alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
HomeVenezuela

# Venezuela

160 items

        -    Readout  		Deputy Secretary Sherman’s Meeting with Members of the Venezuelan Unitary Platform Delegation	  October 19, 2022 
        -    Remarks  		Remarks at a Joint Press Availability	  Antony J. BlinkenOctober 13, 2022Dean Acheson AuditoriumWashington, DC 
        -    Remarks  		Secretary Antony J. Blinken before the Meeting with Cuban, Venezuelan, and Nicaraguan Human Rights Defenders	  Antony J. BlinkenOctober 6, 2022Chief of Mission ResidenceLima, Peru 
        -    Remarks  		Secretary Antony J. Blinken at OAS General Assembly First Plenary Session	  Antony J. BlinkenOctober 6, 2022Lima Convention CenterLima, Peru 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – October 4, 2022	  Vedant PatelOctober 4, 2022Washington, DC 
        -    Press Statement  		The Release of U.S. Nationals from Venezuela	  Antony J. BlinkenOctober 1, 2022 
        -    Press Statement  		Humanitarian Assistance to Respond to the Venezuela Regional Crisis	  Antony J. BlinkenSeptember 22, 2022 
        -    Remarks  		The Responsibility to Protect Focal Points	  Uzra ZeyaSeptember 15, 2022Organization of American StatesWashington, D.C. 
        -    Press Statement  		Matthew Heath’s Two Years of Captivity in Venezuela	  Ned PriceSeptember 9, 2022 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – August 22, 2022	  Ned PriceAugust 22, 2022Washington, DC 

previous page1…45678…16next page

Back to Top
§ 592.307 Kimberley Process Certificate. The term *Kimberley Process Certificate* means a tamper- and forgery-resistant document that bears the following information in any language, provided that an English translation is incorporated: ( a ) The title “Kimberley Process Certificate” and the statement: “The rough diamonds in this shipment have been handled in accordance with the provisions of the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme for rough diamonds”;
( b ) Country of origin for shipment of parcels of unmixed (*i.e.*, from the same) origin; Note to paragraph ( b
):
A shipment including a parcel of mixed-origin rough diamonds is to be entered into the United States with the Kimberley Process Certificate accompanying the shipment, and the certificate need not indicate the countries of origin of the diamonds. With respect to such a shipment, the country-of-origin field on the certificate must be filled in with asterisks. The shipment must, however, still comply with all other country-of-origin reporting requirements imposed by statute or regulation.
( c ) Unique numbering with the Alpha 2 country code, according to ISO 3166-1;
( d ) Date of issuance;
( e ) Date of expiry;
( f ) Name of issuing authority;
( g ) Identification of exporter and importer;
( h ) Carat weight/mass;
( i ) Value in U.S. dollars;
( j ) Number of parcels in the shipment;
( k ) Relevant Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System; and
( l ) Validation by the exporting authority.
Note to paragraph ( l
):
See § 592.301(a)(4) for procedures governing the validation of the Kimberley Process Certificate when exporting from the United States.
HomeU.S. Military–Marine Security Guard...Darwin Judge

# 									Darwin Judge							

DS Memorial

April 29, 1975

		Diplomatic Security Memorial		

**U.S. Military—Marine Security Guard****Year of Death: 1975**

Lance Cpl. Darwin L. Judge, Marine Security Guard (MSG), died on April 29, 1975, in Saigon, South Vietnam, during a Viet Cong rocket attack. His hometown is Marshalltown, Iowa. According to the book, “The Marine Corps and the State Department,” he and MSG Charles McMahon, Jr., were the last two Americans to die in the Vietnam War.

**Photo: U.S. Government image**

Tags

DS Military Marine SecurityVietnam

Back to Top
**Exhibit32.1**

 

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

 

In connection with the annual report ofPaulson Capital Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the periodending December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Chester L.F. Paulson,President, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)                               TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                               Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| /s/ Chester L.F. Paulson |   |   |
|--------------------------|--------|--------|
| Chester L.F. Paulson     |   |   |
| President                |   |
| March 30, 2005      |   |

 

----
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 23






                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT




The Board of Directors
Southside Bancshares Corp.:


         We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
on Form S-8 (No. 33-78454 and No. 333-00579) of Southside Bancshares Corp. of
our report dated March 5, 1999, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of
Southside Bancshares Corp. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 1998, and 1997,
and the related consolidated statements of income, shareholders' equity and
comprehensive income, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year
period ended December 31, 1998, which report appears in the December 31, 1998,
annual report on Form 10-K of Southside Bancshares Corp.



                                                  /s/ KPMG LLP



St. Louis, Missouri
March 25, 1999
#### HENRY L. RAND AND EDWARD L. RAND, EXECUTORS OF JENNIE LATHROP RAND, DECEASED, v. THE UNITED STATES.

[52 C. Cls., 72, 285; 249 U. S., 503.]

Judgment was rendered in favor of the defendants in the court below. On appeal the judgment was affirmed, and the Supreme Court decided:

Revised Statutes, section 3226, providing that no suit shall be maintained for recovery of illegal or erroneous taxes until appeal made to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue and decision had thereon, and fixing a period within which suit may be brought when his decision is delayed more than six months; was made applicable by section 31 of the war revenue act of Juno 3, 1898, 30 Statutes, 448, 464, to inheritance taxes collected under that act.

As applied to a claim for a refund of such inheritance taxes, this bar of Revised Statutes, section 3226, and the bar of section 3228, which requires all claims for the refunding of erroneous or illegal taxes to be presented to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue within two years next after the cause of action accrued, were removed by the acts of June 27, 1902, chapter 1160, section 3, 32 Statutes, 406, and of July 27, 1912, chapter 256, 37 Statutes, 240, if the claimant complied with their requirements and presented his claim to the commissioner.

The fact that a tax.was voluntarily paid, without protest, is not an impediment to a refund under the act of July 27, 1912, *supra. United States*v. *Hvoslef,*237 TI. S., 1.

The act of July 27, 1912, *supra,*section 2, in providing that repayment shall be made to “ such claimants as have presented or shall hereafter present their claims,” requires, a positive and individual assertion of the claim, within the time limited ; the claimant may not rely upon claims presented by *197others not manifestly his own or dearly made on his behalf, nor excuse the presentation of his claim upon the assumption that it would have been useless, judged by results in other cases.

Mr. Justice McKenna

delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court April 21, 1919.
40696.

#### STORY v. RIVERS.

Decided October 1, 1964.

*Carlton S. Brown,*for plaintiff in error.

*Divine & Busbee, W. T. Divine, Jr., Jesse G. Bowles,*contra.

Felton, Chief Judge.

1. An assignment of error, in a ground of an amended motion for a new trial, that there were issues of fact which should have been submitted to a jury, is good as against an objection that the ground should have contained the evidence requiring the submission of the case to the jury. *Webb v. Stephens,*57 Ga. App 395 (195 SE 577); *Bowman v. Bowman,*205 Ga. 796 (1) (55 SE2d 298).

2. Where one suffers personal injury and property damage to his automobile in a single collision with another vehicle, his assignment in writing of his cause of action for the property damage, executed and delivered to his collision insurance carrier does not bar an action by him for personal injuries suffered in the same collision as that causing the property damage, it not appearing whether or not an action had been previously instituted by the assignee to recover for the property damage. *Story v. Rivers,*220 Ga. 232 (138 SE2d 304).

3. The court erred in directing a verdict for the defendant because of the ruling in Headnote 2, above, and because the evidence did not demand a finding for the defendant on the questions of negligence, proximate cause, etc.

The court erred in overruling the motion for a new trial.

*Judgment reversed.*

*Frankum and Pannell, JJ., concur.*
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 Providential Holdings, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ending June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Henry Fahman, President and Director of the Company, certify, 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 my knowledge and belief: (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 result of operations of the Company.

/s/ Henry Fahman
Henry Fahman, President/Director 
October 14, 2008



1

---
40819.

#### McFARLAND v. LUMPKIN et al.

*223Decided September 8, 1964.

*Walter 0. Cooper,*for plaintiff in error.

*S. S. Robinson,*contra.

Nichols, Presiding Judge.

The contract sued on in count 1 of the petition showed that the plaintiff was employed by the defendant Emma S. Lumpkin to represent her and the temporary administrator, and that such employment was accepted by S. D. O’Neal who is alleged to be the temporary administrator.

The allegations of the petition, the contract, and the attorney’s lien attached as an exhibit to the petition, show that the case does not fall within the category of *Estes v. Collum,*91 Ga. *224App. 186 (85 SE2d 561), where the original action was to recover property for the estate and for which the estate would be responsible for reasonable attorney’s fees for the use of the heirs’ attorney who recovered such property for the estate, but rather involves a situation where an attorney is employed to establish, in a contested case, that the employer is an heir at law of the deceased, and as such was entitled to nominate the person appointed to administer such estate. Under such circumstances the Act of 1964 (Ga. L. 1964, p. 211), amending *Code*§ 113-1522 is not applicable, for the litigation was not between the estate and a third party but was for the purpose of determining rights between possible heirs to the estate.

As to the provisions contained in the contract, under the decisions in *Southern Land, Timber &c. Corp. v. Davis & Floyd,*109 Ga. App. 191 (135 SE2d 454), and the cases there cited the contract, being for professional services, was sufficiently definite to support the action and is therefore distinguishable from the cases exemplified by *Peachtree Medical Building v. Keel,*107 Ga. App. 438 (130 SE2d 530), where the alleged executory contract was between a building contractor and a land owner and it was held that the contract was not sufficiently definite to support a cause of action. Moreover, since the plaintiff had fully performed the services he was engaged to render, the question of whether the contract was sufficiently definite became moot. *Jones v. Dupree,*93 Ga. App. 830 (4) (93 SE2d 191).

The demurrer which the trial court sustained attacked the petition as not setting forth a cause of action against the defendants jointly or individually. This demurrer did not raise the question of misjoinder of parties defendant or of causes of action (See *Cartwright v. Commercial Credit Equipment Corp.,*103 Ga. App. 480, 119 SE2d 606; *Ebner v. Gulf Oil Corp.,*99 Ga. App. 586 (1) 109 SE2d 81, and citations), and since the petition set forth a cause of action against the defendant Emma Lumpkin the judgment of the trial court sustaining such general demurrer must be reversed.

In as much as the judgment of the trial court sustaining the general demurrer to the first count of the petition must be reversed the further proceedings were nugatory.

*Judgment reversed.*

*Hall and Russell, JJ., concur.*
#### Donald BUCKLES, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of his minor child, Jeffrey N. Buckles v. James A. FOX and American Southern Insurance Company.

No. 55139.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 20, 1974.

In re: Donald Buckles applying for cer-tiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Jefferson. 296 So.2d 339.

Writ denied. The result is correct.

BARHAM, J.,

is of the opinion the writ should be granted. The Court of Appeal has placed the affirmative defense of sudden emergency upon the plaintiff. It was established that a six year old child of plaintiff was standing near the street talking to a man using an edger and was struck by defendant, Fox. He should have seen the child unless his view was obstructed and thus created a sudden emergency. The burden of proof falls to defendant to show that he could not see what he should have seen.
# C_2005182EN.01004001.xml

| 23.7.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 182/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.7.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 182/40

---

Action brought on 4 May 2005 by Dypna Mc Sweeney and Pauline Armstrong against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-184/05)

(2005/C 182/74)

Language of the case: French

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 4 May 2005 by Dypna Mc Sweeney, residing in Brussels, and Pauline Armstrong, residing in Overijse (Belgium), represented by Sébastien Orlandi, Xavier Martin, Albert Coolen, Jean Noël Louis and Etienne Marchal, lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicants claim that the Court should:

| 1. | annul the decisions of 6 and 7 September 2004 refusing to admit the applicants to the EPSO/C/11/03 competition tests; |
| --- | --- |

1.

annul the decisions of 6 and 7 September 2004 refusing to admit the applicants to the EPSO/C/11/03 competition tests;

| 2. | order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicants participated in the EPSO/C/11/03 competition organised for the purposes of drawing up a reserve list of English-language secretaries at grade C5/C4. The selection board in that competition decided to exclude them from the tests of that competition, on the ground that their diplomas did not correspond to the level required by the competition notice.

In support of their action, the applicants submit that that decision infringes the competition notice and stems from a manifest error of assessment.

---
HomeSingapore

# Singapore

120 items

        -    Bilateral Relations Fact Sheet  		U.S. Relations With Singapore	  October 1, 2021 
        -    Remarks  		Secretary Antony J. Blinken and Singaporean Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan at the Signing of the Singapore-United States Third-Country Training Program (TCTP) Memorandum of Understanding Renewal	  Antony J. BlinkenSeptember 27, 2021Benjamin Franklin RoomWashington, DC 
        -    Readout  		Secretary Blinken’s Meeting with Singapore Foreign Minister Balakrishnan	  September 27, 2021 
        -    Press Statement  		Republic of Singapore National Day	  Antony J. BlinkenAugust 6, 2021 
        -    Report  		2021 Investment Climate Statements: Singapore	  July 21, 2021 
        -    Report  		2021 Trafficking in Persons Report: Singapore	  July 1, 2021 
        -    Report  		2020 Report on International Religious Freedom: Singapore	  May 12, 2021 
        -    DipNote: Education and Culture  		“Perseverance and Assiduousness”: The Story of an Asian American Foreign Service Officer	  May 5, 2021 
        -    Report  		2020 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Singapore	  March 30, 2021 
        -    Remarks  		Remarks at the Mekong-U.S. Partnership Track 1.5 Policy Dialogue Opening Plenary	  Atul KeshapMarch 18, 2021 

previous page1…678910…12next page

Back to Top
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

 

I, Donald C. Grenesko, the Senior Vice President/Finance and Administration of Tribune Company, certify that (i) Tribune Company’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 26, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 26, 2006 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and the results of operations of Tribune Company.

 

 

 

 

| /s/ Donald C. Grenesko   |  
Donald C. Grenesko   

 
Senior Vice President/

 
Finance and Administration  

 

April 28, 2006

 

  |
|-------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 172 (Tuesday, September 8, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46234-46235]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-21527]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration


Manufacturer of Controlled Substances; Notice of Registration

    By Notice dated April 17, 2009, and published in the Federal 
Register on April 29, 2009, (74 FR 19598), AMRI Rensselaer, Inc., 33 
Riverside Avenue, Rensselaer, New York 12144, made application by 
renewal to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to be registered 
as a bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled substances 
listed in schedules I and II:

[[Page 46235]]



------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Drug                               Schedule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marihuana (7360)...........................  I
Tetrahydrocannabinols (7370)...............  I
Amphetamine (1100).........................  II
Lisdexamfetamine (1205)....................  II
Methylphenidate (1724).....................  II
Pentobarbital (2270).......................  II
Hydrocodone (9193).........................  II
Meperidine (9230)..........................  II
Dextropropoxyphene, bulk (non-dosage form)   II
 (9273).
Oxymorphone (9652).........................  II
Fentanyl (9801)............................  II
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The company plans to manufacture bulk controlled substances for use 
in product development and for distribution to its customers.
    In reference to drug code 7360 (Marihuana), the company plans to 
bulk manufacture cannabidiol as a synthetic intermediate. This 
controlled substance will be further synthesized to bulk manufacture a 
synthetic THC (7370). No other activity for this drug code is 
authorized for this registration.
    No comments or objections have been received. DEA has considered 
the factors in 21 U.S.C. 823(a) and determined that the registration of 
AMRI Rensselaer, Inc. to manufacture the listed basic classes of 
controlled substances is consistent with the public interest at this 
time. DEA has investigated AMRI Renssealaer Inc. to ensure that the 
company's registration is consistent with the public interest. The 
investigation has included inspection and testing of the company's 
physical security systems, verification of the company's compliance 
with State and local laws, and a review of the company's background and 
history. Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823, and in accordance with 
21 CFR 1301.33, the above named company is granted registration as a 
bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled substances listed.

    Dated: August 21, 2009.
Joseph T. Rannazzisi,
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug 
Enforcement Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-21527 Filed 9-4-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
# C_2005222EN.01000101.xml

| 9.9.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 222/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.9.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222/1

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

8 September 2005

(2005/C 222/01)

1 euro=

1 euro

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2418 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 137,16 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4564 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,6762 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,32 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,543 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 77,74 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,7895 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9557 |
| CYP | Cyprus pound | 0,5729 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 29,172 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 244,38 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,6962 |
| MTL | Maltese lira | 0,4293 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,9281 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 3,4942 |
| SIT | Slovenian tolar | 239,41 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 38,145 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,66 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6129 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4686 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,6443 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7622 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,0832 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 273,71 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 7,8606 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 10,0518 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,435 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 12 852,63 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,6807 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 69,634 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 35,102 |
| THB | Thai baht | 50,934 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2418

JPY

Japanese yen

137,16

DKK

Danish krone

7,4564

GBP

Pound sterling

0,6762

SEK

Swedish krona

9,32

CHF

Swiss franc

1,543

ISK

Iceland króna

77,74

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,7895

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9557

CYP

Cyprus pound

0,5729

CZK

Czech koruna

29,172

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

244,38

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,6962

MTL

Maltese lira

0,4293

PLN

Polish zloty

3,9281

RON

Romanian leu

3,4942

SIT

Slovenian tolar

239,41

SKK

Slovak koruna

38,145

TRY

Turkish lira

1,66

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6129

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4686

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,6443

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7622

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,0832

KRW

South Korean won

1 273,71

ZAR

South African rand

7,8606

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

10,0518

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,435

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

12 852,63

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,6807

PHP

Philippine peso

69,634

RUB

Russian rouble

35,102

THB

Thai baht

50,934

---

(1)

1

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Source:

---