alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Deputy Secretary Sherman’s Meeting with Lao Deputy Prime Minister Dr. Kikeo

# 									Deputy Secretary Sherman’s Meeting with Lao Deputy Prime Minister Dr. Kikeo							

Readout

Office of the Spokesperson

June 10, 2022

The following is attributable to Spokesperson Ned Price:****

Deputy Secretary Wendy Sherman met today with Dr. Kikeo Khaykhamphithoune, Deputy Prime Minister of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, in Vientiane to discuss how the United States can best support Laos’ economic development and recovery from the pandemic.  The Deputy Secretary emphasized the U.S. prioritization of its relationship with Laos based on a shared commitment to common interests, including respect for ASEAN centrality, the rule of law, human rights, and regional stability.  The Deputy Secretary highlighted U.S.-Laos growing relationship and efforts to further expand our bilateral ties.  Deputy Secretary Sherman also conveyed educational cooperation is a top priority for the United States. The Deputy Secretary announced an additional $45 million in funding from the United States to survey and clear unexploded ordnance, bringing the total to more than $240 million just since 2016.

Tags

Bureau of East Asian and Pacific AffairsDeputy Secretary TripDeputy Secretary of StateLaosOffice of the Spokesperson

Back to Top
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Deputy Secretary Sherman’s Meeting with Australian FM Penny Wong

# 									Deputy Secretary Sherman’s Meeting with Australian FM Penny Wong							

Readout

Office of the Spokesperson

August 8, 2022

The below is attributable to Spokesperson Ned Price:

Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman met today with Australian Minister of Foreign Affairs Penny Wong to discuss U.S. and Australian efforts in support of a free and open Indo-Pacific region while also deepening economic engagement in the region through the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework. They discussed the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) recent actions that undermine international peace and stability and reaffirmed their commitment to maintaining peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. They also highlighted their commitment to the highest possible nonproliferation standards in carrying out their objectives with the United Kingdom through the AUKUS partnership. Deputy Secretary Sherman and Foreign Minister Wong reiterated the importance of holding Russia accountable for its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, including on assistance to Ukraine and in imposing sanctions aimed at holding Russia to account. Deputy Secretary Sherman and Foreign Minister Wong also discussed recent U.S. and Australian engagements with Pacific Island countries and future opportunities to collaborate with the region to advance Pacific Island priorities. Finally, they addressed continued coordination to combat COVID-19 and build stronger global health security under the COVID-19 Global Action Plan.

Tags

AustraliaBureau of East Asian and Pacific AffairsDeputy Secretary of StateIndo-PacificOffice of the Spokesperson

Back to Top
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Deputy Secretary Sherman’s Meeting with Republic of Korea President Moon

# 									Deputy Secretary Sherman’s Meeting with Republic of Korea President Moon							

Readout

Office of the Spokesperson

July 22, 2021

The below is attributable to Spokesperson Ned Price:

Deputy Secretary of State Wendy R. Sherman met with Republic of Korea (ROK) President Moon Jae-in today in Seoul.  Deputy Secretary Sherman and President Moon reaffirmed the U.S.-ROK Alliance as the linchpin of peace, security, and prosperity in Northeast Asia, the Indo-Pacific region, and beyond. They discussed ongoing cooperation to combat the COVID-19 pandemic and support our robust trade and investment ties to advance our joint economic prosperity.  The Deputy Secretary and the President also discussed the importance of cooperation to combat the climate crisis and promote transparency, human rights, and the rule of law in the region and around the world.  Deputy Secretary Sherman and President Moon agreed on the importance of consultations to address Democratic People’s Republic of Korea issues.

Tags

Bureau of East Asian and Pacific AffairsDeputy Secretary TripDeputy Secretary of StateOffice of the SpokespersonSouth Korea

Back to Top
699 A.2d 729

#### Richard M. TECHTMANN and Monica Techtmann, Petitioners, v. Roy J. HOWIE and Robert Gray’s Sons Inc., et al., Respondents.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

Sept. 16, 1997.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 16th day of September, 1997, it is ordered that Petitioner’s Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED; the order of the Superior Court affirming the order of the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County transferring venue from Philadelphia County to Bucks County is REVERSED; and this matter is REMANDED to the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County for further proceedings consistent with this court’s opinion in *Cheeseman v. Lethal Exterminators, Inc.,*No. 56 E.D. Appeal Docket 1996, and *Forman v. Rossman,*et al., No. 57 E.D. Appeal Docket 1996, — Pa.-, 701 A.2d 156 (Opinion issued August 22, 1997).
#### Robert Anthony YANETTA, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 75-182.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Sept. 23, 1975.

*24Carling Stedman, Stephen L. Raskin, Miami, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Lance R. Stelzer, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before PEARSON, HAVERFIELD and NATHAN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Robert Yanetta raises two issues on appeal from his conviction following a jury trial and sentence to five years in the state penitentiary on the charge of aggravated battery.

