alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2014085EN.01000202.xml

| 22.3.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 85/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 85/2

---

Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 16 January 2014 — European Commission v Kingdom of Spain

(Case C-67/12) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2002/91/EC - Energy performance of buildings - Articles 3, 7 and 8 - Incomplete transposition)

2014/C 85/03

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: K. Herrmann and I. Galindo Martin, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: A. Rubio González and S. Centeno Huerta, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Failure to adopt or communicate, within the prescribed period, all of the measures necessary to ensure compliance with Articles 3, 7 and 8 of Directive 2002/91/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2002 on the energy performance of buildings (OJ 2003 L 1, p. 65), read in conjunction with Article 29 of Directive 2010/31/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 May 2010 on the energy performance of buildings (OJ 2010 L 153, p. 13).

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to ensure compliance with Articles 3, 7 and 8 of Directive 2002/91/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2002 on the energy performance of buildings, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under those provisions; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to ensure compliance with Articles 3, 7 and 8 of Directive 2002/91/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2002 on the energy performance of buildings, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under those provisions;

| 2. | Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 118, 21.04.2012.

1

---
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: In the Interest of J.M.H., a child

Appellate case number: 01

- 12

- 00793

- CV

Trial court case number: 1167740

Trial court: 309th District Court of Harris County

It is ORDERED that the court reporter prepare, certify, an d file with this Court, within

15 days of the date of this order and at no cost to appellant, a reporter = s record of any hearing on

the contest to the affidavit of indigence. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 34.6( d); In re Arroyo , 988 S.W.2d

737, 738

– 39 (Tex. 1998).

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Justice Rebeca Huddle

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: December 17, 2012
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JUNE 29, 2016

NO. 03-16-00137-CR

Ex parte Daniel Lee Miller

APPEAL FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, GOODWIN, AND FIELD

DISMISSED AS MOOT -- OPINION BY JUSTICE GOODWIN

This is an appeal from the order denying a petition for writ of habeas corpus signed by the trial 

court. Having reviewed the record, the Court concludes that the appeal is moot and should be 

dismissed. Therefore, the Court dismisses the appeal as moot. Because appellant is indigent for 

purposes of this proceeding, no adjudication of costs is made.
#### § 355.4 Changes in citizenship data.

It shall be incumbent upon the parties filing affidavits under this part to apprise the Maritime Administration promptly in writing relative to changes in data last furnished with respect to officers, directors, and stockholders holding 5 percent or more of the issued and outstanding stock of each class or series, together with statements concerning the citizenship status thereof.
UN PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 17 - 2415
In re: AZANIAH BLANKUMSEE , Petitioner
.

On Petitions for Writ of Mandamus . ( 8:13

- cv - 02507

- PWG ; 8:15

- cv - 00837

- PWG ; 8:16

- cv - 02801

- PWG ; 8:16

- cv - 03436

- PWG ; 8:17

- cv - 02049

- PWG )
Submitted : May 24, 2018 Decided: May 29, 2018
Before NIEMEYER , MOTZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Petitions denied by un published per curiam opinion
. Azaniah Blankumsee , Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Azaniah Blankumsee petitions this court for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing that (1) a certain district judge be recused from adjudicating his actions , and (2) that any prior actions previously adjudicate d by that judge be vacated and re assigned to
an other judge . We conclude that Blankumsee is not entitled to mandamus relief. Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Court , 4 26 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); United States v. Moussaoui , 333 F.3d 509, 516

- 17 (4th Cir. 2003). Further, mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan A ss’ n , 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th C ir. 1988). We have reviewed Blankumsee ’s petition and supplemental petition for a writ of mandamus and conclude that he has not shown extraordinary circumstances warranting mandamus relief. To the extent Blankumsee seeks to challenge the district court’s rulings in an ongoing proceeding , mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re Lockheed Martin Corp. , 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007). To the extent Blankumsee requests that the district court judge be ordered to recuse himself from participatin g in Blankumsee’s cases , Blankumsee has not established extrajudicial bias. See In re Beard , 811 F .2d 818, 826

