alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# CE2009066EN.01008402.xml

| 20.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 66/84 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 66/84

---

Common organisation of agricultural markets and specific provisions for certain agricultural products *

P6_TA(2008)0075

P6_TA(2008)0075

European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 March 2008 on the proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (‘Single CMO Regulation’) (COM(2007)0854 — C6-0033/2008 — 2007/0290(CNS))

(2009/C 66 E/19)

(Consultation procedure)

The European Parliament,

| — | having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2007)0854), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2007)0854),

| — | having regard to Articles 36 and 37 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C6-0033/2008), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Articles 36 and 37 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C6-0033/2008),

| — | having regard to Rules 51 and 43(1) of its Rules of Procedure, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Rules 51 and 43(1) of its Rules of Procedure,

| — | having regard to the report of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (A6-0044/2008), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (A6-0044/2008),

| 1. | Approves the Commission proposal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Approves the Commission proposal;

| 2. | Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;

| 3. | Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to amend the Commission proposal substantially; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to amend the Commission proposal substantially;

| 4. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.

---
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

__________________________________________

)

JACK BEAM, et. al., )

)

Plaintiffs, ) Civ. No. 1:07-cv-1227 (RRP)

)

v. ) 

)

MATTHEW S. PETERSEN, )

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION )

CHAIRMAN, ) NOTICE

)

Defendant. )

)

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION’S 

NOTICE OF SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT

On October 9, 2012, the United States Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit 

affirmed the final judgment and order of this Court dated September 22, 2011, awarding 

the Federal Election Commission costs in the amount of $8,300.64. (Docket No. 218.) 

By check dated November 16, 2012, plaintiffs Jack Beam and Renee Beam have paid to 

the Federal Election Commission the amount ordered by the district court and have fully 

satisfied this judgment.

Respectfully submitted,

Anthony Herman

General Counsel

Lisa J. Stevenson

Deputy General Counsel - Law

David Kolker

Associate General Counsel

Harry J. Summers

Assistant General Counsel

Case: 1:07-cv-01227 Document #: 231 Filed: 12/03/12 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:3026
2

/s Holly J. Baker

Holly J. Baker

Attorney

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

999 E Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20463

(202) 694-1650

December 3, 2012

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on December 3, 2012, I electronically filed the foregoing 

with the Clerk of the Court for the United States District Court for the Northern District 

of Illinois by using the CM/ECF system. I certify that all participants in the case are 

registered CM/ECF users and that service will be accomplished by the CM/ECF system.

s/ Holly J. Baker

Holly J. Baker

Case: 1:07-cv-01227 Document #: 231 Filed: 12/03/12 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:3027
§ 689.8 Interim administrative actions. ( a ) After an inquiry or during an external or NSF investigation the Deputy Director may order that interim actions (as described in § 689.3(c)) be taken to protect Federal resources or to guard against continuation of any suspected or alleged research misconduct. Such an order will normally be issued on recommendation from OIG and in consultation with the Division of Contracts, Policy, and Oversight or Division of Grants and Agreements, the Office of the General Counsel, the responsible Directorate, and other parts of the Foundation as appropriate.
( b ) When suspension is determined to be appropriate, the case will be referred to the suspending official pursuant to 2 CFR part 180, and the suspension procedures of 2 CFR part 180 will be followed, but the suspending official will be either the Deputy Director or an official designated by the Deputy Director.
( c ) Such interim actions may be taken whenever information developed during an investigation indicates a need to do so. Any interim action will be reviewed periodically during an investigation by NSF and modified as warranted. An interested party may request a review or modification by the Deputy Director of any interim action.
( d ) The Deputy Director will make and OIG will retain a record of interim actions taken and the reasons for taking them.
( e ) Interim administrative actions are not final agency actions subject to appeal.
[67 FR 11937, Mar. 18, 2002, as amended at 72 FR 4944, Feb. 2, 2007]
EXHIBIT 32.2




CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT
TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002




In connection with the Annual Report ofNext 1 Interactive,
Inc.(the “Company”) on
Form 10-K for thefiscal
yearendedFebruary 28, 2009as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Teresa McWilliams,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 and belief:





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
Registrant.







