alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|   | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | /s/ CHARLES MUNIZ                                                                                                                                                       |   |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Charles Muniz                                                                                                                                                                |   |
|   | Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer of Tamir Biotechnology, Inc.) |   |
# C_2006108EN.01001202.xml

| 6.5.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 108/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 108/12

---

Action brought on 8 March 2006 — Commission of the European Communities v Hellenic Republic

(Case C-134/06)

(2006/C 108/20)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: G. Zavvos and H. Støvlbæk)

Applicant:

Defendant: Hellenic Republic

Defendant:

Form of order sought

The applicant asks the Court to

| — | declare that, by failing to bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions, as regards the profession of veterinary surgeon, that are necessary to comply with Directive 2001/19/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 May 2001 amending Council Directives 89/48/EEC and 92/51/EEC on the general system for the recognition of professional qualifications and Council Directives 77/452/EEC, 77/453/EEC, 78/686/EEC, 78/687/EEC, 78/1026/EEC, 78/1027/EEC, 80/154/EEC, 80/155/EEC, 85/384/EEC, 85/432/EEC, 85/433/EEC and 93/16/EEC concerning the professions of nurse responsible for general care, dental practitioner, veterinary surgeon, midwife, architect, pharmacist and doctor (1), or in any event by failing to inform the Commission thereof, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 16 of that Directive; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that, by failing to bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions, as regards the profession of veterinary surgeon, that are necessary to comply with Directive 2001/19/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 May 2001 amending Council Directives 89/48/EEC and 92/51/EEC on the general system for the recognition of professional qualifications and Council Directives 77/452/EEC, 77/453/EEC, 78/686/EEC, 78/687/EEC, 78/1026/EEC, 78/1027/EEC, 80/154/EEC, 80/155/EEC, 85/384/EEC, 85/432/EEC, 85/433/EEC and 93/16/EEC concerning the professions of nurse responsible for general care, dental practitioner, veterinary surgeon, midwife, architect, pharmacist and doctor (1), or in any event by failing to inform the Commission thereof, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 16 of that Directive;

1

| — | order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In this case Article 16(1) of Directive 2001/19/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 May 2001 provides that Member States are to bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with the Directive before 1 January 2003 and that they are to inform the Commission thereof forthwith.

The Commission considers that Greece has not yet taken the measures necessary as regards the profession of veterinary surgeon.

---

(1)  OJ L 206 of 31/07/2001

1

---
Exhibit 32
                                                            ----------

              CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                      AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                  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 on Form 10-QSB of
Touchstone Applied Science Associates, Inc. (the "Company"), for
the quarter ended July 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Andrew L. Simon, President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, Touchstone Applied Science Associates, Inc., to the
best of my knowledge, that:

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

        2.      The information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.

Dated:  September 15, 2003         /s/ ANDREW L. SIMON
                                   -------------------
                                   Andrew L. Simon, President,
                                   Chief Executive Officer and
                                   Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906 has been provided to Touchstone Applied Science Associates,
Inc. and will be retained by Touchstone Applied Science
Associates, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Jim MOBLEY v. Lindle M. MOBLEY.

No. 80-C-2756.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 5, 1980.

In re Lindle D. Mobley, applying for remedial writs and stay order. Parish of East Baton Rouge. Family Court, No. 52014.

Writ denied.

DIXON, C. J., would grant the writ.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 174 (Thursday, September 10, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 46617]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-21881]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[USITC SE-09-025]


Government in the Sunshine Act Meeting Notice

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: United States International Trade 
Commission.

TIME AND DATE: September 11, 2009 at 11 a.m.

PLACE: Room 101, 500 E Street, SW.,Washington, DC 20436, Telephone: 
(202) 205-2000.

STATUS: Open to the public.

