alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Europos Sąjungos C 68A/2011

| | ISSN 1725-521X
  doi:10.3000/1725521X.CA2011.068.lit |
| --- | --- |
| Europos Sąjungos
  oficialusis leidinys | C 68A |
| | |
| Leidimas lietuvių kalba | Informacija ir prane_imai | 54 tomas2011m. kovo 3d. |

ISSN 1725-521X

doi:10.3000/1725521X.CA2011.068.lit

Europos Sąjungos

oficialusis leidinys

C 68A

Leidimas lietuvių kalba

Informacija ir prane_imai

54 tomas2011m. kovo 3d.

---

| Prane_imo Nr. | Turinys | Puslapis |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | Klaidų ištaisymas |
| 2011/C 068A/01 | Pranešimo apie viešą konkursą EPSO/AST/112/10 — Asistentai (AST 3) klaidų ištaisymas (OL C 341 A, 2010 12 16) | 1 |

Prane_imo Nr.

Turinys

Puslapis

Klaidų ištaisymas

2011/C 068A/01

Pranešimo apie viešą konkursą EPSO/AST/112/10 — Asistentai (AST 3) klaidų ištaisymas (OL C 341 A, 2010 12 16)

(OL C 341 A, 2010 12 16)

1

OFICIALIOJO LEIDINIO C A SERIJOS KONKURSAI APŽVALGA

Toliau pateikiamas šiais metais išleistų C A serijos leidinių sąrašas.

Jei nenurodyta kitaip, Oficialieji leidiniai yra išleisti visomis kalbomis.

| 19 | (PL) |
| --- | --- |
| 24 | |
| 35 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 37 | (PL/RO) |
| 60 | |
| 68 | |

19

(PL)

24

35

(DE/EN/FR)

37

(PL/RO)

60

68

| LT | |
| --- | --- |

LT

---

Klaidų ištaisymas

| 3.3.2011 | LT | Europos Sąjungos oficialusis leidinys | CA 68/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.3.2011

LT

Europos Sąjungos oficialusis leidinys

CA 68/1

---

Pranešimo apie viešą konkursą EPSO/AST/112/10 — Asistentai (AST 3) klaidų ištaisymas

(
  Europos Sąjungos oficialusis leidinys C 341 A, 2010 m. gruodžio 16 d.
  )

(2011/C 68 A/01)

3 puslapis, IV.2 dalis:

yra:

| „d testas | profesiniais įgūdžiais:


  tikslumu ir aiškumu | vertinimas: 0–20 balų


  mažiausias reikalaujamas balų skaičius: 10 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| e testas | profesiniais įgūdžiais:


  prioritetų nustatymu ir darbo organizavimu | vertinimas: 0–20 balų


  mažiausias reikalaujamas balų skaičius: 10“, |

„d testas

profesiniais įgūdžiais:

tikslumu ir aiškumu

vertinimas: 0–20 balų

mažiausias reikalaujamas balų skaičius: 10

e testas

profesiniais įgūdžiais:

prioritetų nustatymu ir darbo organizavimu

vertinimas: 0–20 balų

mažiausias reikalaujamas balų skaičius: 10“,

turi būti:

| „d testas | profesiniais įgūdžiais:


  tikslumu ir aiškumu | vertinimas: 0–20 balų |
| --- | --- | --- |
| e testas | profesiniais įgūdžiais:


  prioritetų nustatymu ir darbo organizavimu | vertinimas: 0–20 balų |
| | Mažiausias reikalaujamas bendras d ir e testų balų skaičius — 20“. |

„d testas

profesiniais įgūdžiais:

tikslumu ir aiškumu

vertinimas: 0–20 balų

e testas

profesiniais įgūdžiais:

prioritetų nustatymu ir darbo organizavimu

vertinimas: 0–20 balų

Mažiausias reikalaujamas bendras d ir e testų balų skaičius — 20“.

---
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.                  

###### International Trade Commission

# AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: 

United States International Trade Commission. 

# TIME AND DATE: 

May 15, 2000 at 2 p.m. 

# PLACE: 

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

# STATUS: 

Open to the public.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

1. Agenda for future meeting: none.

2. Minutes. 

3. Ratification List. 

4. Inv. No. 731-TA-841 (Final)(Certain Non-Frozen Concentrated Apple Juice from China)—briefing and vote. (The Commission will transmit its determination to the Secretary of Commerce on May 22, 2000.) 

                        5. Inv. No. 731-TA-429 (Review) (Mechanical Transfer Presses from Japan)—briefing and vote. (The Commission will transmit its                               ( print page 30135)                            determination to the Secretary of Commerce on May 26, 2000.)                     

6. Outstanding action jackets: (1) Document No. GC-00-020: Administrative matters. 

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. 

