alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Official Journal C 409/2016

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 409 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 595 November 2016 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 409

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 595 November 2016

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2016/C 409/01 | Initiation of proceedings (Case M.7962 — ChemChina/Syngenta) (
  1
  ) | 1 |
| 2016/C 409/02 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8208 — CPPIB/Glencore/Glencore Agri) (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2016/C 409/01

Initiation of proceedings (Case M.7962 — ChemChina/Syngenta) (
  1
  )

1

1

2016/C 409/02

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8208 — CPPIB/Glencore/Glencore Agri) (
  1
  )

1

1

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2016/C 409/03 | Euro exchange rates | 2 |
| 2016/C 409/04 | New national side of euro coins intended for circulation | 3 |
| 2016/C 409/05 | New national side of euro coins intended for circulation | 4 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2016/C 409/03

Euro exchange rates

2

2016/C 409/04

New national side of euro coins intended for circulation

3

2016/C 409/05

New national side of euro coins intended for circulation

4

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY |
| | European Commission |
| 2016/C 409/06 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8059 — Investindustrial/Black Diamond/Polynt/Reichhold) (
  1
  ) | 5 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

2016/C 409/06

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8059 — Investindustrial/Black Diamond/Polynt/Reichhold) (
  1
  )

1

5

---

| | Corrigenda |
| --- | --- |
| 2016/C 409/07 | Corrigendum to the annual report of the Court of Auditors on the activities funded by the 8th, 9th, 10th and 11th European Development Funds (EDFs) concerning the financial year 2015, together with the Commission's replies ( OJ C 375, 13.10.2016 ) | 6 |

Corrigenda

2016/C 409/07

Corrigendum to the annual report of the Court of Auditors on the activities funded by the 8th, 9th, 10th and 11th European Development Funds (EDFs) concerning the financial year 2015, together with the Commission's replies ( OJ C 375, 13.10.2016 )

6

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS, CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS, CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS
OF CASH FLOWS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-29-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-24-1995
<CASH>                                         1633614
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    34507
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     170799
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               1908363
<PP&E>                                         5178545
<DEPRECIATION>                                 3107984
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 4728769
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           820430
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         37650
<OTHER-SE>                                     3870689
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   4728769
<SALES>                                        2517943
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               2517943
<CGS>                                          1315416
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  2255501
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  4800
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                1171
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 256471
<INCOME-TAX>                                     16400
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             240071
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    240071
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .06
        

</TABLE>
# C_2021182EN.01000902.xml

| 10.5.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 182/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.5.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 182/9

---

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 10 March 2021 — European Road Transport Telematics Implementation Coordination Organisation — Intelligent Transport Systems & Services Europe (Ertico — ITS Europe) v European Commission

(Case C-572/19 P) (1)

(Appeal - State aid - Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities - Recommendation 2003/361/EC - Decision of the Validation Panel of the European Commission on classification as a micro, small or medium-sized enterprise (SME) - Decision 2012/838/EU, Euratom - Annex - Sections 1.2.6 and 1.2.7 - Request for review - Regulation (EC) No 58/2003 - Article 22 - No administrative proceedings - Link between request for review and administrative proceedings - Refusal of SME status despite formal observance of the Recommendation 2003/361 criteria - Legal certainty - Legitimate expectations - Handicaps usually faced by SMEs - None)

(2021/C 182/12)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: European Road Transport Telematics Implementation Coordination Organisation — Intelligent Transport Systems & Services Europe (Ertico — ITS Europe) (represented by: M. Wellinger and K. T’Syen, avocats)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: R. Lyal and A. Kyratsou, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the appellant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek, J. Vláčil, O. Serdula and J. Očková, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders European Road Transport Telematics Implementation Coordination Organisation — Intelligent Transport Systems & Services Europe (Ertico — ITS Europe) to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders European Road Transport Telematics Implementation Coordination Organisation — Intelligent Transport Systems & Services Europe (Ertico — ITS Europe) to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;

| 3. | Orders the Czech Republic to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Czech Republic to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 312, 16.9.2019.

