alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
HomeDirect Line for American Business...Opportunities in Iraqi Kurdistan Agricultural Sector

# 									Opportunities in Iraqi Kurdistan Agricultural Sector							

Direct Line Event

Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs

June 15, 2021

**Topic:** Opportunities in Iraqi Kurdistan Agricultural Sector

**Host:** Consul General Rob Waller

**Guest Speakers:** Kurdistan Regional Government’s Agricultual Minister H.E. Begard Talabani and Planning Director General Dr. Ghazi Faiq Haji

**Date and Time:** Tuesday, June 15 9:30 AM (EDT) 4:30 p.m. (Local Time)

**Brief Description of Call:** Join Consul General Waller and Kurdistan Regional Government’s Agriculture Minister H.E. Begard Talabani and Planning Director General Dr. Ghazi Faiq Haji to discuss agricultural investment opportunities in cold chain infrastructure and supply chain, includingrefrigerated production, storage and distribution, as well as associated equipment and logistics.

Tags

Bureau of Economic and Business AffairsDirect Line

Back to Top
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-14-00903-CV

LIGHTNING OIL CO.,

Appellant

v.

ANADARKO E&P ONSHORE LLC fka Anadarko E&P Company, LP,

Appellee

From the 365th Judicial District Court, Dimmit County, Texas

Trial Court No. 14-01-12171-DCVAJA

Honorable Amado J. Abascal III, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE BARNARD, JUSTICE ALVAREZ, AND JUSTICE PULLIAM

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s order is AFFIRMED. 

We tax costs of this appeal against Appellant Lightning Oil Company. 

SIGNED August 19, 2015.

_____________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
§ 426.417 Contractor's statement regarding new evidence. ( a ) The contractor may review any new evidence that is submitted, regardless of whether the ALJ has stayed the proceedings, including but not limited to— ( 1 ) New evidence submitted with the initial complaint;
( 2 ) New evidence submitted with an amended complaint;
( 3 ) New evidence produced during discovery;
( 4 ) New evidence produced when the ALJ consults with scientific and clinical experts; and
( 5 ) New evidence presented during any hearing.
( b ) The contractor may submit a statement regarding whether the new evidence is significant under § 426.340, within such deadline as the ALJ may set.
§ 430.40 Deferral of claims for FFP. ( a ) *Requirements for deferral.* Payment of a claim or any portion of a claim for FFP is deferred only if— ( 1 ) The Administrator or current Designee questions its allowability and needs additional information to resolve the question; and
( 2 ) CMS takes action to defer the claim (by excluding the claimed amount from the grant award) within 60 days after the receipt of a Quarterly Statement of Expenditures (prepared in accordance with CMS instructions) that includes that claim.
( b ) *Notice of deferral and State's responsibility.* ( 1 ) Within 15 days of the action described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, the current Designee sends the State a written notice of deferral that— ( i ) Identifies the type and amount of the deferred claim and specifies the reason for deferral; and
( ii ) Requests the State to make available all the documents and materials the regional office then believes are necessary to determine the allowability of the claim.
( 2 ) It is the responsibility of the State to establish the allowability of a deferred claim.
( c ) *Handling of documents and materials.* ( 1 ) Within 60 days (or within 120 days if the State requests an extension) after receipt of the notice of deferral, the State must make available to the regional office, in readily reviewable form, all requested documents and materials except any that it identifies as not being available.
( 2 ) Regional office staff usually initiates review within 30 days after receipt of the documents and materials.
( 3 ) If the current Designee finds that the materials are not in readily reviewable form or that additional information is needed, he or she promptly notifies the State that it has 15 days to submit the readily reviewable or additional materials.
( 4 ) If the State does not provide the necessary materials within 15 days, the current Designee disallows the claim.
( 5 ) The current Designee has 90 days, after all documentation is available in readily reviewable form, to determine the allowability of the claim.
( 6 ) If the current Designee cannot complete review of the material within 90 days, CMS pays the claim, subject to a later determination of allowability.
( d ) *Effect of decision to pay a deferred claim.* Payment of a deferred claim under paragraph (c)(6) of this section does not preclude a subsequent disallowance based on the results of an audit or financial review. (If there is a subsequent disallowance, the State may request reconsideration as provided in paragraph (e)(2) of this section.)
( e ) *Notice and effect of decision on allowability.* ( 1 ) The Administrator or current Designee gives the State written notice of his or her decision to pay or disallow a deferred claim.
( 2 ) If the decision is to disallow, the notice informs the State of its right to reconsideration in accordance with 45 CFR part 16.
[53 FR 36571, Sept. 21, 1988, as amended at 77 FR 31507, May 29, 2012]
# C_2005205EN.01000702.xml

