alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Official Journal L 58/2022

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 58 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6528 February 2022 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 58

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6528 February 2022

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/336 of 28 February 2022 implementing Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine | 1 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/336 of 28 February 2022 implementing Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-7300

MUHIDIN SALAD OMAR,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

JOHN C. GARDNER, Attorney at Law,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at 

Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (2:23-cv-00057-AWA-LRL)

Submitted: April 18, 2024 Decided: April 22, 2024

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Muhidin Salad Omar, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-7300 Doc: 8 Filed: 04/22/2024 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Muhidin Salad Omar appeals the district court’s order dismissing his complaint filed 

pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agens of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 

388 (1971), under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). We have reviewed the record and find no 

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Omar v. Gardner, 

No. 2:23-cv-00057-AWA-LRL (E.D. Va. Nov. 28, 2023). We dispense with oral argument 

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this 

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 23-7300 Doc: 8 Filed: 04/22/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

________________

NO. 09-21-00059-CR

________________

JAMES RAY DUNCANSON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

________________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 52nd District Court

Coryell County , Texas

Trial Cause No. 19-25491

________________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In an open plea, appellant James Ray Duncanson pleaded guilty to prostitution 

solicitation of a person under 18 years old. Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 43.02(c-1). After 

conducting a sentencing hearing, the trial court assessed Duncanson’s punishment 

at five years incarceration in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional 

Division.

1

1 This case was transferred to this Court from the Tenth Court of Appeals in 

Waco, Texas, pursuant to a docket equalization order. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 

73.001.
2

Duncanson’s appellate counsel filed an Anders brief that presents counsel’s 

professional evaluation of the record and concludes that the appeal is frivolous. See 

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. 

Crim. App. 1978). On September 7, 2021, we granted an extension of time for 

Duncanson to file a pro se brief. We received no response from Duncanson.

We reviewed the appellate record, and we agree with counsel’s conclusion 

that no arguable issues support the appeal. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order 

appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeal. Cf. Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 

503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

2

AFFIRMED.

 ________________________________

 CHARLES KREGER 

 Justice

 

Submitted on February 23, 2022

Opinion Delivered April 20, 2022

Do Not Publish

Before Kreger, Horton and Johnson, JJ.

2 Duncanson may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for 

discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.
§ 1221.107 Establishment of the NASA Administrator's, Deputy Administrator's, and Associate Administrator's Flags. ( a ) Concurrently with the establishment of the NASA Flag in January 1960, the NASA Administrator also established NASA Flags to represent the NASA Administrator, Deputy Administrator, and Associate Administrator. Each of these flags conforms to the basic design of the NASA Flag except for the following: ( 1 ) The size of the flag is 3 feet x 4 feet;
( 2 ) The Administrator's Flag has four stars;
( 3 ) The Deputy Administrator's Flag has three stars; and
( 4 ) The Associate Administrator's Flag has two stars.
( b ) Flags representing these senior officials shall be used as set forth in § 1221.113.
[85 FR 71830, Nov. 12, 2020]
January 11, 2011 

Ms. Susan Angela Roberts 

108 Taylifers 

Sumners Estate 

Harlow, United Kingdom, CM19 5RG 

Dear Ms. Roberts: 

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from 

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can’t process your 

request and what you should do in the next 30 days. 

Why We Can’t Process Your Request 

We entered your December 27, 2011, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA2011-1451), but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent 

doesn’t comply with the requirements of 14 CFR § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider 

the request any further, you must send us all of the following: 

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the 

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief. 

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole. 

 The reasons why the exemption wouldn’t adversely affect safety or how the exemption 

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you 

seek an exemption. 

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request. 

 The specific reasons why you need to exercise the privileges of your exemption outside 

the United States, if applicable. 

For assistance submitting an exemption request involving use of the CARES restraint, please 

visit http://www.kidsflysafe.com/how-to-use-cares/cares-for-special-needs-kids. The website 

includes specific instructions on completing and submitting a petition on this matter. Please 

include your docket number (FAA-2011-1451) in the comments box when submitting your 

updated petition. 
2 

What You Should Do 

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. We will consider the docket on your request open until we 

receive this required information from you. Please note that 14 CFR § 11.63(d) requires you 

to send your petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the 

exemption. 

If We Don’t Hear From You 

If we don’t hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

Cindy B. Nordlie 

Acting Manager, Airmen and 

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
#### § 229.58 Mode of delivery of information.

A bank may deliver any notice or other information that it is required to provide under this subpart by United States mail or by any other means through which the recipient has agreed to receive account information. If a bank is required to provide an original check or a sufficient copy, the bank instead may provide an electronic image of the original check or sufficient copy if the recipient has agreed to receive that information electronically.
#### Sears *v.*The State.

*Assault With Intent to Murder.*

(Decided May 21, 1914.

Rehearing denied June 3, 1914.