Dated:June 16,
    2009
            By:
            /s/Teresa
      McWilliamsTeresa
      McWilliams
              ChiefFinancialOfficer
              (PrincipalFinancialOfficer)
Exhibit
31.1
 
 CERTIFICATIONS
 
 I,
James B. Wiegand, Chief Executive Officer, certify that:
 
 1.   I
have reviewed the report being filed on Form 10-K by Pinel Bay
Corporation.
 
 2.   Based
on my knowledge, the report does not contain any untrue statement 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 the report;
 
 3.   Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in the report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of Pinel Bay Corporation as
of, and for, the periods presented in the
report;
 
 4.   I
and the other certifying officer are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as such term is defined in
Regulation 13a-14 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) for Pinel Bay
Corporation and have:
 
 i.   Designed
such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information
relating to Pinel Bay Corporation, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is
made  known to us by others within those entities, particularly during
the period in which the periodic reports are being prepared;
 
 ii.  Evaluated
the effectiveness of Pinel Bay Corporation's disclosure controls and procedures
as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of the report ("Evaluation
Date"); and
 
 iii.
Presented in the report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation
Date;
 
 5.   I
and the other certifying officer have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation, to the Pinel Bay Corporation auditors and the audit committee of the
board of directors (or persons fulfilling the equivalent function):
 
 i.   All
significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which
could adversely affect Pinel Bay Corporation's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial data and have identified Pinel Bay
Corporation's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls;
and
 
 ii.  Any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the issuer's internal controls; and
 
 6.   I
and the other certifying officer have indicated in the report whether or not
there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that
could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most
recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant
deficiencies and material weaknesses.
 
   By:
                /s/ James
      B. WiegandJames
      B. Wiegand
                  President
                  Chief
      Financial Officer
§ 400.315 General eligibility requirements. ( a ) For purposes of determining eligibility of refugees for services under this subpart, the same standards and criteria shall be applied as are applied in the determination of eligibility for refugee social services under §§ 400.150 and 400.152(a).
( b ) A State may not provide services under this subpart, except for referral and interpreter services, to refugees who have been in the United States for more than 60 months, except that refugees who are receiving employability services, as defined in § 400.316, as of September 30, 1995, as part of an employability plan, may continue to receive those services through September 30, 1996, or until the services are completed, whichever occurs first, regardless of their length of residence in the U.S.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-13-00026-CR

Jack Egbers

v.

The State of Texas

§

§

§

§

§

From County Criminal Court No. 3

of Denton County (CR-2011-04915-C)

February 6, 2014

Opinion by Justice Meier

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of 

the trial court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By /s/ Bill Meier_______________________

 Justice Bill Meier
§ 60.8 Reporting licensure actions taken by Boards of Medical Examiners. ( a ) *What actions must be reported.* Each Board of Medical Examiners must report to the NPDB any action based on reasons relating to a physician's or dentist's professional competence or professional conduct: ( 1 ) Which revokes or suspends (or otherwise restricts) a physician's or dentist's license,
( 2 ) Which censures, reprimands, or places on probation a physician or dentist, or
( 3 ) Under which a physician's or dentist's license is surrendered.
( b ) *Information that must be reported.* The Board must report the following information for each action: ( 1 ) The physician's or dentist's name,
( 2 ) The physician's or dentist's work address,
( 3 ) The physician's or dentist's home address, if known,
( 4 ) The physician's or dentist's Social Security number or Individual Tax Identification Number (ITIN), if known, and if obtained in accordance with section 7 of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a note),
( 5 ) National Provider Identifier (NPI),
( 6 ) The physician's or dentist's date of birth,
( 7 ) Name of each professional school attended by the physician or dentist and year of graduation,
( 8 ) For each professional license, the physician's or dentist's license number, the field of licensure and the name of the state or territory in which the license is held,
( 9 ) The physician's or dentist's Drug Enforcement Administration registration number, if known,
( 10 ) A description of the acts or omissions or other reasons for the action taken,
( 11 ) A description of the Board action, the date the action was taken, its effective date and duration,
( 12 ) Classification of the action in accordance with a reporting code adopted by the Secretary, and
( 13 ) Other information as required by the Secretary from time to time after publication in the Federal Register and after an opportunity for public comment.
( c ) *Sanctions.* If, after notice of noncompliance and providing opportunity to correct noncompliance, the Secretary determines that a Board has failed to submit a report as required by this section, the Secretary will designate another qualified entity for the reporting of information under § 60.12 of this part.
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 237 (Monday, December 11, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Page 71505]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-9634]


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

BROADCASTING BOARD OF GOVERNORS


Sunshine Act Meeting Notice

DATE AND TIME: Wednesday, December 6, 2006, 2:15 p.m.-3:15 p.m.

