alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 2
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear by USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49223, Sept. 25, 2009, and USCG-2013-0671, 78 FR 60144, Sept. 30, 2013.

§ 2.10-105 Prepayment of annual vessel inspection fees. ( a ) Vessel owners may prepay the annual vessel inspection fee for any period of not less than three years, and not more than the design life or remaining expected service life of the vessel.
( b ) To prepay the annual vessel inspection fee for a period of three or more years, the owner must submit a written request to Commandant (CG-DCO-83) specifying the vessel identification number and the period for which prepayment is to be made.
( c ) The total of the annual fees for the requested prepayment period will be discounted to its net present value using the following formula: Where: PV is the Present Value of the series of annual user fees to be prepaid (the net amount to be prepaid) RO is the published user fee of the vessel i is the interest rate for 10-year Treasury notes at the time of prepayment calculation π is the rate of inflation (based on projected military personnel costs at the time of prepayment calculation) n is the total number of years to be prepaid t is the number of years after prepayment of the fee, for each annual increment (t = 0, 1, 2, 3 ... n)
( d ) When the annual vessel inspection fee has been prepaid, the entitlement to inspection services for the prepayment period attaches to the vessel and remains with the vessel if it is sold. The entitlement to inspection services may not be transferred to any other vessel.
( e ) If a vessel is removed from Coast Guard certification and the vessel owner surrenders the vessel's Certificate of Inspection, the owner may request a refund of the remaining prepayment amount. The annual vessel inspection fee will not be refunded for the year in which the Certificate of Inspection is surrendered. The request for refund must be submitted to the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection to whom the Certificate of Inspection is surrendered. The Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection will endorse and forward the request to Commandant (CG-DCO-83) for decision.
[CGD 91-030, 60 FR 13563, Mar. 13, 1995, as amended by CGD 95-072, 60 FR 50459, Sept. 29, 1995; CGD 96-041, 61 FR 50725, Sept. 27, 1996; USCG-1999-6216, 64 FR 53223, Oct. 1, 1999; USCG-2010-0759, 75 FR 60001, Sept. 29, 2010]
May 30, 2013.

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

JACQUELYN A. HINOJOSA, Appellant

NO. 14-13-00163-CV V.

TEXAS WINDMILL APARTMENTS, LP D/B/A ROYAL OAKS OF 

PEARLAND and NEWPORT ASSET MANAGEMENT, INC., Appellees

________________________________

Today the Court heard appellant’s agreed motion to dismiss the appeal from 

the judgment signed by the court below on February 1, 2013. Having considered 

the motion and found it meritorious, we order the appeal DISMISSED.

We further order that each party shall pay its costs by reason of this appeal.

We further order that mandate be issued immediately.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
<PAGE>

                                                                    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

      This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and accompanies the
quarterly report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 (the "Form
10-QSB") of Community Shores Bank Corporation (the "Issuer").

      I, Tracey A. Welsh, Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and
Treasurer of the Issuer, certify that:

      (i)   the Form 10-QSB fully complies with the requirements of Section
            13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15
            U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

      (ii)  the information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Issuer.

Dated: May 16, 2005

                                           /s/ Tracey A. Welsh
                                           -------------------
                                           Tracey A. Welsh
                                           Senior Vice President,
                                           Chief Financial Officer
                                           and Treasurer
# C_2014421EN.01003001.xml

| 24.11.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 421/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.11.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 421/30

---

Judgment of the General Court of 16 October 2014 — Eurallumina v Commission

(Case T-308/11) (1)

1

((State aid - Electricity - Preferential rate - Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market - Concept of State aid - New aid))

2014/C 421/40

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Eurallumina SpA (Portoscuso, Italy) (represented by: V. Leone, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: V. Di Bucci and É. Gippini Fournier, agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

By way of principal claim, application for annulment, in so far as it concerns the applicant, of Commission Decision 2011/746/EU of 23 February 2011 on State aid granted by Italy to Portovesme Srl, ILA SpA, Eurallumina SpA and Syndial SpA (State aid measures C 38/B/04 (ex NN 58/04) and C 13/06 (ex N 587/05) (OJ 2011 L 309, p. 1) and, in the alternative, application for annulment of Article 2 and 3 of that decision, the latter in so far as an order is made for restitution of the aid granted to the applicant and, in the further alternative, application for annulment of Article 3 of that same decision, again in so far as it concerns the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

dismisses the action;

| 2. | orders Eurallumina SpA to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

orders Eurallumina SpA to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 238, 13.8.2011.