By order of the Commission: 

Issued: May 5, 2000.

Donna R. Koehnke, 

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-11755 Filed 5-8-00; 10:10 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
United States Environmental Protection Agency

Region IX

75 Hawthorne Street

San Francisco, CA 94105-3901

November 30, 2011

Transmittal of EPA Rule Review Comments

To: Jessi Fierro, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 

jessica.fierro@valleyair.org

Mike Guzzetta, California Air Resources Board

mguzzett@arb.ca.gov

From: Andrew Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief

steckel.andrew@epa.gov

Re: Poposed Rule 4352, Solid Fuel Fired Boilers (November 15, 2011)

We are providing comments based on our preliminary review of the draft rule identified above. Please 

direct any questions about our comments to me at (415) 947-4115 or to Idalia Perez at (415) 972-3248.

1. The District should define the terms in the six-tenths equation, used for the first time on page seven of 

the staff report.

2. The District should explain why it uses a 10-year life and a 10% interest rate to determine the 

annualized capital costs for retrofit equipment. 

3. The District should consider including PM2.5 and SOx emission limits in the SIP in response to the 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS.
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Shannon Bass, Appellant

No. 06-19-00058-CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

Appeal from the 124th District Court of 

Gregg County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 44585-B). 

Memorandum Opinion delivered by Justice 

Stevens, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice 

Burgess participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find that the motion of the appellant to 

dismiss the appeal should be granted. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal.

We note that the appellant, Shannon Bass, has adequately indicated her inability to pay 

costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED MAY 3, 2019

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
#### Best & Company, Inc., et al., Appellants, *v.*Village of Garden City et al., Respondents.

Argued January 25, 1937;

decided March 9, 1937.

*565
      *M. James Spitzer*and *Nathaniel D. Reich*for appellants.

*George L. Hubbell, Jr., Daniel S. Murphy*and *John J. Gibson, Jr.,*for respondents.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Loughran, Einch and Rippey, JJ. Taking no part: Hubbs, J.
**Exhibit
      32.1**








**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**








In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of WT Holdings Corporation (the “Company”)
      on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Ke Huang, Chief
      Executive Officer of the Company, certify to the best of my knowledge, pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 and Exchange Act of 1934; and





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


/s/ Ke
                    HuangKe
                      Huang
                    Chief
                      Executive Officer
                    May
                        15,
                        2006





The
      foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350
      and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
      document.
§ 303.41 Notice. ( a ) The Documentary Service Division shall compile a weekly list of all applications filed under §§ 303.04 and 303.05. The list shall include a description of the application, the docket number, date of filing, state that it may be reviewed in the Documentary Services Division, and indicate that interested parties may comment on the application or request a hearing within 21 days of the date of filling or other period as specified. The weekly list will normally be prepared on the following Monday, or as soon as possible, and will be posted on a public bulletin board in the Documentary Services Division. The list also shall be submitted for publication in the Federal Register.
( b ) In appropriate case, particularly when an application concerns a matter of broad public significance, the Assistant Secretary may cause a notice of an application and request for public comment to be published separately in the Federal Register.
§ 420.17 Bases for issuance of a license. ( a ) The FAA will issue a license under this part when the FAA determines that: ( 1 ) The application provides the information required by § 420.15;
( 2 ) The FAA has completed an analysis of the environmental impacts associated with the proposed operation of the launch site, in accordance with NEPA, 40 CFR parts 1500-1508, and FAA Order 1050.1D;
( 3 ) The launch site location meets the requirements of §§ 420.19, 420.21, 420.23, 420.25, 420.27, and 420.29;
( 4 ) The applicant has completed the agreements required by § 420.31;
( 5 ) The application demonstrates that the applicant shall satisfy the requirements of §§ 420.53, 420.55, 420.57, 420.59, 420.61 and 420.71;
( 6 ) The explosive site plan meets the criteria of §§ 420.63, 420.65, 420.67 and 420.69; and
( 7 ) Issuing a license would not jeopardize foreign policy or national security interests of the United States.
( b ) The FAA advises an applicant, in writing, of any issue arising during an application review that would lead to denial. The applicant may respond in writing, submit additional information, or amend its license application.
# Roll Call Vote Unavailable

**

----

Results of roll call votes are published approximately an hour after they have been announced.

Return to the Votes page.

        -  Bills, Acts, & Laws 
        -  Nominations 
        -  Treaties 
        -  Votes 
        -  Floor Proceedings 
        -  Rules & Procedure 
        -  Landmark Legislation 
        -  Sessions of Congress 
        -  Senate Archives 
        -  Public Disclosure 

### Legislative Keys 

Key to Versions of Printed LegislationKey to Legislative Citations

### Calendar of Business 

Current (GPO-govInfo)Past Calendars (GPO-govInfo)About the Calendar

### Related Links 

Types of Legislation
Electronically Filed 

Supreme Court 

SCPW-11-0001085 

09-FEB-2012 

11:42 AM 

NO. SCPW-11-0001085
 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I
 

BENJAMIN ACUNA, Petitioner,
 

vs.
 