- 27 (4th Cir. 1987). Accordingly, we deny Blankumsee ’s petitions for a writ of mandamus. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately3 presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITIONS DENIED
COMPLETENESS CHECKLIST FOR SIP REVISION California State Implementation Plan (SIP) Truck and Bus Regulation and Drayage Truck Regulation

Planning Area: All Nonattainment Areas

Title 40 CFR, Part 51, Appendix V

– Criteria for Determining the Completeness

of Plan Submissions Enclosed Notes

ADMINISTRATIVE MATERIALS

2.1(a) Submittal Letter from Governor's Designee X See letter addressed to Mr. Jared Blumenfeld from Mr. James N. Goldstene

2.1(b) Evidence of Adoption X See ARB Executive Order s R

- 11

- 00 9 and R

- 11

- 010 (See Attachment s V and VI ) and ARB Resolution s 10

- 44 and 10

- 45 (See Attachment s I I and I I I ) 2.1(c) Legal Authority Citation X See Resolutions 10

- 44 and 10

- 45 (See Attachments I I and I I I )
2.1(d) Copy of :

a. Attainment Plan b: Contin gency Measures Not applicable

2.1(e) Evidence of Compliance with State's Procedural Requirements X See ARB Executive Orders R

- 11

- 009 and R

- 11

- 010 (See Attachments V and VI) and ARB Resolutions 10

- 44 and 10

- 45 (See Attachments II and III) 2.1(f) Ev idence of Public Notice Consistent with 40 CFR part 51.102 X See 15

- Day Comment Notice (See Attachment IV )

2.1(g) Certification of Public Hearing in Accordance with Notice Not applicable

2.1(h) Compilation of Public Comments and Responses See Final S tatement of Reasons (See Attachment V II )

2.2(a) Identification of Regulated Pollutant Not applicable

2.2(b) Identification of Attainment Area/Status Not applicable

2.2(c) Estimate of Plan's Impact on Emissions Not applicable

2.2(d) Demonstrati on that Plan Approval/Implementation Protects NAAQS Not applicable

2.2(e) Modeling Support Not applicable2.2(f)

- Compliance/Enforcement and

2.2(i) Justification Not applicable

S: \ SIP Submittals

- Statewide Rules \ TnB and Drayage Submittal Letter \ CD for USEPA

\ 10

- Checklist.doc
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 July 29, 2006

|Filer                                | Filing Type    | Filing Proposal                                                                                              | End of Comment Period                                  
|------------------------------------ | -------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | -------------------------------------------------------
|FARMERS BANK & CAPITAL TRUST COMPANY | Member         | Farmers Bank & Capital Trust Company, Frankfort, Kentucky, to become a member of the Federal Reserve System. | Newspaper:Not applicableFederal Register:Not applicable
|Newspaper:                           | Not applicable
|Federal Register:                    | Not applicable

## 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
Exhibit 32



Certification by the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer

Relating to a Periodic Report Containing Financial Statements



I, William J. Reuter, Chief Executive Officer, and Drew K. Hostetter, Chief Financial Officer, of Susquehanna Bancshares, Inc. (the Company), hereby certify that, based on our knowledge:



(1) The Companys periodic report containing financial statements on
Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2004 (the Form 10-Q) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and



(2) The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operation of the Company.



|                        |  |                        
|----------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Date: May 10, 2004      |  |                        
|                        | 
|CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER |  | CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
|                        | 
|/s/ William J. Reuter   |  | /s/ Drew K. Hostetter  
|William J. Reuter       |  | Drew K. Hostetter
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 104 (Thursday, May 31, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 30383]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-2703]


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

FEDERAL RETIREMENT THRIFT INVESTMENT BOARD

Employee Thrift Advisory Council


Sunshine Act Meeting

Time and Date: 1:30 p.m. (Eastern Time), June 12, 2007.

Place: 4th Floor, Conference Room, 1250 H Street, NW., Washington, DC.