1

---
Editorial Note on Part 199
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 199 appear by USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59789, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 199.510 EPIRB requirements. ( a ) Each vessel must carry a category 1 406 MHz satellite EPIRB meeting the requirements of 47 CFR part 80.
( b ) When the vessel is underway, the EPIRB must be stowed in its float-free bracket with the controls set for automatic activation and be mounted in a manner so that it will float free if the vessel sinks.
Page | 1

Meeting between EPA and FDEP 7/27/2010

RE: FDEP data screening process for reference sites

Attendees:

EPA: Betsy Behl (OST/HECD); Lester Yuan (OST/HECD)

FDEP: Drew Bartlett; Daryl Joyner; Russ Freydenborg; Ken Weaver

Contractor Support (TetraTech): John Hochheimer; Michael Paul

 The purpose of this meeting was for EPA and FDEP to discuss in detail the process that FDEP 

used to identify and screen data used to develop the distribution of reference sites used by 

FDEP in deriving criteria for Florida streams. Steps identified are summarized below.

Stream Reference Data Set

Process for selection of FDEP Reference Sites:

1. Initial data set – FL Storet and GWIS (1989 – 2008) (this was noticed in the proposal)

2. QA sort by “org” code and select the appropriate organizations (FDEP will provide the list of 

appropriate organizations that have established QA programs in place)

3. Apply FDEP QA rule 62-160 process for ensuring the data quality; use “Process for Determining 

Data Usability” (FDEP to provide)

4. “All Streams” data set is the result from step 2. (approximately 280,000 observations or 9,401 

org stations)

5. Screen All Streams to remove any lakes (screen by waterbody type)

6. Begin to apply screens1:

a. Sites with TN or TP data – 6,706 org stations

b. Sites with LDI < 2 (which implies that these sites all exist in streams, checked by locating 

in the NHD+ data set) (614 WBIDs or 1516 org stations)

c. Apply 303(d) screen – 413 WBIDS or 869 org sites (decide which list, FDEP or EPA)

d. BPJ screens – District biologist screen and FDEP BPJ (site visits, Ken’s aerial surveys, 

FDEP staff discussion, and Tt analysis of LDI) – 322 WBIDs or 673 org sites

e. NO3 screen (NO3< 0.35 mg/L) – 290 WBIDs or 565 sites

f. LDI in watershed <3 – 287 WBIDs or 550 sites

g. SCI > 40 – 261 WBIDs or 460 sites

h. QA screen for nonsensical data (15 mg/L TP or 100 mg/L TN) – 261 WBIDs or 460 sites

 

1

Note – the number of WBIDs and org sites result from preliminary analysis, values need to be re-run
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1818 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to extend military commissary and 

exchange store privileges to veterans with a compensable service-connected disability and to their dependents. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 31, 2009 

Mr. BURTON of Indiana (for himself, Mrs. MILLER of Michigan, Mr. 

LOBIONDO, Mr. ROHRABACHER, Mr. COURTNEY, Mr. RODRIGUEZ, Mr. 

LATTA, and Mrs. MCMORRIS RODGERS) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to extend military 

commissary and exchange store privileges to veterans 

with a compensable service-connected disability and to 

their dependents. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Disabled Veterans 

5 Commissary and Exchange Store Benefits Act’’. 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
2 

•HR 1818 IH

1 SEC. 2. COMMISSARY AND EXCHANGE STORE PRIVILEGES 

2 FOR DISABLED VETERANS AND THEIR DE3 PENDENTS. 

4 (a) EXTENSION OF PRIVILEGES.—Chapter 54 of title 

5 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end 

6 the following new section: 

7 ‘‘§ 1065. Use of commissary and exchange stores: dis8 abled veterans and their dependents 

9 ‘‘(a) DISABLED VETERANS.—A veteran with a com10 pensable service-connected disability shall be permitted to 

11 use commissary and exchange stores on the same basis 

12 as a member of the Armed Forces entitled to retired or 

13 retainer pay. 