65 South. 300.)

1. *Appeal and Error; Review; Matters Presented.*— Where matters complained of are properly shown by the bill of exceptions, and the bill of exceptions on file contained no recital as to such matters or ruling thereon, they cannot be reviewed on appeal.

2. *Same; Barmless Error; Evidence.*— If rulings were originally erroneous the error was cured where such rulings were subsequently changed so that defendant was given the benefit of everything he sought to obtain through his objections.

Appeal from Montgomery City Court.

Heard before Hon. Gaston Gunter.

Robert L. Sears was convicted of an assault with intent to murder, and he appeals.

Affirmed.

L. A. Sanderson, for appellant.

Counsel discusses assignments of error, as to the court’s rulings on the evidence with citation of authority in support thereof, but in view of the opinion it is not deemed necessary to set them out.

R. C. II rick ell, Attorney General, and W. L. Martin, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

PELHAM, J.

We have carefully examined the transcript in this case, and discover no reversible error. The proceeding's shown in the record proper are regular, and the bill of exceptions contains nothing requiring or meriting discussion; and no matter has been pointed out or called to our attention by argument or brief in behalf of the appellant as constituting error. Let tl'« judgment appealed from be affirmed.

*77ON REHEARING.

The appellant, in an application for a rehearing, points out and discusses several matters that are insisted upon as showing reversible error. We have again examined the transcript in connection with the contentions of the appellant, and are of opinion that reversible error is not shown by anything insisted upon in the application. Several of the matters argued as showing error are not reviewable here, as no ruling of the trial court in. respect to them is shown b;y any recital contained in the bill of exceptions. Many of the rulings on the evidence that are insisted upon as constituting error are shown to have been subsequently changed, and the defendant to have been given the benefit of everything he was seeking to obtain through his objections. Rulings to which exceptions were reserved that were not cured or rendered nonprejudicial to the defendant are manifestly correct.

Application 'denied.
<PAGE>

                                 EXHIBIT (10)(b)

                         OPINION AND CONSENT OF ACTUARY

<PAGE>

                [Transamerica Life Insurance Company Letterhead]

April 1, 2003

Transamerica Life Insurance Company
4333 Edgewood Road NE
Cedar Rapids, Iowa  52499-0001

Re:   Retirement Income Builder - BAI
      Separate Account VA K
      Registration on Form N-4

Dear Sir/Madam:

With regard to the above registration statement, I have examined such documents
and made such inquiries as I have deemed necessary and appropriate, and on the
basis of such examination, have the following opinions:

Fees and charges deducted under the Retirement Income Builder - BAI policies are
those deemed necessary to appropriately reflect:

(1)   the expenses incurred in the acquisition and distribution of the
      policies, 

(2)   the expenses associated with the development and servicing of the
      policies,

(3)   the assumption of certain risks arising from the operation and management
      of the policies and/or riders to the policy and that provides for a
      reasonable margin of profit.

Fees and charges assessed against the policy values in the variable account
include:

(i)   Service Charge and Administrative Charge

(ii)  Mortality and Expense Risk Fee (M&E)

(iii) Taxes (including premium and other taxes if applicable)

(iv)  Surrender Charges

(v)   Any applicable rider fees or charges

<PAGE>

Transamerica Life Insurance Company
April 1, 2003
Page 2


The magnitude of each of the individual charges listed above in (i) through (v)
is established in the pricing of the Retirement Income Builder - BAI, to achieve
a reasonable Return on Investment (ROI), which is within the range of industry
practice with respect to comparable variable annuity products.

Except by coincidence, it is not expected that actual charges assessed in a
given year would exactly offset actual expenses incurred. Acquisition expenses
(as well as major product and/or systems development expenses) are incurred "up
front" and recovered, with a reasonable profit margin, through future years'
charges. In addition, the company cannot increase certain charges under the
policies in the pricing process.

Therefore, in my opinion, the fees and charges deducted under the policies, in
the aggregate, are reasonable in relation to the services rendered, the expenses
expected to be incurred, and the risks assumed by the company.

I hereby consent to the use of this opinion, which is included as an Exhibit to
the registration statement.


    /s/ R. Gene Hauser
----------------------------------------------
R. Gene Hauser
Associate Actuary
Transamerica Life Insurance Company
APPENDIX “B5”

 User Manual: DJI Inspire
#### BENDYKSON *v.*LYONS EVANGELISTIC COMMITTEE.

Master and Servant — Workmen’s Compensation Act — Applicability op Act.

It is not competent for the industrial accident hoard to make an award where the injury to a claimant for compensation occurs before the employer has elected to come under the workmen’s compensation act (Act No. 10, Extra Session 1912, 2 Comp. Laws 1915, § 5423 *et seg.).*

Certiorari to Industrial Accident Board.

Submitted January 16 1917.

(Docket No. 144.)

Decided March 30, 1917.