---
Exhibit 4.57

 

POWER OF ATTORNEY

 

I, Liu Dele, citizen of the People’s Republic of China (the “PRC”), PRC ID card number , hereby irrevocably authorize any individual appointed, in writing, by Chuanxian Technology (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. (“WFOE”)  who is approved by Youku Tudou Inc. (“Authorizee”), to the extent permitted by PRC Law, as my sole attorney to solely exercise, in the manner as approved by Youku Tudou Inc., the following powers and rights during the term of this Power of Attorney (“POA”) pursuant to Section 3.5 of the Business Operations Agreement entered into among WFOE, Shanghai Quan Toodou Network Science and Technology Co., Ltd. (“Shanghai Quan Toodou”), Qin Qiong and I on December 22, 2014 (the “Operations Agreement”):

 

I hereby authorize and designate the Authorizee to vote on my behalf at the shareholders’ meetings of Shanghai Quan Toodou and exercise the full voting rights as its shareholder as granted to me by law and under the Articles of Association of Shanghai Quan Toodou, including but not limited to, the right to propose the holding of shareholders’ meetings, to accept any notification about the holding and discussion procedure of such meeting, to attend the shareholders’ meeting of Shanghai Quan Toodou  and exercise the full voting rights (such as my authorized representative on the shareholders’ meeting of the company, to designate and appoint the executive director or directors of the Board and the general manager and to decide the allotment of profits, etc.), and to sell or transfer any or all of my shares of Shanghai Quan Toodou.

 

The authorization I granted to WFOE can be re-authorized or assigned to any third party without my consent.  In exercising the rights and powers provided hereunder, the Authorizee shall act with due care and diligence and pursuant to this POA and the applicable laws.

 

The POA shall take effect from December 31, 2014 and will remain effective as long as Shanghai Quan Toodou exists.

 











 

	
 
    	
Liu Dele
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
/s/ Liu Dele
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
Date:   December 22, 2014
#### § 1022.40 Scope.

Subpart E of this part applies to any person that furnishes information to a consumer reporting agency, except for a person excluded from coverage of this part by section 1029 of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010, title X of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376.
42181.

#### AMERICAN SECURITY INVESTMENT COMPANY v. POPPELL, Sheriff, et al.

Submitted July 8, 1966

Decided September 6, 1966.

*Conyers, Fendig, Dickey & Harris, J. Thomas Whelchel,*for appellant.

*Daniel H. White,*Tom Poppell, *pro se,*for appellee.

Eberhardt, Judge.

A bill of sale to secure debt was foreclosed and pursuant to levy of the mortgage fi. fa., the property, a house trailer, was advertised and sold for $2,000, less than half the amount due. Plaintiff in fi. fa. brought a petition to set aside the sale, alleging that it had not been represented at the sale because its attorneys had an understanding that the sale would not be held until 12 noon, whereas it was in fact held at 10 a.m. and that if it had been represented at the sale the trailer would have brought a substantially greater sum.

It was not alleged how or why the attorneys “had an understanding that the sale would not be held until 12 noon,” or that the sale had not been lawfully advertised and regularly held, that there was any matter of accident or surprise, or that there was any fraud in the sale. Though the proceeding was maintainable at law as well as in equity *(Johnson v. Dooly,*72 Ga. 297, 301), the petition was insufficient and it was not error to deny the relief and dismiss it. *Sellers v. Johnson,*207 Ga. 644 (63 SE2d 904).

A different question might have been raised if it had been alleged that the sheriff misled the attorneys as to when the sale was to be held. Cf. *Horton & Rikeman v. Moyers,*25 Ga. 89; *Fears v. State,*102 Ga. 274, 284 (5) (29 SE 463); *Haunson v. Nelms,*109 Ga. 802 (35 SE 227); *Suttles v. Sewell,*109 Ga. 707, 710 (35 SE 224); *Smith v. Georgia Loan &c. Co.,*114 Ga. 189 (39 SE 846); *Oswald, v. Johnson,*140 Ga. 62 (78 SE 333); *Sikes v. Sikes,*153 Ga. 725 (113 SE 416); but see Jones *v. Bibb Brick Co.,*120 Ga. 321 (8) (48 SE 25); *Code*§ 39-1316. Even this may be unavailing, however, unless it appears that the purchaser knew of or had some hand in the misleading. *Howland v. Donehoo,*141 Ga. 687, 694 (82 SE 32); *Interstate Trust Co. v. Citizens Bank of Moultrie,*166 Ga. 537 (143 SE 577); and particularly see *Code Ann.*§ 109A-9—504 (4).