PLACE: Cohen Building, Room 3360, 330 Independence Ave., SW., 
Washington, DC 20237.
    Closed Meeting: The members of the Broadcasting Board of Governors 
(BBG) will meet in a special session to review and discuss budgetary 
issues relating to U.S. Government-funded non-military international 
broadcasting. This meeting is closed because if open it likely would 
either disclose matters that would be properly classified to be kept 
secret in the interest of foreign policy under the appropriate 
executive order (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1)) or would disclose information the 
premature disclosure of which would be likely to significantly 
frustrate implementation of a proposed agency action. (5 U.S.C. 
552b(c)(9)(B)). In addition, part of the discussion will relate solely 
to the internal personnel and organizational issues of the BBG or the 
International Broadcasting Bureau. (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2) and (6)).

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Persons interested in obtaining 
more information should contact Carol Booker at (202) 203-4545.

    Dated: December 6, 2006.
Carol Booker,
Legal Counsel.
[FR Doc. 06-9634 Filed 12-7-06; 10:22 am]
BILLING CODE 8230-01-P
Jack Speight (Wyoming Bar No. 4-0983)

4021 Snyder Ave

Cheyenne, WY 82001

307.635.1239 [Tel.]

jbspeight@gmail.com

Benjamin T. Barr

10737 Hunting Lane

Rockville, MD 20850

202.595.4671 [Tel.]

benjamin.barr@gmail.com

Stephen R. Klein

Wyoming Liberty Group

1902 Thomes Ave, Ste. 201

Cheyenne, WY 82001

307.632.7020 [Tel.]

stephen.klein@wyliberty.org

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF WYOMING

____________________________________

)

FREE SPEECH, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) No. 12-CV-127-S

)

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, )

)

Defendant. )

____________________________________)

NOTICE OF APPEAL

Case 2:12-cv-00127-SWS Document 56 Filed 03/20/13 Page 1 of 3
Notice is hereby given that Free Speech, plaintiff in the above named case, hereby appeals to the 

United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit from an order granting defendant’s motion 

to dismiss entered in this action on March 19, 2013. See Docket No 55.

Date: March 20, 2013

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Stephen Klein

Stephen R. Klein

Wyoming Liberty Group

1902 Thomes Ave., Ste. 201

stephen.klein@wyliberty.org

307.632.7020 [Tel.]

Benjamin T. Barr

10737 Hunting Lane

Rockville, MD 20850

202.595.4671 [Tel.]

benjamin.barr@gmail.com

Jack Speight 

4021 Snyder Ave

Cheyenne, WY 82001

307.635.1239 [Tel.]

jbspeight@gmail.com

Attorneys for Free Speech

Case 2:12-cv-00127-SWS Document 56 Filed 03/20/13 Page 2 of 3
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on March 20, 2013, I the below listed persons received copies of this 

document by electronic mail via Electronic Case Filing pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2)(E):

Anthony Herman

Federal Election Commission

aherman@fec.gov

Erin Chlopak

Federal Election Commission

echlopak@fec.gov

David Kolker

Federal Election Commission

dkolker@fec.gov

Lisa Stevenson

Federal Election Commission

lstevenson@fec.gov

Nicholas Vassallo

United States Attorney’s Office

nick.vassallo@usdoj.gov

Larry Jones

Counsel for Amici Curiae

ljones@skelaw.com

/s/ Stephen Klein

Stephen Klein 

Case 2:12-cv-00127-SWS Document 56 Filed 03/20/13 Page 3 of 3
#### § 402.20 General provisions.

Except where otherwise required by Federal law, the Department rules codified at 45 CFR part 74 (for grants awarded in FY 1988) or 45 CFR part 92 (for grants awarded in FY 1989 and succeeding fiscal years), relating to the administration of grants, apply to funds awarded under this part. A State may, however, apply any or all provisions of part 92 to FY 1988 SLIAG funds.