Ole J. Bendykson presented his claim for compensation against the Lyons Evangelistic Committee for injuries received while in defendant’s employ. From an order awarding compensation, defendant and the American Indemnity Company bring certiorari.

Reversed,

*491
      *Fred L. Vanderveer (Orville II. Foster,*of counsel), for appellants.

Brooke, J.

On September 7, 1915, respondent, Lyons Evangelistic Committee, filed with the industrial accident board a written acceptance of the provisions of the so-called employers-’ liability act (2 Comp. Laws 1915, § 5423 *et seq.).*This acceptance was approved by the board on September 29, 1915. The claimant, in the course of his employment', while working for said respondent, the Lyons Evangelistic Committee, was injured on the 1st day of September, 1915. He made a claim for compensation under the act, and was awarded compensation by an arbitration •committee, which award was afterwards affirmed by the board on appeal.

The injury to claimant having occurred before his employer had elected to come under the act, it was not competent for the board to make an award. *Bernard*v. *Traction Co.,*188 Mich. 504 (154 N. W.*565); Shevchenko*v. *Railway,*189 Mich. 421 (155 N. W. 423).

The order of the board granting compensation is vacated and set aside.

Kuhn, C. J., and Stone, Ostrander, Bird, Moore, Steere, and Fellows, JJ., concurred.
§ 1245.205 Processing of administrative claims. ( a ) *Filing and forwarding of claims.* All communications regarding claims should be addressed to: Agency Counsel for Intellectual Property, Office of the General Counsel, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC 20546-0001. If any communication relating to a claim or possible claim of patent or copyright infringement is received by an agency, organization, office, or field installation within NASA, it shall be forwarded to the Agency Counsel for Intellectual Property.
( b ) *Disposition and notification.* The General Counsel, or designee, shall investigate and administratively settle, deny, or otherwise dispose of each claim. When a claim is denied, the Agency shall so notify the claimant or the claimant's authorized representative and provide the claimant with the reasons for denying the claim. Disclosure of information shall be subject to applicable statutes, regulations, and directives pertaining to security, access to official records, and the rights of others.
( c ) *Termination of claims.* If, while an administrative claim for patent or copyright infringement is pending against NASA, the claimant brings suit for patent or copyright infringement against the United States in the Court of Federal Claims based on the same facts or transactions as the administrative claim, the administrative claim shall thereupon be automatically dismissed, with no further action being required of NASA.
<PAGE>

                                     EXHIBIT

                                      21.1


<PAGE>

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
         NAME OF SUBSIDIARY                                            STATE OF INCORPORATION
         ------------------                                            ----------------------
<S>                                                                   <C>
Green Leaf Advertising Company, Inc.                                            New York

Abacus Films Ltd.                                                               New York

Unapix Films, Inc.                                                              New York

Unapix Productions West                                                         California

Unapix Syndication, Inc.                                                        New York

Fresh Development, Inc.                                                         Delaware

Unapix Direct Media, Inc.                                                       New Jersey

Green Leaf Advertising Company, Inc.                                            New York

Miramar Images, Inc.                                                            Washington
(doing business as Unapix Home Entertainment)
</TABLE>
###### Editorial Note on Part 1251

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1251 appear at 81 FR 3709, Jan. 22, 2016.

#### §§ 1251.583-1251.999 [Reserved]
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**Certification**

 

I, George Feldenkreis, certify that: 

 

1) I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 31, 2004 of Perry Ellis International, Inc.; 

 

2) Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual report;

 

3) Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and otherfinancial information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report; 

 

4) The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the registrant and have: 

 

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensurethat material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared; 

 

b) [Paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release No. 34-49313] 

 

c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this Report based on such evaluation; and 

 

d) Disclosed in this annual report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

 

5) The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofthe registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function): 

 

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,process, summarize and report financial information; and 

 

b)Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
#### GEORGE *W.*JOHNSON v. UNITED STATES

[76 C.Cls. 360; 290 U.S. 677]

Petition for writ of certiorari *denied*by Supreme Court October 23, 1933.
#### § 107.43 Operation in the vicinity of airports.

No person may operate a small unmanned aircraft in a manner that interferes with operations and traffic patterns at any airport, heliport, or seaplane base.
§ 1232.102 Policy. It is the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) policy to comply with the Animal Welfare Act of 1966 (Pub. L. 89-544) which requires that minimum standards of care and treatment be provided for certain animals bred for use in research. To implement the provisions of this Act, NASA promulgated the following internal policies and requirements: ( a ) NASA Policy Directive (NPD) 8910.1, Care and Use of Animals, describes the policy and responsibilities for conducting activities involving vertebrate animals. NPD 8910.1 is accessible at *http://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov/ ;* and
( b ) NASA Procedural Requirements (NPR) 8910.1, Care and Use of Animals, delineates the responsibilities and implements requirements for the Agency's use of animals in research, testing, teaching, and hardware development activities. NPR 8910.1 is accessible is access at *http://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov/ .*