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Bell, P. J., and Jordan, J., concur.*
Exhibit 32.2


              CERTIFICATION OF 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  IGENE  Biotechnology,  Inc.  (the
"Company")  Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for  the  period  ended
September  30,  2010  as filed with the Securities  and  Exchange
Commission  (the  "Report"),  I,  Edward  J.  Weisberger,   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:

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

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


Date: November 15, 2010           By: /S/ EDWARD J. WEISBERGER
      _________________               ___________________________
                                          EDWARD J. WEISBERGER
                                          Chief Financial Officer


A  signed original of this written statement required by  Section
906  has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the
Company  and furnished to the Securities and Exchange  Commission
or its staff upon request.
42103.

#### CHAMBERLAIN v. RYCROFT.

Argued June 10, 1966

Decided September 16, 1966.

*293
      *Arnold & Harris, Boss Arnold,*for appellant.

*Sarah Frances McDonald, B. Hugh Burgess,*for appellee.

Bell, Presiding Judge.

In order for a plaintiff to be permitted by law to recover in a tort action based on negligence the evidence must show four essential elements. These are: (1) a legal duty to conform to a standard of conduct raised by the law for the protection of others against unreasonable risks of harm; (2) a breach of this standard; (3) a legally attributable causal connection between the conduct and the resulting injury; and, (4) some loss or damage flowing to the plaintiff’s legally protected interests as a result of the defendant’s breach of the legal duty. *Lee Street Auto Sales v. Warren,*102 Ga. App. 345, 347 (1) (116 SE2d 243). Cf. Prosser on Torts, 3d Ed. § 30.

Here the finding is demanded as a matter of law that at least the third essential element was totally absent from the case, as the only reasonable inference that can be drawn from the evidence is that the defendant did not share in producing the plaintiff’s injuries. Thus there is no causal connection between the defendant’s conduct and the plaintiff’s injury. Further, this is not a case where the negligence of the other drivers of the cars in line may be legally attributable to the defendant. The evidence was silent regarding any agency relationship, and totally failed to show a joint enterprise, since it did not suggest that any of the drivers of the cars in line had any right to control, direct, or govern the operation and running of any of the vehicles other than his own. *Fuller v. Mills,*36 Ga. App. 357 (136 SE 807); *Holland v. Boyett,*212 Ga. 458 (93 SE2d 662).

The trial judge properly directed the verdict for the defendant.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Jordan and Eberhardt, JJ., concur.*
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF WASHINGTON,

Respondent,

v.

RAFAEL CONTRERAS GONZALES,

Appellant.

No. 70293-9-1

UNPUBLISHED OPINION

FILED: MAR 1 0 2014

Per Curiam — Rafael Contreras Gonzales appeals the sentence imposed

following his convictions for attempting to elude a police vehicle and driving under the

influence of alcohol. He contends, and the State concedes, that the sentence condition

requiring him to obtain a "substance abuse evaluation" does not accurately reflect the

sentencing court's intent and should be amended to require evaluation and treatment

only for alcohol abuse. Gonzales also notes, and the State also concedes, that the

portion of the judgment and sentence pertaining to the DUI conviction erroneously

refers to 60 months of "community custody" and community custody statutes instead of

"probation" under RCW 9.95.210. We accept the State's concessions and remand for

amendment of the judgment and sentence.

Remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

FOR THE COURT:
Exhibit 11

Electronic Retailing Systems International, Inc.
Computation of Net Income Per Common Share



					Year Ended		Year Ended		Year Ended
					Dec. 31, 2000	Dec. 31, 1999	Dec. 31, 1998
					--------------	--------------	--------------

Net Income				$41,207,000		($2,111,000)	($34,313,000)
					--------------	--------------	--------------

Weighted average common
 shares outstanding		 21,291,072		 21,264,025		  21,232,621
					--------------	--------------	--------------

Basic (loss) per common
 share				      $1.94		     ($0.10)	      ($1.62)
					--------------	--------------	--------------

Calculation of weighted average shares outstanding
--------------------------------------------------
Shares issued and outstanding
			 21,282,637		 21,249,447		  21,187,035

Issuance of shares pursuant
to stock option plan	      8,440		     14,578		      45,586
	--------------	--------------	--------------

