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           22,370
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       62
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 16,211
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  9,428
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       9,428
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,810
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .82
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .80
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.15
<LOANS-NON>                                      3,189
<LOANS-PAST>                                     1,361
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  4,243
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 6,120
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      536
<RECOVERIES>                                       289
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                6,192
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             6,192
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
#### § 589.409 Credit extended and cards issued by financial institutions to a person whose property and interests in property are blocked.

The prohibition in § 589.201 on dealing in property subject to that section prohibits U.S. financial institutions from performing under any existing credit agreements, including charge cards, debit cards, or other credit facilities issued by a financial institution to a person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to § 589.201.
#### Barbara SOCHANCHAK et al., Appellants, v. ELI LILLY & CO. et al., Appellees.

No. 78-1851.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

May 1, 1979.

Rehearing Denied June 1, 1979.

Lida & Krasnow, Miami, for appellants.

Wicker, Smith, Blomqvist, Davant, McMath, Tutan & O’Hara and Richard A. Sherman; Lane, Mitchell & Harris, Miami, for appellees.

Before HENDRY, HUBBART and KE-HOE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *Diamond v. E. R. Squibb & Sons, Inc.,*366 So.2d 1221 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary Financial information extracted from the
Company's Consolidated Balance sheets and Consolidated Statements of Operations
found on pages 2,3,4 and 5 of the Company's Financial statements for the
year-to-date of each period and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
such financial information.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          19,165
<SECURITIES>                                    32,143
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,972
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               221,155
<PP&E>                                           5,474
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 232,519
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          198,323
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         4,809
<OTHER-SE>                                      21,491
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   232,519
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                20,060
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,434
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   120
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,434
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  7,071
<INCOME-TAX>                                    12,701
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,370
<EPS-BASIC>                                     1.64
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.52


</TABLE>
# C_2005271EN.01000902.xml

| 29.10.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 271/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.10.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 271/9

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fourth Chamber)

of 8 September 2005

in Case C-427/04: Commission of the European Communities v Hellenic Republic (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2001/16/EC - Trans-European networks - Interoperability of the trans-European conventional rail system - Failure to implement)

(2005/C 271/17)

Language of the case: Greek

In Case C-427/04 Commission of the European Communities (Agents: W. Wils and G. Zavvos) v Hellenic Republic (Agent: N. Dafniou) — action under Article 226 EC for failure to comply with obligations, brought on 5 October 2004 — the Court (Fourth Chamber), composed of K. Lenaerts, President of the Chamber, M. Ilešič and E. Levits (Rapporteur), Judges; J. Kokott, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, gave a judgment on 8 September 2005, in which it:

| 1. | Declares that, by not adopting all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2001/16/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 March 2001 on the interoperability of the trans-European conventional rail system, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by not adopting all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2001/16/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 March 2001 on the interoperability of the trans-European conventional rail system, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

| 2. | Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 6 of 08.01.2005

1

---
#### State of Connecticut *v.*Paul J. Sathory.

Maltbie, C. J. Avery, Brown, Jennings and Ells, Js.

Argued November 4

decided November 7, 1941.

*David B. Cohen,*prosecuting attorney, for the state.

*Louis Sperandeo,*for the defendant.

Per Curiam.

The defendant was tried in the City Court of Derby upon a criminal complaint charging him with assault and a failure to support his wife and was found guilty. He has attempted to appeal directly to this court from that judgment, relying upon § 5689 of the General Statutes, which allows an appeal “in any cause or action, except summary process, in the superior court, any court of common pleas or any city court.” This section is found in Title 58 of the General Statutes, which is entitled “Civil Actions,” Rev. 1930, p. 1697. In preceding revisions, the predecessors of the present statute have been placed under a like title for more than a hundred years. Appeals by defendants in criminal cases are governed by § 6492 of the General Statutes, as amended by Cum. Sup. 1939, § 1464e. This provides for an appeal to this court only from a judgment of the Superior or Common Pleas Courts. It and its predecessors have been included in revisions of the statutes for more than a hundred years under titles *342dealing with crime and criminal procedure. No appeal lies to this court from a judgment in a criminal case under the provisions of § 5689, but such appeals must be taken under § 6492 of the General Statutes as amended and the latter section does not permit an appeal from a city court in such a case.

The motion to erase is granted.
Exhibit 32.1

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 of Circuit Research Labs, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, C. Jayson Brentlinger, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|(1) |  | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                                                         
|--- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|    |  |                                                                                                                                                                               
|(2) |  | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company for the periods presented.
|    |  |                                                                                                                                                                               
|    |  |                                                                                                                                                                               





| | /s/ C. Jayson Brentlinger                                                              
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | C. Jayson Brentlinger 
Chief Executive Officer
Circuit Research Labs, Inc.
May 15, 2008
#### John Frank HASS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 80-1448.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Nov. 18, 1981.

Maurice Graham of Brimmell & Graham, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Joy B. Shearer, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm appellant’s conviction. It appears, however, that appellant has been denied access to the factual portions of the presentence investigation report. This report is not part of the record on appeal and we therefore are unable to determine whether disclosure will have an impact on sentencing. We none-the-less are required to vacate the sentence and remand for compliance with Rule 3.713(b), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, and for resentencing.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; AND REMANDED.

BERANEK and HERSEY, JJ., and OWEN, WILLIAM C., Jr., (Associate Judge, retired), concur.