14 ‘‘(b) DEPENDENTS.—A dependent of a veteran de15 scribed in subsection (a) shall be permitted to use com16 missary and exchange stores on the same basis as a de17 pendent of a member of the Armed Forces entitled to re18 tired or retainer pay. 

19 ‘‘(c) DEFINITIONS.—In this section, the terms ‘vet20 eran’ and ‘service-connected’ have the meanings given 

21 those terms in section 101 of title 38.’’. 

22 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections 

23 at the beginning of such chapter is amended by adding 

24 at the end the following new item: 

‘‘1065. Use of commissary and exchange stores: disabled veterans and their dependents.’’. 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
3 

•HR 1818 IH

1 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—Section 1065 of title 10, 

2 United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall take 

3 effect at the end of the 90-day period beginning on the 

4 date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
‘fne, CO

32954 WALKER ROAD

lee

: The Express & Total Car Care

INVOICE NOs aii9361

Sale Type: C AVON LAKE, GH 44212 WORK ORDER: 6790286
(448) 933-6622 lésc4 Pr O@9/E1/13
SERVICE
Cust Num: a Phone Nos; 440-897-2525
BRIAN HASSETT Car Model: 2229 Chrysler 3a@
32678 ADMIRAL’S WAY Car Color: BLACK
License Nos FVF7G12 GH
AVON LAKE, OH 44012 VIN. ¢ 2C3LASSVE9HS75 1235
Technician: S147 Mileage: G352@
Promised: @9/21/13
Writers PAUL BUSSER
Srvc Adve PAUL BUSSER :
Extendect
Total
CHECK ALL 4 TIRES, REAR HAS BEEN LOOSING
AIR.
6) 1 FREE BRAKE INSPECTION/ESTIMATE
BI
FEAR IE SEE SIE IERIE I STR IIR IR RHE
B) 1 #256arR16 TIGER PAW TOURING ~ Mileage Warranty: 55, aga
21324 BSW 12H 1a. 2a _ LEE. Oe
1 FREE TIRE GUARANTEE PACKAGE
FTGP Sz. 95 32.95
Tire mounting, new rubber valve stem (where le
applicable), tire disposal, lifetime wheel a
balance, lifetime rotation, lifetime flat
repairs, free wheel alignment check and free
tire replacements for road hazards down to
3/32 or.3 years whichever comes first... Reset
TPMS wheel positioning where applicable.
Tire DOT Serial Numbers: YSE4C9UUE7IS Oty: 1
HEEK SARAH HH EN SEK AKER EERIE A ERE RR LR TR
ia) @ TFMS SENSOR - 12 Mth/12, aaa Lbr/24 Mth/24, aa Parts
4158 4,92 9. 8a
12A & NAPECH9Z1129-TPMS SENSOR 123, 69 Bat. 76
Thank you for choosing Conrads AVON LAKE.
998) 1 OHIO TIRE FEE
OTF 1. 2a 1. 2a

PLAINTIFF'S
EXHIBIT
# C_2012399EN.01002101.xml

| 22.12.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 399/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.12.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 399/21

---

Judgment of the General Court of 13 November 2012 — tesa v OHIM — Superquímica (tesa TACK)

(Case T-555/11) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark tesa TACK - Earlier national figurative mark TACK Ceys - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2012/C 399/37

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: tesa SE (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: F. Schwab, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral and Ó. Mondéjar Ortuño, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: La Superquímica, SA (L’Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain) (represented by: A. Canela Giménez, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 5 July 2011 (Case R 866/2010-1) relating to opposition proceedings between La Superquímica, SA and tesa SE.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders tesa SE to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders tesa SE to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 6, 7.1.2012.

1

---
§ 26.30-5 Use. ( a ) Approved buoyant work vests are considered to be items of safety apparel and may be carried aboard vessels to be worn by crew members when working near or over the water under favorable working conditions.
( b ) When carried, approved buoyant work vests shall not be accepted in lieu of any portion of the required number of approved lifesaving appliances required by § 25.25-10 of this subchapter.
#### § 201.157 Reopening of a case by presiding officer prior to decision.