He claims as error that the prosecutor made several comments in closing argument which were prejudicial and grounds for a mistrial. The objection by Yanetta’s attorney was overruled and the motion for mistrial denied. From reading the record, including closing argument, we are of the opinion that the comments by the prosecutor were not so highly prejudicial as to require reversal. See *Wilson v. State,*Fla.App.1974, 305 So.2d 50, 52 and cases cited therein.

 As his second point, Yanetta contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion for production of the victim’s FBI report sheet. The record reflects that the motion was made for the first time during trial, and that the court did not deny the request, but rather that the report sheet was found to be unavailable. A defendant is properly allowed discovery as to the criminal records of the State’s witnesses to the extent that the information is in the actual or constructive possession of the State, not limited to that in the physical possession of the State Attorney’s office, and including data obtainable from the FBI. *State v. Coney,*Fla.1973, 294 So.2d 82, 86, interpreting *State v. Crawford*Fla. 1972, 257 So.2d 898. However, a defendant should not be permitted to so employ the pretrial discovery procedures as to require the State Attorney to disclose to him information or documents which by the exercise of due diligence, are readily-available to him by subpoena or deposition. *State v. Coney,*Fla.App.1973, 272 So.2d 550, 553. Therefore, since demand for the FBI report sheet was not timely made, and since it was not available when it was demanded, no error has been shown.

Affirmed.
# C_2006036EN.01001801.xml

| 11.2.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 36/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.2.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 36/18

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 17 November 2005

in Case C-131/05: Commission of the European Communities v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (1)

1

(Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Directives 79/409/EEC and 92/43/EEC)

(2006/C 36/35)

Language of the case: English

In Case C-131/05, action for failure to fulfil obligations brought on 21 March 2005 pursuant to Article 226 EC, Commission of the European Communities (Agent: M. van Beek, assisted by F. Louis and A. Capobianco, lawyers) v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (Agent: S. Nwaokolo) — the Court (Fifth Chamber Chamber), composed of R. Schintgen, acting for the President of the Fifth Chamber, R. Silva de Lapuerta and J. Klučka (Rapporteur), Judges; J. Kokott, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, gave a judgment on 17 November 2005, the operative part of which is as follows:

Commission of the European Communities

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

| 1. | By not adopting, within the prescribed period, all the measures necessary to comply with Article 6(1) of Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds and with Article 12(2) and Article 13(1), both read in conjunction with Article 2(1), of Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under these Directives. |
| --- | --- |

1.

By not adopting, within the prescribed period, all the measures necessary to comply with Article 6(1) of Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds and with Article 12(2) and Article 13(1), both read in conjunction with Article 2(1), of Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under these Directives.

| 2. | The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is ordered to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is ordered to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 132 of 28.5.2005.

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                            5088
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      227
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  5321
<PP&E>                                            7648
<DEPRECIATION>                                    3363
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    9626
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              332
<BONDS>                                           5812
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                        3482
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      9626
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 19461
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     1018
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   593
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 791
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  17059
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              17059
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     60
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     17119
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   121.05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   121.05
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit
32   CERTIFICATIONSPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  In
connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Hudson United Bancorp (the
Company) for the fiscal year ended 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Kenneth T. Neilson, as
Chief Executive Officer of the Company , and James W. Nall, as Chief Financial
Officer, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (section) 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the
best of his knowledge:  (1)The Report
fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  (2)Information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.   /s/Kenneth
  T. NeilsonKenneth T. NeilsonChief Executive OfficerMarch 12, 2004/s/James W. NallJames W. NallChief Financial OfficerMarch 12, 2004
# C_2005237EN.01000601.xml

| 27.9.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 237/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.9.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 237/6

---

Corrigendum to the call for proposals (No VIII-2006/01) — Budget line 4020 ‘Contributions to European political parties’

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 141 of 10 June 2005
  )

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 141 of 10 June 2005

(2005/C 237/06)

On page 22, in point 4.3(e):

for:

‘Payment of an advance of 80 % (15 days after signature of the agreement).’,

read:

‘Payment of an advance of 50 % (15 days after signature of the agreement).’.

---
#### § 137.105 May a Self-Governance Tribe carryover from one year to the next any funds that remain at the end of the funding agreement?

Yes, pursuant to section 508(i) of the Act, a Self-Governance Tribe may carryover from one year to the next any funds that remain at the end of the funding agreement.
**Exhibit32.2**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connectionwith the annual report of Paulson Capital Corp., Inc.”(Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2004 as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, Carol A. Rice, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)                                  The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                                  The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| /s/ Carol A. Rice       |   |   |
|-------------------------|--------|--------|
| Carol A. Rice           |   |   |
| Chief Financial Officer |   |
| March 30, 2005     |   |

 

----
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 State

          - [Public Notice 6751]

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681,                         *et seq.;*22 U.S.C. 6501 note,                         *et seq.*), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236 of October 19, 1999, as amended, and Delegation of Authority No. 257 of April 15, 2003 [68 FR 19875], I hereby determine that the objects in the exhibition: “Drawings by Rembrandt and His Pupils: Telling the Difference,” imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to loan agreements with the foreign owners or custodians. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at The J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles, CA, from on or about December 8, 2009, until on or about February 28, 2010, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest. Public Notice of these Determinations is ordered to be published in the                         **Federal Register**                        .                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        For further information, including a list of the exhibit objects, contact Julie Simpson, Attorney-Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (                        *telephone:*                         202-632-6467). The address is U.S. Department of State, L/PD, SA-5, 2200 C Street, NW., Suite 5H03, Washington, DC 20522-0505.                    