Matters To Be Considered

    1. Agenda for future meetings: None.
    2. Minutes.
    3. Ratification List.
    4. Inv. Nos. 701-TA-468 and 731-TA-1166-1167 (Preliminary) (Certain 
Magnesia Carbon Bricks from China and Mexico)--briefing and vote. (The 
Commission is currently scheduled to transmit its determinations to the 
Secretary of Commerce on or before September 14, 2009; Commissioners' 
opinions are currently scheduled to be transmitted to the Secretary of 
Commerce on or before September 21, 2009.)
    5. Outstanding action jackets: None.
    In accordance with Commission policy, subject matter listed above, 
not disposed of at the scheduled meeting, may be carried over to the 
agenda of the following meeting. Earlier announcement of this meeting 
was not possible.

    Issued: September 4, 2009.

    By order of the Commission.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. E9-21881 Filed 9-8-09; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
Exhibit 23.1

            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

Our report on our audits of the financial  statements of Alfacell Corporation as
of July 31,  2005 and 2004 and for each of the  years in the three  year  period
ended  July  31,  2005  and  on  the  statements  of   operations,   changes  in
stockholders'  equity (deficiency) and cash flows for the period from August 24,
1981 (date of  inception)  to July 31, 2005,  included in this Annual  Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended July 31, 2005, is dated October 4, 2005. Our report
on  Alfacell   Corporation's  internal  control  over  financial  reporting  and
management's   assessment  of  Alfacell   Corporation's  internal  control  over
financial  reporting,  included in this Annual  Report on Form 10-K for the year
ended July 31, 2005 is dated October 4, 2005. We consent to the incorporation by
reference of our reports in the  Registration  Statements  on Form S-8 (SEC File
Nos.  33-81308,  333-110074  and  333-112866)  and on Form  S-3  (SEC  File  No.
333-112865)  previously  filed by the Company with the  Securities  and Exchange
Commission pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933.


                                                           /s/ J.H. Cohn LLP

Roseland, New Jersey
October 10, 2005
IRC Section 162(m) Deferral Letter



 Exhibit 10.34 
 [Date] 
 [Name of Executive] 
  

	RE:	Deferral of compensation to satisfy the requirements of Section 162(m) 

 Dear [Name of Executive]: 
 Reference is made to Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (as from time to time in
effect and together with the regulations thereunder, “Section 162(m)”). With some exceptions and subject to the rules under Section 162(m), the deductibility for federal income tax purposes of compensation paid to any “covered
employee” of a public corporation is limited by Section 162(m) to $1 million in any year. Under current law, the term “covered employee” includes only certain named executive officers of the corporation who are in office at the
end of the corporation’s taxable year. 
 Please be advised that Hanover retains the right to elect to defer any payment to you under the [specify
award] (the “Award”) of even date herewith that Hanover reasonably anticipates would not be deductible by reason of Section 162(m) if paid as scheduled. Hanover expects to make any such election in accordance with the
Section 162(m)-related deferral provisions of the Treasury Regulations under Section 409A of the Code such that the deferred amounts would be payable to you, in a manner that complies with those provisions, after you have ceased to be
subject to the Section 162(m) limitations. In connection therewith, Hanover reserves the right to amend the terms of the Award, in connection with any such deferral, to conform them to the requirements of Section 409A of the Code to the
extent Hanover in its discretion determines such amendments, if any, to be necessary. The election to defer shall be made by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of The Hanover Insurance Group, Inc. 
 Please indicate your acknowledgment of and consent to the foregoing, effective as of the date first set forth above, by executing the enclosed copy of this letter in the
space indicated below and returning that fully executed copy to my attention. Your consent and acknowledgment are a condition to the effectiveness of the Award. 
  

			
	The Hanover Insurance Group, Inc.
		
	By:	 	 
		 	


  

	
	Consented to and acknowledged:
	
	  
	[Executive]
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v.

JULIO AQUIL,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 18

- 30194

D.C. No. 1:97

- cr

- 00045

- SPW

- 5

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Montana

Susan P. Watters, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 15, 2019 **

Before: TROTT, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

Julio Aquil appeals pro se from the district court’ s order denying his motion

for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). We have jurisdiction under

28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm

.