At any time prior to the filing of his initial or recommended decision, the presiding officer, either upon petition or upon his own initiative may, for good cause shown and upon reasonable notice, reopen the case for the receipt of further evidence.
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

# District: 8
Federal Reserve Bank of: St. Louis

## Filings received during the week ending January 6, 2007

|Filer                  | Filing Type    | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                                                                        | End of Comment Period                              
|---------------------- | -------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------
|FIRST BANK             | * Branch       | First Bank, St. Louis, Missouri, to establish a branch facility to be located at 710 Olive Street, St. Louis, Missouri.                                                                                                                | Newspaper:01/04/2007Federal Register:Not applicable
|Newspaper:             | 01/04/2007    
|Federal Register:      | Not applicable
|STIFEL FINANCIAL CORP. | * 3A1          | Stifel Financial Corp., St. Louis, Missouri, to become a bank holding company by acquiring 100 percent of First Service Financial Company, St. Louis, Missouri, and thereby indirectly acquire FirstService Bank, Crestwood, Missouri. | Newspaper:02/01/2007Federal Register:02/02/2007    
|Newspaper:             | 02/01/2007    
|Federal Register:      | 02/02/2007    

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location | RSSDID | Exam Date | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|---------------------- | ------ | --------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|NONE                  

## CRA Examinations scheduled for     Quarter of

|Institution | Location
|----------- | --------
|NONE       

Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

---

Home Banking information and regulation  Accessibility Contact 
  us
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 77 (Monday, April 23, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 20137]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-1995]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Notice of Lodging Proposed Consent Decree

    In accordance with Departmental Policy, 28 CFR 50.7, notice is 
hereby given that a proposed consent decree in United States v. Jack 
and Chris Barnhill, Case No. 4:07-cv-00994-RBH, was lodged with the 
United States District Court for the District of South Carolina on 
April 12, 2007. This proposed Consent Decree concerns a complaint filed 
by the United States against the Defendants pursuant to Section 301(a) 
of the Clean Water Act (``CWA''), 33 U.S.C. 1311(a), to obtain 
injunctive relief from and impose civil penalties against the 
Defendants for filling wetlands without a permit.
    The proposed Consent Decree resolves these allegations by requiring 
the Defendants to restore the impacted areas and to pay a civil 
penalty. The Department of Justice will accept written comments 
relating to this proposed Consent Decree for thirty (30) days from the 
date of publication of this notice. Please address comments to Emery 
Clark, Assistant United States Attorney, United States Attorney's 
Office, Wachovia Building, Suite 500, 1441 Main Street, Columbia, South 
Carolina 29201 and refer to United States v. Jack and Chris Barnhill, 
Case No. 4:07-cv-00994-RBH.
    The proposed Consent Decree may be examined at the Clerk's Office, 
United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, 901 
Richland Lane, Columbia, South Carolina.
    In addition, the proposed Consent Decree may be viewed on the World 
Wide Web at http://www.usdoj.gov/enrd/open.html.

Stephen Samuels,
Assistant Chief, Environmental Defense Section, Environment and Natural 
Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 07-1995 Filed 4-20-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-15-M
Editorial Note on Part 151
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 151 appear by USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49236, Sept. 25, 2009, and USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59784, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 151.01-25 Existing barges. ( a ) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, barges certified for, or used within the previous 2 years prior to the effective date of this regulation, or barges equivalent to such barges, for the transportation of any cargo regulated by this subchapter which do not meet the specific requirements herein, may be continued in service subject to the following conditions: ( 1 ) Venting, gauging, and all operating requirements shall be met within a 1-year period subsequent to the effective date.
( 2 ) All other requirements shall be met within a 2-year period subsequent to the effective date.
( b ) If an existing barge, which has been designed to carry or has regularly been carrying one or more of the cargoes regulated by this subchapter, is found to be so arranged, or outfitted that conversion to bring it into compliance with any or all of the requirements of this subchapter is impractical or impossible, the Commandant, upon application, may review the plans of the barge to determine if it is suitable and safe for the cargoes to be transported.
( c ) Except for operating and vinyl chloride requirements, barges constructed and certificated for the transportation of any cargo for which specific regulations existed, in parts 36, 38, 39, 40, and 98 of this chapter at the time of their construction or conversion, may continue and will be certificated to operate without the requirement that they comply with the provisions of subchapter O of this chapter.
[CGFR 70-10, 35 FR 3714, Feb. 25, 1970, as amended by CGD 74-167k, 40 FR 17026, Apr. 16, 1975]