Dated: August 28, 2009.

Maura M. Pally,

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Professional and Cultural Exchanges, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.

[FR Doc. E9-21314 Filed 9-2-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
§ 23.4 How must an entity apply for assignment? ( a ) An application for the assignment of National Health Service Corps personnel must be submitted to the Secretary by an eligibe applicant in the form and at the time prescribed by the Secretary.[1] The application must be signed by an individual authorized to act for the applicant and to assume on behalf of the applicant the obligations imposed by law, the Act, this regulation, and any additional conditions of assignment imposed under these authorities.
( b ) In addition to other pertinent information required by the Secretary, an application for the assignment of Corps personnel must include— ( 1 ) A description of the applicant's overall organizational structure;
( 2 ) A justification of the request for the assignment of personnel based upon the needs of the health manpower shortage area;
( 3 ) A description of the applicant's financial plan for operating the National Health Service Corps site including a proposed budget, sources of non-Federal support obtained, and the proposed expenditures for obtaining adequate support staff, equipment and supplies;
( 4 ) A list of the proposed fees and discounted fees to be charged for the provision of health services; and
( 5 ) If an entity wishes to request an interest free loan (not to exceed $50,000) under section 335(c) of the Act to assist the applicant in establishing the practice of the assigned National Health Service Corps personnel, a detailed justification of the amount requested must be included.
( c ) An application for assignment must include evidence that the applicant has provided a copy of the completed application for review to ( 1 ) each health systems agency designated under section 1515 of the Act for the health service area which includes all or part of the health manpower shortage area for which as assignment of National Health Service Corps personnel is sought or
( 2 ) if no health systems agency has been designated for such a health service area, to each State health planning and development agency designated under section 1521 of the Act for each State which includes all or part of the health manpower shortage area for which an assignment of National Health Service Corps personnel is sought.
( d ) If an application for assignment is filed by an applicant which had previously been assigned National Health Service Corps personnel under an agreement entered into under section 329 of the Act as in effect before October 1, 1977, or under section 334 of the Act, the applicant must provide the information the Secretary considers necessary to make the determinations required by section 333(a)(1)(D) of the Act.
[45 FR 12790, Feb. 27, 1980, as amended at 51 FR 31948, Sept. 8, 1986] Footnotes -
23.4
[1] Applications and instructions may be obtained from Regional Offices of the Department of Health and Human Services at the addresses set forth at 45 CFR 5.31(b).
# C_2005330EN.01000902.xml

| 24.12.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 330/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.12.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 330/9

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (Belgium) by judgment of that court of 9 September 2005 in Samotor SPRL v Belgian State

(Case C-378/05)

(2005/C 330/18)

Language of the case: French

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by judgment of the Cour de cassation (Belgium) of 9 September 2005, received at the Court Registry on 14 October 2005, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings between Samotor SPRL and the Belgian State on the following questions:

| 1. | Where the recipient of a supply of goods is a taxable person who has entered into a contract in good faith without knowledge of a fraud committed by the seller, does the principle of fiscal neutrality in respect of value added tax mean that the fact that the contract of sale is void, by reason of a rule of domestic civil law which renders the contract incurably void as contrary to public policy on the ground of illegal basis of the contract attributable to the seller, cannot cause that taxable person to lose his right to deduct the tax? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Where the recipient of a supply of goods is a taxable person who has entered into a contract in good faith without knowledge of a fraud committed by the seller, does the principle of fiscal neutrality in respect of value added tax mean that the fact that the contract of sale is void, by reason of a rule of domestic civil law which renders the contract incurably void as contrary to public policy on the ground of illegal basis of the contract attributable to the seller, cannot cause that taxable person to lose his right to deduct the tax?

| 2. | Is the answer different where the contract is incurably void for fraudulent evasion of VAT itself? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Is the answer different where the contract is incurably void for fraudulent evasion of VAT itself?

| 3. | Is the answer different where the illegal basis of the contract of sale, which makes it incurably void under domestic law, is fraudulent evasion of value added tax of which both contracting parties had knowledge? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Is the answer different where the illegal basis of the contract of sale, which makes it incurably void under domestic law, is fraudulent evasion of value added tax of which both contracting parties had knowledge?

---
# C_2006022EN.01002503.xml

| 28.1.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 22/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.1.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 22/25

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 22 November 2005 — Degussa Initiators v Commission

(Case T-104/04) (1)

1

(2006/C 22/47)

Language of the case: German

Language of the case: German

The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 118, 30.4.2004.

1

---