Aquil contends that he is eligible for a sentence reduction under Amendment

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

JAN 17 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 18

- 30194

599 to the Sentencing Guidelines. We review de novo whether a district court had

authority to modify a sentence under section 3582(c)(2). See United States v.

Leniear , 574 F.3d 668, 672 (9th Cir. 2009). Amendment 599 provides that when a

defendant has been convic ted of both a drug traffick ing offense and possession of a

firearm in connection with that drug trafficking offense in violation of 18 U.S.C. §

924(c), a district court should not apply a firearm enhancement in calculating the

guideline range applicable to the under lying drug traffi cking offense. The record

shows that the sentencing court did not apply a weapons enhancement when

calculating the Guidelines range for Aquil’s drug trafficking offenses

.

Accordingly, Amendment 599 did not have the effect of lowering Aquil’s

guideline ra nge, and the district court correctly concluded that he is ineligible for a

sentence reduction. See 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2 ) ; U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(a)(2)(B);

Leniear , 574 F.3d at 674

.

AFFIRMED.
#### Wiley, Admx., *v.*The Board of Commissioners of Sandusky County et al.

*Directed verdict*— No *evidence to support petition*— Damages *for mob violence.*

(No. 16395

Decided June 17, 1920.)

Error to the Court of Appeals of Sandusky county.

*Mr. Benjamin F. James; Mr. Frank O’Farréll*and. *Mr. John B. Stahl,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. A. F. Bauman,*prosecuting attorney; *Mr. Jonathan E. Ladd,*prosecuting attorney, and *Messrs. Fries & Hatfield,*for defendants in error.

This court finds that the trial court was correct in sustaining the motion of the defendants at the conclusion of the plaintiff’s case, that the court direct the jury to render a verdict in favor of defendants. A careful examination of the record compels the conclusion that there was no evidence tending to prove the material allegations of the plaintiff’s petition.

This court, therefore, finds that the court of appeals did not err in affirming the judgment of the trial court, and the judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed.

*Judgment affirmed.*

Jones, Matthias, Johnson dhd Merrell, JJ., concur.
HomeBureaus & Offices > Office of the Chief of Protocol...Visits Division

# Visits Division

## 				Visits Division			

					The Visits division plans, arranges, and executes detailed programs for visiting Chiefs of State and Heads of Government. From the arrival of a visiting foreign leader to their departure from the United States, Visits Officers work on the front lines of diplomacy and play a significant role in creating the framework for foreign relations.The Visits division, often working closely with other federal agencies, takes a lead role in the logistical planning of everything from bilateral meetings with the President, First Lady, Vice President, and Secretary of State, to Official and State visits and large scale international meetings and summits.In advance of a visit, the Visits division will work with the visiting leader’s delegation and embassy staff to create a detailed schedule from beginning to end. Working with the embassy, the division will lay the blueprint for a successful visit by ensuring all logical considerations are arranged and all cultural and traditional customs are met.In addition, the Visits division will assist and accompany Presidential Delegations while traveling to events abroad. The division also handles foreign press arrangements between the Department of State, the White House, and foreign dignitaries.				

Back to Top
EXHIBIT 10.605

December 18,
2001

Dr. Lewis
T. Williams
125 Chapel Drive
Mill Valley, CA 94941

Dear
Rusty:

I
am writing to confirm certain of the terms of your continuing employment with Chiron. As you had discussed and agreed with Linda Short and me, we each expect that you will continue your employment
relationship on the existing terms until January 2, 2002, unless you elect to terminate your employment earlier. We do not contemplate any continuing employment or consulting relationship after
that date.