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Respondent.
 

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
 

ORDER
 

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, Duffy, and McKenna, JJ.)
 

Upon review of the letters to the Chief Justice and 

Associate Justices submitted by Petitioner Benjamin Acuna 

concerning the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC) and 

Petitioner Acuna’s counsel Emmanuel V. Tipon, which we consider 

as a petition for a writ of mandamus, materials submitted by ODC 

in response to our December 27, 2011 order, and the record, it 

appears that ODC did not abuse its discretion in the matter. See 

In re Disciplinary Board of the Hawai'i Supreme Court, 91 Hawai'i 

363, 368, 370-71, 984 P.2d 688, 693, 695-96 (1999). It further 

appears that Petitioner Acuna’s request regarding the files in 

the possession of attorney Tipon is moot. Therefore, 
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for a writ of
 

mandamus is denied. 

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, February 9, 2012. 

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald 

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama 

/s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr. 

/s/ James E. Duffy, Jr. 

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Aeroservoelastic testing offree flying wind tunnel models**
 
Parts: One | Two
 
SuDoc Number:NAS 1.60:2013-218051 | NAS1.60:2014-218170
Item Number:0830-H-15 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000931404
 
January 24, 2018
#### Maxine BRYANT, Appellant, v. James C. MATHIS and Ray J. Radliff, Appellees.

No. 15417.

„ . United States Court of Appeals t.. . . , . ~ District of Columbia Circuit.

Argued Feb. 18, 1960.

Decided March 24, 1960.

Mr. Harry L. Ryan, Jr., Washington, D. C., for appellant.

Mr. Robert M. Gray, Washington, D. C., argued for both appellees.

*20Messrs. Thomas S. Jackson and John W. Jackson, Washington, D. C., were on the brief for appellee Mathis.

Messrs. Lawrence E. Carr, Jr., and Michael F. X. Dolan, Washington, D. C., were on the brief for appellee Ratliff.

Before Mr. Justice Burton, retired* and Bazelon and Fahy, Circuit Judges.

*

 Sitting by designation pursuant to 28 U. S.O. § 294(a).

PER CURIAM

Appellant was one of four passengers injured in a two-car collision. Upon a consolidated trial, the jury found both drivers negligent, and awarded the four passenger-plaintiffs individual judgments totaling $41,425. Appellant’s recovery was $4,250. Believing this amount insufficient, she moved for a new trial and appeals from the denial thereof.

Her sole contention is that the verdict is inadequate as a matter of law because it did not reimburse her for all her special damages. Her medical expenses, as shown by bills and receipts received in evidence, totaled $3,367.32. Oral testimony showed an additional $40 of expense, making the total $3,407.32. The jury’s verdict thus exceeded her medical expenses by almost $850. But appellant testified that she earned “roughly twelve thousand dollars a year” and was away from work “approximately four and one-half months,” and thus claims she was entitled, as special damages, to $4,500 above her medical expenses. Although this testimony was uncontradicted, appellees did not concede either liability or the amount of damages.

Courts are understandablv re- , , ^ . , . y luctant to overturn jury verdicts on the grounds that they are inadequate or excessive. Fairmount Glass Works v. Cub Fork *Coal*Co., 1933, 287 U.S. 474, 53 S.Ct. 252, 77 L.Ed. 439; Frasca v. Howell, 1950, 87 U.S.App.D.C. 52, 182 F.2d 703. This is especially true of appellate courts, for motions for new trial are committed to the trial court’s discretion. Ibid. Cf. Miller v. Maryland Casualty Co., 2 Cir., 1930, 40 F.2d 463, 465. Although the jury’s verdict in this case creates some “wonderment,” Rankin v. Shayne Brothers, Inc., 1956, 98 U.S.App.D.C. 214, 215, 234 F.2d 35, 36, we cannot say that it was so arbitrary that it must be reversed as a matter of law.

 Conceivably, the jury believed that appellant had been paid during her absence from work, and thus did not allow recovery for lost earnings. Al-fe was entitled to an instruction ^at,lost wages are recoverable notwithstanding compensation from a collateral source, Geffen v. Winer, 1957, 100 U.S.App.D.C. 286, 244 F.2d 375; cf. Hudson v. Lazarus, 1954, 95 U.S.App.D.C. 16, 217 F.2d 344, she requested no such in-section and none was given. On this s+íate+ °f ,the rf°[d’ say that the trial court abused its discretion m denying appellant’s motion for a new trial. On the authority of Rankin v. Shayne Brothers, Inc., supra, we affirm,
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADDED BY

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of SunCoast Bancorp, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2006 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, John T. Stafford, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350, as added by § 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. | To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for
the period covered by the Report.
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                   |  |     |  |                                                        
|------------------ |  | --- |  | -------------------------------------------------------
|Date: May 15, 2006 |  | By: |  | /s/ John T. Stafford                                   
|                   |  |     |  | John T. Stafford, President and Chief Executive Officer
§ 381.13 Price increases. ( a ) Should the tour operator increase a participant's tour price by more than 10 percent (aggregate of all increases to that participant), that participant shall have the option of canceling his or her participation in the tour and receiving a full refund within 14 days after the cancellation.
( b ) The tour operator shall not increase the tour price to any participant less than ten days before departure.
Unassociated Document


    Exhibit
10.6

    China
Agri-Business, Inc.

    Finance
Plaza, 9th Floor, Hi-Tech Road No. 42

    Hi-Tech
Industrial Development Zone, Xi-An, China 710068

     

    
      	 	 	
              June 12,
      2009

            	 


    

     

    Re:
Registration Rights
Agreement dated September 29, 2008

    


    


    Reference is made to that certain
Registration Rights Agreement, dated as of September 29, 2008 (the “Agreement”), by and
among China Agri-Business, Inc. (the “Company”) and the
investors named therein (as identified by their signatures below) (the “Investors”).
Capitalized terms used herein but not otherwise defined in this letter shall
have the respective meanings set forth in the Agreement.

    


    The Company and the Investors wish to
modify the Agreement, and agree as follows.

    


    1. The Company shall be obligated to
make the payments to the Investors required by Section 2(b) of the Agreement if,
and only if, the Registration Statement is not declared effective by the SEC by
5:30 p.m. Eastern time on July 31, 2009 (the “Extended
Deadline”).  In the event that the Registration Statement is
declared effective by the SEC by the Extended Deadline, then the Investors waive
any and all claims to any payments pursuant to such Section 2(b) of the
Agreement.

    


    All other terms of the Agreement,
including without limitation Section 2(c) of the Agreement, shall continue in
full force and effect.

    


    


    


    


    


    


    [Signature
pages follow]

     

     

    
      
         

      

      
         

        
          

        

      

      
         

      

    

    Please acknowledge your acceptance of
the foregoing terms by signing where indicated below.

    


    
      
        	 	Very
      truly yours,	 
	 	 	 
	 	China
      Agri-Business, Inc.	 
	 	 	 	 
	
                 

              	
                By:
      

              	/s/ Xiaolong
      Zhou	 
	 	Name: 	Xiaolong
      Zhou	 
	 	Title:	Chief
      Financial Officer	 
	 	 	 	 


      

    

     

     

    
      
         

      

      
         

        
          

        

      

      
         

      

    

     

    Agreed
and Accepted as of the date written above:

     

    
      
        	JAG MULTI-INVESTMENTS, LLC	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	By:	
                /s/
      Alexander
      M. Goren

              	 	 	
                 

              	 
	Name:  	
                Alexander
      M. Goren

              	 	 	
                 

              	 
	Title: 	
                 

              	 	 	
                 

              	 


      



    
      
        	 	 	 	 	 
	
                /s/
      Keith
      Guenther

              	 	 	
                 

              	 
	
                      
                  KEITH
      GUENTHER
§ 258.6 Effective and compliance dates. ( a ) This Part is effective as of August 25, 1999.
( b ) Compliance with the following sections is mandatory as of August 25, 1999: §§ 258.1, 258.2, 258.3, 258.4, 258.5(a), 258.5(b), and 258.6.
( c ) Compliance with § 258.5(c) is mandatory as of March 15, 2000.
[64 FR 46821, Aug. 27, 1999]
§ 49.53 Eligibility for recording: general requirements. ( a ) A conveyance is eligible for recording under this subpart only if, in addition to the requirements of §§ 49.11, 49.13, and 49.17, the following requirements are met: ( 1 ) It affects any aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, or spare part, maintained by or on behalf of an air carrier certificated under 49 U.S.C. 44705;
( 2 ) It contains or is accompanied by a statement by the air carrier certificated under that section;
( 3 ) It specifically describes the location or locations of each aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, or spare part covered by it; and
( 4 ) It is accompanied by the recording fee required by § 49.15, but there is no fee for recording a conveyance named in § 49.51(c).
( b ) The conveyance need only describe generally, by type, the engines, propellers, appliances, or spare parts covered by it.
[Doc. No. 1996, 29 FR 6486, May 19, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 49-5, 35 FR 802, Jan. 21, 1970; Amdt. 49-10, 70 FR 246, Jan. 3, 2005]