| 20.8.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 205/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.8.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 205/7

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo (Spain) by order of that court of 13 April 2005 in the case of Asnef-Equifax Servicios de Información sobre Solvencia y Crédito, S.L. and Administración del Estado v Asociación de Usuarios de Servicios Bancarios (AUSBANC)

(Case C-238/05)

(2005/C 205/14)

Language of the case: Spanish

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by order of the Tribunal Supremo (Spain) of 13 April 2005, received at the Court Registry on 30 May 2005, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings between Asnef-Equifax Servicios de Información sobre Solvencia y Crédito, S.L. and Administración del Estado and Asociación de Usuarios de Servicios Bancarios (AUSBANC) on the following questions:

| A) | Is it possible to interpret Article 81(1) EC as meaning that agreements between financial institutions for the exchange of information about the solvency of their customers and lateness of payments by them may be regarded as compatible with the common market, in so far as they affect the financial policies of the European Union and the common credit market and have the effect of restricting competition in the financial and credit institution sector? |
| --- | --- |

A)

Is it possible to interpret Article 81(1) EC as meaning that agreements between financial institutions for the exchange of information about the solvency of their customers and lateness of payments by them may be regarded as compatible with the common market, in so far as they affect the financial policies of the European Union and the common credit market and have the effect of restricting competition in the financial and credit institution sector?

| B) | Is it possible to interpret Article 81(3) EC as meaning that a Member State may, by means of bodies responsible for overseeing competition, authorise agreements between financial institutions for the exchange of information about their customers through the establishment of a credit information register, in so far as the creation of that register produces benefits for consumers and users of those financial services? |
| --- | --- |

B)

Is it possible to interpret Article 81(3) EC as meaning that a Member State may, by means of bodies responsible for overseeing competition, authorise agreements between financial institutions for the exchange of information about their customers through the establishment of a credit information register, in so far as the creation of that register produces benefits for consumers and users of those financial services?

---
I

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3204

To require the administrative agency responsible for adjudicating claims under

the workers’ compensation provisions of title 5, United States Code,

to select board certified physicians to provide second opinions.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 29, 1996

Mr. BILBRAY (for himself and Ms. DUNN of Washington) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Economic and Educational Opportunities

A BILL

To require the administrative agency responsible for adjudicating claims under the workers’ compensation provisions of title 5, United States Code, to select board

certified physicians to provide second opinions.

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

3 SECTION 1. PHYSICIANS PROVIDING SECOND OPINIONS.

4 The administrative agency to which the Secretary of

5 Labor has delegated the authority to adjudicate claims

6 made under the workers’ compensation provisions of title

7 5, United States Code, shall only select physicians who
2

•HR 3204 IH

1 have been certified by a board of medical specialties to

2 provide second opinions in connection with such claims.

Æ
- Project Home
- U.S. ECS
- About the Project
- About ECS
- Data Collection
- International Cooperation
- FAQ
- Downloads

HomeU.S. Extended Continental Shelf Project...International Cooperation

# 									International Cooperation							

The United States supports the efforts of other countries to determine their ECS limits, in accordance with the Law of the Sea Convention.

### CLCS Voluntary Trust Fund

The United States supports the work of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) to provide advice and recommendations to coastal States relating to the delineation of the outer limits of the continental shelf. Since 2022, the United States has supported the Commission and its developing country members through contributions to the CLCS’s voluntary trust fund. The purpose of this trust fund is to defray the costs borne by CLCS members from developing countries in participating in the meetings of the CLCS, including their airfare, living expenses, and medical insurance.