For
your service through May 31, 2001, Chiron has accelerated the vesting of 40,000 of the 100,000 restricted share rights granted to you on January 2, 1998, which you will receive on
your termination date. Chiron will also accelerate the vesting of 1,667 of such share rights for each full month of full or part-time employment after May 31, 2001, up to a maximum
acceleration of 11,669 restricted share rights for seven full months, if your employment extends through to December 31, 2001. You will receive these shares on your termination date. This
acceleration is subject to approval by the Board of Directors, which we will seek immediately, and to the execution by you of an acceptable form of general release and a covenant not to solicit for
hire or hire directly or indirectly any Chiron employees into a commercial enterprise competitive with Chiron without Chiron's prior written consent. Thus, a total of up to 51,669 share rights of the
January 2, 1998 restricted stock grant may vest through December 31, 2001. The remaining 48,331 (of the original 100,000) restricted share rights will expire unvested.

In
lieu of any AIP compensation for 2001 and any other claim for cash compensation, severance or consulting, Chiron is prepared to enter into a cash deferred compensation arrangement under which you
would be paid lump sums of $161,000 on March 1, 2002 and $193,500 on May 31, 2002, provided as to the May 31 payment only that through that date you had not joined a commercial
enterprise that competes with Chiron and had not solicited or hired Chiron employees other than as agreed in advance with Chiron.

This
letter supercedes and replaces entirely the provisions of our February 20, 2001 Letter Agreement. If these changes are consistent with your understanding, please sign and return to Linda
Short a copy of this letter.

Very
truly yours,

|/s/
William G. Green
Senior Vice President and General Counsel |  | 
|-------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|                                                               |  | 
|Agreed: /s/LEWIS T. WILLIAMS                                   |  | 
|Lewis T. Williams                                              |  | 

---
#### Amidi ZUBERI, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 79-1707.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Nov. 13, 1979.

Mark C. Menser, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Steven L. Bolotin, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before HAVERFIELD, C. J., and HEN-DRY and SCHWARTZ, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner, pursuant to Fla.R.App.P. 9.140(g) having taken this appeal from the summary denial of his motion for post conviction relief under Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850 and this court having considered the record presented and having further determined that it conclusively appears therefrom that petitioner is entitled to no relief, the denial of his motion is affirmed.
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 Agriculture

###### Natural Resources Conservation Service

# AGENCY:

Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Department of Agriculture. 

# ACTION:

Notice of availability of proposed changes in the Virginia NRCS State Technical Guide for review and comment.

# SUMMARY:

It has been determined by the NRCS State Conservationist for Virginia that changes must be made in the NRCS State Technical Guide specifically in practice standard: #528, Prescribed Grazing. This practice will be used to plan and install conservation practices.

# DATES:

Comments will be received for a 30-day period commencing with this date of publication.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        John A. Bricker, State Conservationist, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), 1606 Santa Rosa Road, Suite 209, Richmond, Virginia 23229-5014; Telephone number (804) 287-1691; Fax number (804) 287-1737. Copies of the practice standards will be made available upon written request to the address shown above or on the Virginia NRCS Web site:                         *http://www.va.nrcs.usda.gov/​technical/​draftstandards.html.*      ( print page 47189)    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Section 343 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 states that revisions made after enactment of the law to NRCS State technical guides used to carry out highly erodible land and wetland provisions of the law shall be made available for public review and comment. For the next 30 days, the NRCS in Virginia will receive comments relative to the proposed changes. Following that period, a determination will be made by the NRCS in Virginia regarding disposition of those comments and a final determination of change will be made to the subject standards.

Dated: September 1, 2009.

John A. Bricker,

State Conservationist, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Richmond, Virginia.

[FR Doc. E9-22122 Filed 9-14-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-16-P
#### Hazel HICKMAN and Wade G. Hickman, her husband, Appellants, v. I. Allan BAKER, M.D., et al., Appellees.

No. 74-127.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

May 24, 1974.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### § 423.656 Appointment of representatives.

A party may appoint as its representative at the hearing anyone not disqualified or suspended from acting as a representative before the Secretary or otherwise prohibited by law.