Weighted average common
 shares outstanding	 21,291,077		 21,264,025		  21,232,621
	---------------	--------------	--------------
Exhibit 32.1
                                  Certification
                  Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
                     Act of 2002 (Subsections (a) and (b) of
                      Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18,
                               United States Code)

     Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a)
and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of
the undersigned officers of ATA Holdings Corp. (the "Company"), does hereby
certify that:

     The Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 (the
"Form 10-K") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information
contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


Dated:   March 28, 2005                    /s/J. George Mikelsons
                                           J. George Mikelsons
                                           Chairman and Chief Executive Officer



Dated:   March 28, 2005                    /s/Gilbert F. Viets
                                           Gilbert F. Viets
                                           Executive Vice President and
                                           Chief Financial Officer



<PAGE>
HomeReportsBureau of Economic and Business Affairs2023 Fiscal Transparency Report…Chad

# 					2023 Fiscal Transparency Report: Chad			

 In this section										

                -  Government-by-Government Assessments: Chad 

## Government-by-Government Assessments: Chad

During the review period, the transitional government made its executive budget proposal, its enacted budget, and end-of-year report publicly available within a reasonable period. Budget documents broke down expenditures by ministry, but did not include all revenues and expenditures, nor allocations to or earnings from major state-owned enterprises. Information on debt obligations, including major state-owned enterprise debt, was not publicly available. The transitional government

maintained some off-budget accounts not subject to audit or oversight. The supreme audit institution was not operational and did not meet international standards of independence or produce substantive public reports. The transitional government specified in law or regulation the criteria and procedures for awarding natural resource extraction contracts and licenses, but it did not always follow those regulations in practice. Basic information on natural resource extraction awards was publicly available.

Chad’s fiscal transparency would be improved by:

- Including all revenues and expenditures in the budget, including allocations to and earnings from major state-owned enterprises;
- Eliminating off-budget accounts or subjecting them to audit and oversight;
- Disclosing debt holdings, including for major state-owned enterprises;
- Establishing an operational supreme audit institution that meets international standards of independence;
- Making substantive supreme audit institution reports publicly available; and
- Following natural resource extraction laws and regulations in practice.

## View report by:

### On This Page

                    -  Government-by-Government Assessments: Chad 

Tags

Bureau of African AffairsBureau of Economic and Business AffairsChadDivision for International Finance and Development

Back to Top

                - White House
                - USA.gov
                - Office of the Inspector General
                - Archives
                - Contact Us

follow us
FacebookXInstagramYouTubeFlickrGovDelivery

              - Privacy Policy
              - Accessibility Statement
              - Copyright Information
              - FOIA
              - No FEAR Act

## U.S. Department *of* State

#### The Lessons of 1989: Freedom and Our Future
§ 64.10 Application. ( a ) To apply for an RVCP grant, eligible entities must submit to VA a complete application package. Applications will be accepted only through Grants.gov (*http://www.grants.gov*).
( b ) A complete RVCP grant application package includes the following: ( 1 ) A description of the services to be provided and which of the permissible uses for RVCP grants outlined in § 64.6(a) the services are intended to fulfill.
( 2 ) A description, with supporting documentation, of the need for the proposed project in the proposed location, including an estimate, with supporting documentation, of the number of veterans and families that will be provided services by the applicant.
( 3 ) A description, with supporting documentation, of how the proposed project location qualifies as a rural or an underserved community, as defined in this part.
( 4 ) Documentation evidencing the applicant's experience in providing the proposed services, particularly to veterans and their families.
( 5 ) Evidence of a clear, realistic, and measurable program of self-evaluation and monitoring, including a documented commitment to remediate any identified noncompliance.
( 6 ) Documentation of the ability of the applicant to administer the project, including plans to: ( i ) Continuously assess and adapt to the needs of participants for services under the RVCP grant;
( ii ) Coordinate and customize the provision of services to the identified needs of the participants;
( iii ) Comply with and implement the requirements of this part throughout the term of the RVCP grant; and
( iv ) Complete and submit timely reports of RVCP grant activities.
( 7 ) A description of any assistance received from or any consultations with VA or Veterans Service Organizations in the development of the proposal being submitted.
( 8 ) Any additional information deemed appropriate by VA and set forth in the NOFA. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, 523 note)
(The Office of Management and Budget has approved the information collection provisions in this section under control numbers 4040-0003, 4040-0004, 4040-0006, 4040-0007, 4040-0008, 4040-0009, and 4040-0010)