[56 FR 19808, Apr. 30, 1991]
Argued and submitted January 31,

appellant’s motion denied as moot; affirmed May 15,

petition for review denied October 29,1996 (324 Or 323)

#### STATE OF OREGON, *Respondent, v.*DEREK MANDEL WALKER, *Appellant.*

(C94-02-3111; CA A86263)

916 P2d 887

Mary M. Reese, Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for appellant. With her on the brief was Sally L. Avera, Public Defender.

Timothy A. Sylwester, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent. On the brief were Theodore R. Kulongoski, Attorney General, Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, and Ann Kelley, Assistant Attorney General.

Before Deits, Presiding Judge, and De Muniz and Haselton, Judges.

PER CURIAM

Appellant’s motion to strike respondent’s cross-assignment of error denied as moot; affirmed. *State v. Walker,*140 Or App 472, 915 P2d 1039 (1996).
#### § 73.735-306 Sexual harassment.

Sexual harassment is deliberate unsolicited verbal comments, gestures, or physical contact of a sexual nature which are unwelcome. Sexual harassment is unacceptable conduct and is expressly prohibited. In addition, supervisors and managers are prohibited from taking or promising personnel actions in exchange for sexual favors, or failing to take an action because an employee or applicant for employment, refuses to engage in sexual conduct. This same prohibition applies to relationships between Department personnel who take or recommend action on a grant or contract and the grantee or contractor. Those employees who wish to file a complaint of sexual harassment should contact the Office of Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) within their respective agencies for guidance. (Time frames for pursuing a charge alleging sexual harassment are the same as for any other complaint based on allegations of sex discrimination.)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          40,113
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,666
<ALLOWANCES>                                       582
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                53,404
<PP&E>                                         338,326
<DEPRECIATION>                                (61,191)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 752,791
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          591,302
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           178
<OTHER-SE>                                     161,311
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   752,791
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                42,289
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   44,845
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (1,077)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              14,195
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (15,674)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (5,046)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (10,628)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               (14,767)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (25,395)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.46)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.46)


</TABLE>
EX-33 (j)
Securities Servicing
The Bank of New York
101 Barclay Street
New York, NY 10286


(logo) The BANK
of NEW YORK

ASSERTION OF COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE SERVICING
CRITERIA


The Bank of New York and The Bank of New York Trust Company, N.A.(collectively,
the "Company") provides this platform-level assessment of compliance with the
servicing criteria specified in Item 1122(d) of Regulation AB promulgated by the
Securities and Exchange Commission.

Management has determined that the following servicing criteria are applicable
in regards to the following servicing platform for the following period:

Platform: Publicly-issued (i.e., transaction-level reporting initially required
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) residential
mortgage-backed securities and other mortgage-related asset-backed securities
issued on or after January 1, 2006 (and like-kind transactions issued prior to
January 1, 2006) for which the Company provides trustee, securities
administration, paying agent or custodial services. The platform includes like
kind transactions for which the Company provided trustee, securities
administrator, paying agent or custodial services as a result of the Company's
acquisition as of October 1, 2006 of portions of JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.'s
corporate trust business, including structured finance agency and trust
transactions.

Applicable Servicing Criteria: All servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d),
to the extent required by the related transaction agreements as to any
transaction, except for the following criteria: 1122 (d) (1) (ii), (iii), (iv),
(4) (iv), (v), (vi), (vii), (viii), (ix), (x), (xi), (xii) and (xiii).

Period: Twelve months ended December 31, 2006.

With respect to the Platform and the Period, the Company provides the following
assessment of compliance in respect of the Applicable Servicing Criteria:

* The Company is responsible for assessing its compliance with the Applicable
Servicing Criteria.


1


(page)


* The Company has assessed compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.

* As of December 31, 2006 and for the Period, the Company was in material
compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.


Ernst & Young LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, has issued
an attestation report with respect to the Company's foregoing assessment of
compliance.


The Bank of New York
The Bank of New York Trust
Company, N.A.

/s/ Robert L. Griffin
Robert L. Griffin
Authorized Signer


The Bank of New York
The Bank of New York Trust
Company, N.A.

/s/ Patrick J. Tadie
Patrick J. Tadie
Authorized Signer

March 1, 2007


2
#### § 400.6 [Reserved]