Status: Open.

Matters To Be Considered: 
    1. Approval of the minutes of the February 7, 2007 meeting.
    2. Nomination of Council Chairman and election of Vice Chairman.
    3. Report of the Executive Director on Thrift Savings Plan Status.
    4. Discussion of three potential FRTIB legislative proposals 
(automatic enrollment, L Fund default investments, Roth feature).
    5. Other proposals.
    6. New business.

Contact Person For More Information: Thomas K. Emswiler, Committee 
Management Officer, (202) 942-1660.

    Dated: May 25, 2007.
Thomas K. Emswiler,
General Counsel, Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board.
[FR Doc. 07-2703 Filed 5-29-07; 9:44 am]
BILLING CODE 6760-01-P
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1454

To require the Federal Trade Commission to issue a trade regulation rule

which requires the release of prescriptions for contact lenses.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 6, 1995

Mr. STARK introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Commerce

A BILL

To require the Federal Trade Commission to issue a trade

regulation rule which requires the release of prescriptions

for contact lenses.

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 ‘‘Contact Lens Prescrip5 tion Release Act of 1995’’.

6 SEC. 2. PRESCRIPTIONS FOR CONTACT LENSES.

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Federal Trade Commission

8 shall amend its trade regulation rule on ophthalmic prac9 tice published at 16 C.F.R. 456 to require the prescriber
2

•HR 1454 IH

1 to offer to release a copy of the prescriber’s prescription

2 for contact lenses—

3 (1) after the contact lens fitting process is com4 pleted, or

5 (2) in the case of a renewal of a prescription,

6 immediately if there is no change in the prescrip7 tion’s specifications,

8 regardless of whether or not the patient requests a copy

9 of the prescription. Such a prescription shall expire 2

10 years from the date of its issue unless the prescriber other11 wise specifies based upon the medical judgment of the pro12 vider.

13 (b) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of subsection (a):

14 (1) The term ‘‘prescription’’ means the speci15 fications necessary to obtain contact lenses and in16 cludes data on the refractive status of patient’s eyes

17 and clearly notes that the patient is suitable for con18 tact lenses.

19 (2) The term ‘‘prescriber’’ means an ophthal20 mologist or optometrist who performs eye examina21 tions under a license issued by a State.

22 (3) The term ‘‘contact lens fitting process is

23 completed’’ means the process which—

24 (A) begins after the initial eye examination

25 and includes an examination to determine what
3

•HR 1454 IH

1 the lens specifications should be, the purchase

2 of lenses, and an initial evaluation of the fit of

3 the lens on the patient’s eyes and follow-up ex4 aminations, and

5 (B) is completed when the prescriber is

6 satisfied that a successful fit has been achieved.

7 SEC. 3. EFFECT ON STATE LAW.

8 The prescription release requirement of section 2

9 does not affect any State law which permits the release

10 of prescriptions for contact lenses on terms which are not

11 more restrictive than the terms of section 2 or regulates

12 who is to be legally permitted to fit contact lenses.

Æ
Executive Financial Services Program



 EXHIBIT 10.30 
  
 HOLOGIC, INC. 
 EXECUTIVE FINANCIAL SERVICES PROGRAM 
  
 (updated December 15, 2004) 
  

			
	OBJECTIVE:	    	Hologic is maintaining a financial services program to assist eligible officers in their
personal planning. Helping to ensure each officer has the most advantageous personal
financial plan
in place should enable the officer to devote a greater amount of productive
time to Hologic corporate matters. The Company believes that this program is a
worthwhile benefit, helping to retain key employees and providing for a certain
peace-of-
mind.
		
	PROGRAM:	    	Hologic will pay for up to $5,000 of qualified financial planning services each calendar year for each officer. Expenses incurred in excess of $5,000 are the responsibility of that
officer.
		
	TERM:	    	The initial term of this program will be three years (until December 15, 2007) and include all services incurred through December 31, 2006.
		
	ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUALS:	    	This program is extended to each U.S. based executive officer of the Company as approved by the Board of Directors.









							
	ALLOWABLE SERVICES:	  	 This program covers all financial planning services provided to officers which fall under the
following general categories:

 

	 	  	 	  	•	 	Estate Planning and Administration
	 	  	 	  	•	 	Retirement Planning
	 	  	 	  	•	 	Investment and Financial Planning
	 	  	 	  	•	 	Gift Planning
	 	  	 	  	•	 	Stock Option Exercise Planning
	 	  	 	  	•	 	Trust Preparation
	 	  	 	  	•	 	Will Preparation
	 	  	 	  	•	 	Income Tax Planning and Return Preparation
			
	 	  	 	  	The above list of services is not all inclusive. However, commissions or fees payable in connection with the purchase of financial products or monitoring investment assets are not
included.
		
	PLANNING PROVIDERS:	  	The Company will pay or reimburse each officer for services provided by any qualified financial advisor, tax authority, accountant or attorney.
		
	PROCEDURE:	  	Each officer is responsible for sending all invoices for services incurred directly to the Company within a reasonable period of time and no later than the 15th of February for the preceding calendar year (based on invoice date).
		
	TAX TREATMENT:	  	The cost of all services provided to each officer is a taxable benefit and will be included as ordinary income on their W-2 for the year in which the costs are paid.
		
	ADMINISTRATION:	  	This Program will be administered by the Controller of the Company and any questions or issues regarding interpretation of this Program will be decided by the Company’s Chief
Financial Officer.
		
	EFFECTIVE DATE:	  	This Program is effective for all services incurred or invoices received in calendar 2004.
|   | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13a) 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 Company. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| March 30, 2011 |                                        |                     |
|----------------|---------------------------------------------|--------------------------|
|           |                                        | /s/ D. Jonathan Merriman |
|           | D. Jonathan MerrimanChief Executive Officer |

|   |                                  | /s/ Jack A. Thrift |
|--------|---------------------------------------|--------------------|
|   | Jack A. ThriftChief Financial Officer |

----
NotesFAQContact Us

Collection

Thesaurus
AdvancedSearch Tips

Collection

Thesaurus
BrowseThesaurus

 Download full text

**ERIC Number:**

**Record Type:**

**Publication Date:**

**Pages:**

**Abstractor:**

**ISBN:**

**ISSN:**

**EISSN:**

Elementary Secondary EducationFederal AidFederal ProgramsMathematics EducationRegional LaboratoriesResource MaterialsScience Education

**Publication Type:**

**Education Level:**

**Audience:**

**Language:**

**Sponsor:**

**Authoring Institution:**

**Grant or Contract Numbers:**

**Note:**

PrivacyCopyrightContact UsSelection PolicyAPI
JournalsNon-JournalsDownloadSubmitMultimediaWidget
**Exhibit 31.2****CERTIFICATION**I, Michael W. Bruns, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of DOVER SADDLERY, INC.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:     a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; and     b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and     c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe 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 havea significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.     Date: November 13, 2006 /s/ Michael W. Bruns         Michael W. Bruns    Chief Financial Officer    *(Principal Financial Officer)*
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7781

LARRY EUGENE SMITH, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COLBERT L. RESPASS; BEN PILLMON, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (CA-96-853-5-BO(3)) Submitted: July 22, 1998 Decided: August 4, 1998 Before ERVIN, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Larry Eugene Smith, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Jane Ray Garvey, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Larry Eugene Smith, Jr., appeals the district court’s ordersdenying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1998) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion declining to accept the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Smith v. Respass , No. CA-96-853-5-BO(3) (E.D.N.C. Nov. 18, 1997). After a similar review, we find that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Smith’sdue process challenge to his prison disciplinary hearing as frivolous. See Preiser v. Rodriguez , 411 U.S. 475, 500 (1973); Edwards v. Balisok , 520 U.S. 641, ___ (1997). We deny Smith’s motion for the appointment of counsel and dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED