alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2006010EN.01000601.xml

| 14.1.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 10/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 10/6

---

ORDER OF THE COURT

ORDER OF THE COURT

(Third Chamber)

of 13 October 2005

in Case C-2/05 SA: Names BV v Commission of the European Communities (1)

1

(Application for authorisation to serve a garnishee order on the Commission of the European Communities)

(2006/C 10/12)

Language of the case: French

In Case C-2/05 SA: application for authorisation to serve a garnishee order on the Commission of the European Communities brought on 28 January 2005 by Names BV, established in Hazerswoude-Rijndijk (Netherlands) (lawyer: R. Nathan) against Commission of the European Communities (Agents: J-F. Pasquier and E. Manhaeve) — the Court (Third Chamber), composed of A. Rosas, President of the Chamber, J. Malenovský (Rapporteur), A. La Pergola, J.-P. Puissochet and A. Ó Caoimh, Judges; C. Stix-Hackl, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, made an order on 13 October 2005, the operative part of which is as follows

| 1. | There is no need to adjudicate on this case. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no need to adjudicate on this case.

| 2. | Each party is to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Each party is to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 82 of 02.04.2005

1

---
#### Hannah M. Cowan, Plaintiff, *v.*Alvarado W. Cowan, Defendant.

(Supreme Court, Onondaga Special Term,

June, 1898.)

Absolute divorce — Connivance of husband.

"An absolute divorce will be refused a wife, although her husband has made default, where it appears that the husband committed the compromising acts with the avowed purpose of furnishing her grounds, for a divorce and by collusion with her son, who communicated the facts to her.

This action is brought by plaintiff to secure an absolute divorce upon the ground of the defendant’s adultery. The defendant has not answered or defended.

John R. Collins, for plaintiff.

No appearance for defendant.

Hisoock, J.

The only misconduct-upon the part of the-defendant which has been sufficiently proved to be the basis for a judgment for divorce-occurred April 17, 1898.

Before that occurrence, plaintiff’s son, in pursuance of a talk with her and with a letter from her, went to see the defendant about procuring a divorce from him. Defendant asserted in that conversation that no evidence could be obtained against him which would warrant a judgment for such relief, and there was other conversation. Subsequently, he'committed the acts of April llth for the express and avowed purpose of supplying plaintiff with evidence upon which to procure her divorce, going so far as to take witnesses with him. The information of those occurrences, was subsequently communicated to plaintiff through her son and the attorney named to whom she could go for the purpose of getting her divorce.

There is no question about what this court should do under such1 circumstances. It should deny the application for the relief demanded, as it hereby does. I do not fin'd that the plaintiff personally has been guilty of any wrongdoing, but legally she must bear the responsibility for what her representatives have done, and there is no reasonable doubt but what her son, acting in her behalf, and- the defendant, were guilty of such misconduct and collusion in the premises as to defeat her right to recover. ■

Ordered accordingly.
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.                  

###### Securities and Exchange Commission

          - [File No. 500-1]

It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of Super Nova Resources, Inc. because questions have arisen regarding the trading in the company's stock, and the accuracy and adequacy of publicly available information concerning, among other things, the company's business operations.

The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the securities of the above-listed company.

*Therefore, it is ordered,*                     pursuant to Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the securities of the above-listed company is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EDT, on September 8, 2009, through 11:59 p.m. EDT, on September 21, 2009.                

By the Commission.

Elizabeth M. Murphy,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. E9-21924 Filed 9-8-09; 11:15 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsCognitive issues in head-up displaysThe ability of pilots to recognize and act upon unexpected information, presented in either the outside world or in a head-up display (HUD), was evaluated. Eight commercial airline pilots flew 18 approaches with a flightpath-type HUD and 13 approaches with conventional instruments in a fixed-base 727 simulator. The approaches were flown under conditions of low visibility, turbulence, and wind shear. Vertical and lateral flight performance was measured for five cognitive variables: an unexpected obstacle on runway; vertical and lateral boresight-type offset of the HUD; lateral ILS beam bend-type offset; and no anomaly. Mean response time to the runway obstacle was longer with HUD than without it (4.13 vs 1.75 sec.), and two of the pilots did not see the obstacle at all with the HUD. None of the offsets caused any deterioration in lateral flight performance, but all caused some change in vertical tracking; all offsets seemed to magnify the environmental effects. In all conditions, both vertical and lateral tracking was better with the HUD than with the conventional instruments.Document ID19810005125Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeTechnical Publication (TP)AuthorsFischer, E.*(NASA Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA, United States)*Haines, R. F.*(San Jose State Univ. Calif., United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 4, 2013Publication DateDecember 1, 1980Subject CategoryMan/System Technology And Life SupportReport/Patent NumberNASA-TP-1711A-8246Accession Number81N13636Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 505-35-21Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19810005125.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Designating an International ISIS Network of Financial Facilitators

