alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SI 0-100913-03 

Camarilio 

1 Chamber of 

Commerce 

Promoting and enhancing a positive environment for business and community 

2400 E.Ventura Boulevard • Camarilio, California 93010 

Phon.: 805-484-4383 • FW: 80S-484-I395 • info@CamarllloChimber.org • www.CainarilloChamber.org 

August 27,2010 

The Honorable Ray LaHood 

Secretary 

United States Department of Transportation 

1200 New iersey Ave. SE 

Washington D.C. 

RE: Support of Ventura County / Oxnard Airport Grant 

Dear Secretary LaHood: 

ISJ 

> 

_oThis letter is sent to you to indicate my support of the application of Ventura COunty/Oxnard Airport for 

a grant in the 2010 Small Community Air Service Development Program. The grant requested is 

$520,000 with a local contribution and ticket purchase program of $480,000 as an incentive for new air 

service at Oxnard Airport. 

The Oxnard Airport has had continuous passenger air service since 1946 and, unfortunately, United 

Express terminated its scheduled air service on June 8**^ of this year leaving Oxnard Airport with no air 

service. The loss of air service has a significant impact on the businesses in the Camarilio Chamber, the 

nearest city to Oxnard. Our only option Is to now drive to either Burbank Airport or Los Angeles 

international Airport. The drive on the freeways from Ventura County is long and very congested. It can 

easily take over two hours to get to either airport. 

I understand that Ventura County Department of Airports management has had meeting with Horizon 

Air about providing nonstop service to San Jose with flights continuing on to its markets in the Pacific 

Northwest. We are in support of this type of air service and will be an important link to markets In the 

north and connections to other areas. We believe that if Horizon Air is successful at Oxnard Airport, 

Horizon will add more flights to other markets or other airlines will come to our airport with nonstop 

service to other regional hub airports. 

Our community needs air service at Oxnard Airport and this will be a good start. I strongly support the 

application of Ventura County/Oxnard Airport for a grant under this program and will support the new 

air service. 

Sincer^yours, 

Thomas P. Kelley 

President/CEO
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                      23,634,480
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                       1,748,323
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                            11,900,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 51,555,380
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                      22,019,378
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                    133,606,082
<ALLOWANCE>                                  2,360,429
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             249,232,173
<DEPOSITS>                                 220,151,532
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          2,509,237
<LONG-TERM>                                    879,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        16,676
<OTHER-SE>                                  25,675,727
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             248,232,173
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              2,884,346
<INTEREST-INVEST>                            1,321,744
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               114,853
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             4,320,943
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             723,844
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             849,128
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        3,471,815
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  125,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                              35,344
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              3,294,112
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                568,847
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     335,543
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   335,543
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.16
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    6.18
<LOANS-NON>                                  2,423,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                 1,540,000
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                               486,986
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             2,200,000
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                   15,000
<RECOVERIES>                                    50,000
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            2,360,000
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                         2,360,000
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
#### § 308.527 Application for return premium, Form MA-307.

An application for the return of premium, which may be obtained from MARAD's underwriting agent or MARAD, shall be filed in duplicate with the Underwriting Agent on Form MA-307.
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE> 5

<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
THE REGISTRANT'S FORM 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN SUCH REPORT.
</LEGEND>

<CIK>   0000827086
<NAME>  CARLYLE INCOME PLUS, L.P. - II

       
<S>                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>          12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>      DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>           DEC-31-1996

<CASH>                                3,933,927 
<SECURITIES>                                  0 
<RECEIVABLES>                            25,348 
<ALLOWANCES>                                  0 
<INVENTORY>                                   0 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                      3,959,275 
<PP&E>                                        0 
<DEPRECIATION>                                0 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                       28,511,534 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                    77,246 
<BONDS>                                       0 
<COMMON>                                      0 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         0 
<PREFERRED>                                   0 
<OTHER-SE>                           28,392,378 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>         28,511,534 
<SALES>                               2,377,068 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                      2,885,863 
<CGS>                                         0 
<TOTAL-COSTS>                         1,334,670 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                        321,554 
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              0 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            0 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                       1,229,639 
<INCOME-TAX>                                  0 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                    (658,715)
<DISCONTINUED>                        2,524,162 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               0 
<CHANGES>                                     0 
<NET-INCOME>                          1,865,447 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                             29.14 
<EPS-DILUTED>                             29.14 
        <PAGE>




</TABLE>
# C_2019044EN.01005302.xml

| 4.2.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 44/53 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.2.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 44/53

---

Order of the General Court of 25 October 2018 — ATMvision v Commission

(Case T-627/11) (1)

((State aid - German tax legislation concerning the possibility of carrying losses forward to future tax years (Sanierungsklausel) - Decision declaring aid incompatible with the internal market - Annulment of the contested measure by the Court - Action which has become devoid of purpose - No need to adjudicate))

(2019/C 44/68)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: ATMvision AG (Salem, Germany) (represented by: initially, A. Cordewener, F. Kutt and C. Jehke, then, F. Kutt and C. Jehke, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially, R. Lyal, T. Maxian Rusche, M. Adam and M. Noll0Ehlers, then, R. Lyal, T. Maxian Rusche and M. Noll-Ehlers and finally, R. Lyal, T. Maxian Rusche and K. Blanck, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: initially T. Henze, K. Petersen and R. Kanitz, then, T. Henze, R. Kanitz and K. Stranz and finally, T. Henze, R. Kanitz and S. Eisenberg, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking annulment of Commission Decision 2011/527/EU of 26 January 2011 on State aid C 7/10 (ex CP 250/09 and NN 5/10) implemented by Germany — Scheme for the carry-forward of tax losses in the case of restructuring of companies in difficulty (Sanierungsklausel) (OJ 2011 L 235, p. 26).

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no need to adjudicate on the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no need to adjudicate on the action;

| 2. | The European Commission is ordered to pay its own costs as well as those incurred by ATMvision AG; |
| --- | --- |

2.

The European Commission is ordered to pay its own costs as well as those incurred by ATMvision AG;

| 3. | The Federal Republic of Germany is ordered to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The Federal Republic of Germany is ordered to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 49, 18.2.2012.

---
#### BLACK AND WHITE OPERATING COMPANY, INCORPORATED, A NEW JERSEY CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. EMIL GROSBART, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Submitted October term, 1928

Decided May 27, 1929.

Before Justices Teenohaed, Kalisch and Lloyd.

Eor the appellant, *Harry Levin.*

Eor the respondent, *George F.*Seymour, *Jr.*

Pee Curiam.

Since the *per curiam*opinion was filed in this case our attention has been called by counsel to a supplemental state of the case which appears to have been signed by the trial judge two months after the original state of the ease had been signed.

Without passing on the sufficiency of such a state of the record, we have examined the reasons urged for reversal and find them without merit, and the judgment is affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> BD
<MULTIPLIER>   1,000

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999             DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999             JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          13,979                  13,979
<RECEIVABLES>                                   31,282                  31,282
<SECURITIES-RESALE>                                  0                       0
<SECURITIES-BORROWED>                                0                       0
<INSTRUMENTS-OWNED>                             51,989                  51,989
<PP&E>                                               0                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 136,357                 136,357
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0                       0
<PAYABLES>                                      45,923                  45,923
<REPOS-SOLD>                                         0                       0
<SECURITIES-LOANED>                                  0                       0
<INSTRUMENTS-SOLD>                              27,850                  27,850
<LONG-TERM>                                          0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                            71                      71
<OTHER-SE>                                      62,512                  62,512
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   136,357                 136,357
<TRADING-REVENUE>                                1,687                   2,375
<INTEREST-DIVIDENDS>                               481                     925
<COMMISSIONS>                                    2,288                   4,830
<INVESTMENT-BANKING-REVENUES>                      480                   1,075
<FEE-REVENUE>                                      443                     758
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 243                     287
<COMPENSATION>                                   3,044                   5,214
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    254                   1,257
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                           0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                        76                     641
<EPS-BASIC>                                      .01                     .10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .01                     .10


</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 160
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 160 appear by USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59785, 59786, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 160.076-21 Component materials. Each component material used in the manufacture of an inflatable PFD must— ( a ) Meet the applicable requirements of subpart 164.019 of this chapter, UL 1191 and UL 1180 (incorporated by reference, see § 160.076-11), and this section; and
( b ) Be of good quality and suitable for the purpose intended.
[USCG-2011-0076, 77 FR 19942, Apr. 3, 2012]
# C_2013367EN.01000701.xml

| 14.12.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 367/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.12.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 367/7

---

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 22 October 2013 — European Commission v Federal Republic of Germany

(Case C-95/12) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Judgment of the Court establishing a failure to fulfil obligations - National legislation providing for a blocking minority of 20 % in respect of the adoption of certain decisions by the shareholders of Volkswagen AG)

2013/C 367/10

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: E. Montaguti and G. Braun, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: T. Henze, J. Schwarze, J. Möller and J. Kemper, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Failure to comply fully with the judgment of the Court of 23 October 2007 in Case C-112/05 Commission v Germany concerning the infringement of Article 56(1) EC — National legislation requiring, exceptionally, a majority of more than 80 % for the adoption of certain decisions by the shareholders of Volkswagen AG, thereby enabling the Land of Lower Saxony, which holds 20 % of those shares, to block those decisions — Calculation of penalties: payment of both a penalty payment and a lump sum

Commission

Germany

Land

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the European Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 118, 21.4.2012.

1

---
**Exhibit
      32**








**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 Victory Energy Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the
      period ending June 30, 2007 (the “Report”), Jon Fullenkamp, Principal Executive
      Officer of the Company, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





1)
            The
                Report fully complies with the requirement 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 Company’s financial position and results of
                operations.











Date:  August
      __,
      2007                                                                                               */s/  Jon
      Fullenkamp*


----------------------------------


Jon
      Fullenkamp


Principal
      Executive
      Officer


Principal
      Financial and


Accounting
      Officer
<PAGE>

                                  Exhibit 12.1
                Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                            Year Ended December 31,
                                          2000          1999          1998         1997          1996
                                     --------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                  <C>             <C>           <C>           <C>           <C>
Consolidated pretax income from
  continuing operations              (18,396,488)    50,307,000    72,970,000    60,109,000    46,465,000

Interest                              19,192,119      6,807,106     6,819,257     6,751,975     6,444,424

Interest portion of rental expense     2,539,743      2,147,371     1,683,549     1,278,793       959,180
                                     -----------    -----------   -----------   -----------   -----------
  Earnings                             3,335,374     59,261,477    81,472,806    68,139,768    53,868,604
                                     ===========    ===========   ===========   ===========   ===========

Interest                              19,192,119      6,807,106     6,819,257     6,751,975     6,444,424

Interest portion of rental expense     2,539,743      2,147,371     1,683,549     1,278,793       959,180

Preferred stock dividend
  requirements                              --             --            --         127,478       201,319

                                     -----------    -----------   -----------   -----------   -----------
  Fixed Charges                       21,731,862      8,954,477     8,502,806     8,158,246     7,604,923
                                     ===========    ===========   ===========   ===========   ===========

  Ratio of Earnings to Fixed
  Charges                                   0.15           6.62          9.58          8.35          7.08
</TABLE>
# C_2012174EN.01001401.xml

| 16.6.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 174/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.6.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 174/14

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 10 April 2012 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — Criminal proceedings against Minh Khoa Vo

(Case C-83/12 PPU) (1)

1

(Area of freedom, security and justice - Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 - Community Code on Visas - Articles 21 and 34 - National legislation - Third country nationals brought illegally into the territory of a Member State - Visas obtained by fraud - Criminal penalties imposed on the human smuggler)

2012/C 174/20

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Party in the main proceedings

Party in the main proceedings

Minh Khoa Vo

Re:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Bundesgerichtshof — Interpretation of Articles 21 and 34 of Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 establishing a Community Code on Visas (OJ 2009 L 243, p. 1) — National legislation imposing criminal penalties on persons who smuggle foreign nationals into national territory — Applicability of penalties when the foreign nationals concerned are in possession of a visa obtained by false pretences from a competent authority of another Member State but which has not yet been annulled pursuant to that regulation

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 21 and 34 of Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 establishing a Community Code on Visas (Visa Code) are to be interpreted as meaning that they do not preclude national provisions under which assisting illegal immigration constitutes an offence subject to criminal penalties in cases where the persons smuggled, third country nationals, hold visas which they obtained fraudulently by deceiving the competent authorities of the Member State of issue as to the true purpose of their journey, without prior annulment of those visas.

---

(1)  OJ C 126, 28.4.2012.

1

---
2:15-cr-20382-GER-EAS Doc # 3 Filed 08/28/15 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 12
2:15-cr-20382-GER-EAS Doc # 3 Filed 08/28/15 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 13
**EXHIBIT 99.6**I, Gerald W. Grandey, certify that:1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 40-F of Cameco Corporation;2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit 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 annual report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, resultsof operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisannual report;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)) for the registrant and we have: a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this annual report is being prepared;  b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this annualreport based on such evaluation; and  c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial 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 registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunction): a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controlover financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.Date: March 17, 2006         /s/ *“Gerald W. Grandey”*       Gerald W. Grandey    President & Chief Executive Officer    (Principal Executive Officer)
#### § 35.30-25 Explosives—TB/ALL.

Fulminates or other detonating compounds in bulk in dry condition; explosive compositions that ignite spontaneously or undergo marked decomposition when subjected for forty-eight consecutive hours to a temperature of 167 °F. or more; composition containing an ammonium salt and a chlorate; and other like explosives shall not be accepted, stored, stowed or transported on board tank vessels.