### Data Support

NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) has provided bathymetric and seismic data, either directly or through the United Nations Environment Programme, to an estimated 35 countries. Many other countries have downloaded data from NCEI servers in support of their ECS delineation efforts.

In some instances, the United States has been able to collect bathymetric data from “ships of opportunity” to support coastal States in delineating their ECS limits. The U.S. ECS Project is also working to identify the bathymetric data needs of many Pacific island countries to enable them to successfully complete their ECS delineation efforts.

### U.S.-Canada Data Collection in the Arctic

Much of the data necessary to delineate the continental shelf of the United States and Canada in the Arctic Ocean was collected cooperatively in a two-ship operation.

The *U.S. Coast Guard Cutter (USCGC) Healy*collected multibeam bathymetric data and created a straight and open path through the ice for the *Canadian Coast Guard ship Louis S. Saint Laurent*, which followed collecting seismic reflection and refraction data with sensors towed behind the stern of the ship. The Data Collection page summarizes the multibeam and seismic data collected by *Healy*and *Louis*.

This two-ship approach was both productive and necessary in the Arctic’s difficult and varying weather and ice conditions. This collaboration saved millions of dollars for both countries, provided data both countries need, ensured that data are collected only once in the same area, and increased scientific and diplomatic cooperation.

### Training

In 2015, the U.S. ECS Project hosted a week-long training session on how to delineate ECS limits and compile the necessary analysis and documentation. The training was conducted in cooperation with the UN Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea (DOALOS) and included present and former members of the CLCS. Nearly 50 ECS specialists from numerous countries of the Americas and Pacific islands participated.

Tags

ArcticBureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific AffairsContinental Shelf

Back to Top
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
33-72788 of U.S.B. Holding Co., Inc. (the "Company") on Form S-3 and
Registration Statement Nos. 333-106376, 333-63408, 333-75317, 333-65161,
333-56169, 333-43797, 333-27451, 33-80678 and 2-90674 of U.S.B. Holding Co.,
Inc. on Form S-8 of our reports dated March 14, 2005, related to the
consolidated financial statements of the Company and management's report on the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, incorporated by
reference in the Company's 2004 Annual Report on Form 10-K and appearing in the
Company's 2004 Annual Report to Stockholders.

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

New York, New York
March 14, 2005
U.S.B. HOLDING CO., INC.
                                  SUBSIDIARIES

                                   EXHIBIT 21

                               December 31, 1997

Union State Bank
100 Dutch Hill Road
Orangeburg, New York 10962

Union State Capital Trust I
100 Dutch Hill Road
Orangeburg, New York 10962

Ad Con Inc.
100 Dutch Hill Road
Orangeburg, New York 10962

U.S.B. Realty Corp. (subsidiary of Union State Bank)
100 Dutch Hill Road
Orangeburg, New York 10962

U.S.B. Financial Services, Inc. (subsidiary of Union State Bank)
100 Dutch Hill Road
Orangeburg, New York 10962

Dutch Hill Realty Corp. (subsidiary of Union State Bank)
100 Dutch Hill Road
Orangeburg, New York 10962
§ 423.2034 Requesting information from the IRE. ( a ) If an ALJ or attorney adjudicator believes that the written record is missing information that is essential to resolving the issues on appeal and that information can be provided only by CMS, the IRE, and/or the Part D plan sponsor, the information may be requested from the IRE that conducted the reconsideration or its successor. ( 1 ) Official copies of redeterminations and reconsiderations that were conducted on the appealed issues, and official copies of dismissals of a request for redetermination or reconsideration, can be provided only by CMS, the IRE, and/or the Part D plan sponsor. Prior to issuing a request for information to the IRE, OMHA will confirm whether an electronic copy of the missing redetermination, reconsideration, or dismissal is available in the official system of record, and if so will accept the electronic copy as an official copy.
( 2 ) “Can be provided only by CMS, the IRE, and/or the Part D plan sponsor” means the information is not publicly available, is not in the possession of the enrollee, and cannot be requested and obtained by the enrollee. Information that is publicly available is information that is available to the general public via the Internet or in a printed publication. Information that is publicly available includes, but is not limited to, information available on a CMS, IRE or Part D Plan sponsor Web site or information in an official CMS or HHS publication.
( b ) The ALJ or attorney adjudicator retains jurisdiction of the case, and the case remains pending at OMHA.
( c ) The IRE has 15 calendar days for standard appeals, or 2 calendar days for expedited appeals, after receiving the request for information to furnish the information or otherwise respond to the information request directly or through CMS or the Part D plan sponsor.
( d ) If an adjudication period applies to the appeal in accordance with § 423.2016, the adjudication period is extended by the period between the date of the request for information and the date the IRE responds to the request or 20 calendar days after the date of the request for standard appeals, or 3 calendar days after the date of the request for expedited appeals, whichever occurs first.
[82 FR 5133, Jan. 17, 2017, as amended at 84 FR 19873, May 7, 2019]
### M A N D A T E