# 									Designating an International ISIS Network of Financial Facilitators							

Press Statement

Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

May 9, 2022

Coinciding with the 16th meeting of the Counter ISIS Finance Group (CIFG) of the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS, the United States is designating today five individuals participating in an ISIS network of financial facilitators operating across Indonesia, Syria, and Turkey.  The United States, Italy, and Saudi Arabia co-lead the CIFG, which comprises nearly 70 countries and international organizations and coordinates efforts against ISIS financial support networks worldwide.  The United States is committed to working with the Global Coalition to deny ISIS the ability to raise and move funds across multiple jurisdictions.

The individuals designated today, pursuant to Executive Order 13224, as amended, have facilitated the travel of violent extremists to Syria and other areas where ISIS operates.  By designating them, we aim to expose and disrupt an international ISIS facilitation network that has financed ISIS recruitment, including of vulnerable children in Syria.

For more information this action, please see the Department of the Treasury’s press release.

Tags

Bureau of CounterterrorismBureau of Near Eastern AffairsDivision for Counter Threat Finance and SanctionsOffice of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of StateSyriaTerrorist Designation

Back to Top
Art’s-Way
Letterhead

    


    January
19, 2009

    


    West
Bank

    1601
22nd
Street

    West Des
Moines, IA 50266

    


    Mr. Kevin
Smith:

    


    In
conjunction with the preparation of our financial statements as of November 30,
2008, we have determined that we are not in compliance with the certain
restrictive covenant of the business loan agreement.  Under the terms
of our agreement, you  may have the right to demand immediate payment
of the entire balance of the note, which would affect our classification and
disclosure requirements related to the note.  The covenant that we
believe we are not in compliance with is:

    


    Covenant:

    
      	
               
      

            	
              ·

            	
              Borrowers
      agree to maintain a maximum debt/tangible net worth ratio of 1.25
      times.  For the year ended November 30, 2008, Art’s-Way
      Manufacturing’s debt/tangible net worth ratio is 1.26
    times.

            


    

    


    We hereby
request that you waive your right to demand payment of the note as a result of
the noncompliance identified above, through November 30, 2009.

    


    Please
indicate your acceptance of this waiver request by signing
below.  Please return one signed copy of this letter directly to us
for our file.

    


    If you
have any questions, please call.

    


    Sincerely,

    


    /s/ Carrie Majeski

    


    Carrie
Majeski

    Chief
Executive Officer

    


    We hereby
waive our right to demand payment of the above referenced note as a result of
the noncompliance identified above through November 30, 2008.  This
waiver extends only to the restrictive covenant described above.  All
other terms and conditions of the note shall remain in full force and
effect.

    


    WEST
BANK

    


    
      
        
          	
                  Signed
      by:

                	
                  /s/ Kevin
    Smith

                
	 
      	 
      
	
                  Title:

                	
                  Senior Vice President

                
	 
      	 
      
	
                  Date:

                	
                  January 20,
2009
#### Wayne MALEN, Appellant, v. AMERICAN STATES INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.

No. MM-299.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Nov. 7, 1979.

John C. Cooper of Douglass, Powell & Davey, Tallahassee, for appellant.

Frank J. Santry of Keen, O’Kelley, Field & Ellis, P. A., Tallahassee, for appellee.

SHIVERS, Judge.

Malen, injured in an accident while driving a vehicle owned by Diane Loos, seeks review of a final judgment dismissing with prejudice his claim against American States Insurance Company for personal injury protection benefits under an automobile insurance policy issued to Diane Loos. The trial court held that Section 627.736(4)(d)4a, Florida Statutes (1975), disentitles Malen to benefits since he was “the owner of a motor vehicle with respect to which security is required under ss. 627.730-627.741 . . .” We reverse.

At the time of the accident, February 28, 1976, Malen was the registered owner of an uninsured inoperable 1964 Mercedes Benz. Malen had operated this vehicle from the time of purchase in 1974 until November, 1975 when it developed transmission problems and was taken to a repair shop. Because the necessary repairs were determined to be too expensive, the vehicle was left unrepaired at the repair shop and Malen decided to try to sell the vehicle “as is”. The vehicle remained at the shop until May, 1976 when it was sold, repairs not having been made until around that time.

*474Whether Malen’s vehicle was one required to be insured at the time of his accident is dependent upon whether the vehicle was being “maintained” for operation over the public streets or highways of Florida. *Tapscott v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.,*330 So.2d 475 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976). In *Ward v. Florida Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company,*375 So.2d 898 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979), Opinion filed October 17, 1979, LL-274, we held that an automobile which had been disabled and left unrepaired due to lack of financial resources for nearly four months prior to the accident and for which the registration and license had been allowed to lapse due to the vehicle’s inoperability was not one being maintained for operation on the streets and highways. Similarly, we find that Malen’s vehicle was not one being maintained for operation on the streets and highways for which security was required under Section 627.730, et seq., Florida Statutes (1975). Accordingly, the final judgment dismissing Malen’s claim with prejudice is reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.

ERVIN, Acting C. J., and BOOTH, J., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEET AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF EARNINGS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000724969
<NAME> MINNTECH CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                          12,899
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   13,203
<ALLOWANCES>                                       446
<INVENTORY>                                     11,157
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                39,036
<PP&E>                                          39,300
<DEPRECIATION>                                  23,041
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  59,780
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,422
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           334
<OTHER-SE>                                      52,120
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    59,780
<SALES>                                         35,081
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                35,081
<CGS>                                           22,585
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   33,802
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  30
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,866
<INCOME-TAX>                                       597
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,269
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,269
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .19
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .19


</TABLE>
- Office Home
- Key Topics

HomeBureau of Economic and Business Affairs...Direct Line for American Business

# Direct Line for American Business

							Subscribe							

## About Direct Line

With 96 percent of global consumers living outside the United States, exports are a great way to increase jobs and income here at home. Successful exporting requires accurate and up-to-the minute information on opportunities and market conditions abroad. The Direct Line program provides a unique opportunity for American businesses, particularly small- and medium-sized enterprises, to engage directly via webcast with U.S. ambassadors overseas.

**Direct Line to American Business**

Direct Line lets U.S. business hear directly from our ambassadors and our economic and commercial experts at over 260 embassies and consulates in over 190 countries. Our staffs are trained to identify promising market sectors and to help U.S. exporters capitalize on new opportunities.

**How Direct Line Works**

Ambassadors or principal officers of U.S. missions overseas host Direct Line webinars or conference calls, often including local government officials, to discuss emerging sectors or new developments. Approximately 30-40 minutes is dedicated to allow participants to ask questions and offer comments.

**Who Can Participate**

Any U.S. business can register for a Direct Line webinar. This page provides a full list of past and upcoming calls. U.S. businesses can also subscribe to receive e-mail announcements of upcoming calls, as well as offer suggestions for future countries and sectors for calls. Direct Line is a free service of the U.S. Department of State.

**Contact Us**

We value your input on Direct Line. Click here to submit questions and comments or to suggest topics and countries for future webcasts.

## 							Discover More						

May 14, 2024		Opportunity for Lithium Extraction and Value Chain Development in Chile		Read more 

		Direct Line for American Business: Upcoming and Past Events		Read more 

		 Subscribe here to receive updates on Direct Line.		Read more 

		Tools for Business		Read more 

### 											Previous Direct Line Events										

          -  																Direct Line Events Archive (2017-2020)																 

Back to Top
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 PHI Group, Inc. on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2022, 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                          | 
|Principal
    Executive Officer /Director | 
|Dated:
    January 13, 2023               | 















Exhibit
32.2



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 PHI Group, Inc. (aka Philux Global Group Inc) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2022,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Henry D. Fahman, Acting Chief
Financial Officer 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                       | 
|Acting
    Principal Financial Officer | 
|Dated:
    January 13, 2023            |
§ 3.402 Basis for a civil money penalty. ( a ) *General rule.* A person who discloses identifiable patient safety work product in knowing or reckless violation of the confidentiality provisions shall be subject to a civil money penalty for each act constituting such violation.
( b ) *Violation attributed to a principal.* A principal is independently liable, in accordance with the federal common law of agency, for a civil money penalty based on the act of the principal's agent, including a workforce member, acting within the scope of the agency if such act could give rise to a civil money penalty in accordance with § 3.402(a) of this subpart.