TO THE 332ND DISTRICT COURT of HIDALGO COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before our Court of Appeals for the Thirteenth District of Texas, on the 2nd day of

Septmeber, 2015, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

Ricardo Masso, Appellant,

v.

PlainsCapital Bank Appellee.

CAUSE NO. 13-15-00298-CV (Tr.Ct.No. C-5620-14-F)

was determined; and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on

appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the appeal

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

      

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals

for the Thirteenth District of Texas, in this behalf, and in all things have it duly

recognized, obeyed and executed.

WITNESS, the Hon. Rogelio Valdez, Chief Justice of our Court of Appeals, with the seal

thereof affixed, at the City of Edinburg, Texas this 29th day of October, 2015.

Dorian E. Ramirez, CLERK
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Ira Wayne SHAW v. Frank C. BLACKBURN, Warden.

No. 64935.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 21, 1979.

In re Ira Wayne Shaw applying for writ of habeas corpus. Parish of Vernon. No. 25,093.

Writ denied.
# C_2006108EN.01002001.xml

| 6.5.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 108/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 108/20

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 15 March 2006 — Kimman v Commission

(Case T-44/04) (1)

1

(Officials - Appointment - Revision of the classification in grade - Article 31(2) of the Staff Regulations)

(2006/C 108/34)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Eugène Kimman (Overijse, Belgium) (represented by: N. Lhoëst and E. De Schietere de Lophem, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: V. Joris and A. Bouquet, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

:

Re:

Application for annulment of the Commission's decision of 20 December 2002 setting the applicant's final classification at Grade B5 and, as far as is necessary, annulment of the Commission's decision of 1 October 2003 rejecting the applicant's complaint.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders each party to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders each party to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 94, 17.4.2004.

1

---
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 Princeton National Bancorp, Inc. (PNBC) on Form
10-K for the period ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I Todd D. Fanning, Vice
President & Chief Financial Officer of PNBC, 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:

|    |                                                                                                                                                 
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|(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 represents, in all material respects, the
 financial condition and result of operations of PNBC.

|/s/ Todd D. Fanning                              | 
|------------------------------------------------ | 
|                                                 | 
|                                                
|Todd D.
 Fanning                                 | 
|Senior Vice
 President & Chief Financial Officer | 
|                                                 | 
|March 16,
 2009                                  | 

---
# C_2006152EN.01002001.xml

| 30.6.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 152/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.6.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 152/20

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4231 — Arcelor/Mitsui/Amsa JV)

(2006/C 152/09)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 22 June 2006, 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 website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website 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 32006M4231. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://ec.europa.eu/eur-lex/lex) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32006M4231. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://ec.europa.eu/eur-lex/lex)

---
Exhibit 99.1

                            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 Quarterly Report of Leadville Mining and Milling Corp.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended October 31, 2002 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Gifford A. Dieterle, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Finacial
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to ss. 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 result of operations of the
Company.


                                        ___________________________
                                        Gifford A. Dieterle
                                        Chief Executive Officer and
                                        Chief Financial Officer
                                        December 16, 2002