alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Official Journal C 344A/2011

| | ISSN 1977-091X
  doi:10.3000/1977091X.CA2011.344.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 344A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5424 November 2011 |

ISSN 1977-091X

doi:10.3000/1977091X.CA2011.344.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 344A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5424 November 2011

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | V   Announcements |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Commission |
| 2011/C 344A/01 | Vacancy for an Executive Director (Grade AD 14) of a European Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice — COM/2011/10318 | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Commission

2011/C 344A/01

Vacancy for an Executive Director (Grade AD 14) of a European Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice — COM/2011/10318

1

---

REVIEW OF COMPETITION C A OJs

Please find below the list of C A published during the present year.

Unless otherwise indicated, OJs are published in all language versions.

| 19 | (PL) |
| --- | --- |
| 24 | |
| 35 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 37 | (PL/RO) |
| 60 | |
| 68 | |
| 76 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 82 | |
| 91 | |
| 98 | |
| 114 | (DA) |
| 121 | (DA) |
| 122 | |
| 135 | |
| 140 | (BG/ET/HU/MT/PL/SL/SV) |
| 142 | |
| 146 | |
| 147 | (EN/IT/MT/SV) |
| 155 | (EN/ES/ET/FR/NL/PL/PT/SK/SL/SV) |
| 156 | |
| 157 | |
| 162 | |
| 169 | (EN) |
| 177 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 180 | (BG/RO) |
| 181 | (DA) |
| 183 | (SL) |
| 185 | |
| 193 | (BG/RO) |
| 198 | (CS/HU/LT/MT/PL/SK) |
| 206 | (CS/ES/LV/MT/SV) |
| 208 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 221 | |
| 222 | (BG/RO) |
| 223 | |
| 229 | |
| 257 | |
| 258 | |
| 270 | |
| 271 | |
| 278 | (EN) |
| 279 | (FR) |
| 281 | (DA) |
| 284 | (DE) |
| 285 | (LT) |
| 286 | (NL) |
| 292 | (RO) |
| 294 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 303 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 304 | (DA/EN) |
| 307 | |
| 309 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 312 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 315 | |
| 321 | (EN/FR) |
| 324 | |
| 330 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 334 | |
| 336 | (EL/EN/ET/FI/FR/GA/HU/IT) |
| 339 | |
| 344 | |

19

(PL)

24

35

(DE/EN/FR)

37

(PL/RO)

60

68

76

(DE/EN/FR)

82

91

98

114

(DA)

121

(DA)

122

135

140

(BG/ET/HU/MT/PL/SL/SV)

142

146

147

(EN/IT/MT/SV)

155

(EN/ES/ET/FR/NL/PL/PT/SK/SL/SV)

156

157

162

169

(EN)

177

(DE/EN/FR)

180

(BG/RO)

181

(DA)

183

(SL)

185

193

(BG/RO)

198

(CS/HU/LT/MT/PL/SK)

206

(CS/ES/LV/MT/SV)

208

(DE/EN/FR)

221

222

(BG/RO)

223

229

257

258

270

271

278

(EN)

279

(FR)

281

(DA)

284

(DE)

285

(LT)

286

(NL)

292

(RO)

294

(DE/EN/FR)

303

(DE/EN/FR)

304

(DA/EN)

307

309

(DE/EN/FR)

312

(DE/EN/FR)

315

321

(EN/FR)

324

330

(DE/EN/FR)

334

336

(EL/EN/ET/FI/FR/GA/HU/IT)

339

344

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

JOSEPH H. CAMBURN III,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 297 MAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 17th day of October, 2023, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
No. 52410.

protests 136088-K, etc. (New York).

#### Rolex Watch Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

The protests were dismissed.
Skip to main content

Back to HomeBoard of Governors of the Federal Reserve System      -  Stay Connected          - Link to Federal Reserve Facebook Page
        - Link to Federal Reserve Twitter Page
        - Link to Federal Reserve YouTube Page
        - Link to Federal Reserve Flickr Page
        - Federal Reserve LinkedIn Page
        - Subscribe to RSS
        - Subscribe to Email 
      - Recent Postings
      - Calendar
      - Publications
      - Site Map
      - A-Z index
      - Careers
      - FAQs
      - Videos
      - Contact
Submit Search Button

Advanced

Toggle Dropdown Menu

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
*The Federal Reserve, the central bank of the United States, provides the nation with a safe, flexible, and stable monetary and financial system.*

Sections

Search Submit ButtonSubmit

-  About
Exhibit 21.1
 LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES OF DYNCORP INTERNATIONAL LLC
 Subsidiary Name
    
    State/Country of OrganizationDCH Limited
    
    United KingdomDIV Capital Corporation
    
    DelawareDTS Aviation Services LLC
    
    NevadaDynCorp Aerospace Operations LLC
    
    DelawareDynCorp Aerospace Operations (UK) Ltd.
    
    United KingdomDynCorp (Aust.) Pty. Limited
    
    AustraliaDynCorp International FZ-LLC
    
    United Arab EmiratesDynCorp International Private Limited
    
    SingaporeDynCorp International Services LLC
    
    VirginiaDynCorp International Services GmbH
    
    GermanyDyn Marine Services LLC
    
    CaliforniaDyn Marine Services of Virginia LLC
    
    VirginiaGlobal Linguist Solutions LLC
    
    DelawareServices International LLC
    
    DelawareWorldwide Humanitarian Services LLC
    
    DelawareWorldwide Recruiting and Staffing Services
LLC (f/k/a DynCorp International of Nigeria
LLC
    
    Delaware
EXHIBIT 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       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 of Mystica Candle Corp. (the "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the year ending June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jon Suk, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
28th day of September, 2006.


/s/ Jon Suk
---------------------------
Chief Executive Officer
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-18-00355-CR

QUINCY BLAKELY, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

§

§

§

§

§

On Appeal from the 211th District 

Court

of Denton County (F18-1122-211)

November 8, 2018

Opinion by Justice Birdwell

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

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

appeal should be dismissed. It is ordered that the appeal is dismissed for want of 

jurisdiction.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By _/s/ Wade Birdwell___________________

 Justice Wade Birdwell
Attachment I: 

Non-Operating Ownership - McElmo Creek Unit Oil Production Facility - Gas 

Compression Plant 

Navajo Nation Oil and Gas Company 

P.O. Box 4439 

Window Rock, AZ 86515 

Tel: 928-871-4880
Case No. 8,926.

#### McSHERRY v. QUEEN et al.

[2 Cranch, C. C. 406.]4

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

April Term, 1823.

Judgment — Supersedeas—Execution—Improper Recital.

The court will, on motion, quash an execution upon a supersedeas judgment and also the su-persedeas judgment itself, if it does not truly recite the original judgment.

[Cited in Chesapeake & O. Canal Co. v. Bar-croft, Case No. 2,0)44.]

[This was a suit by Dennis McSherry against R. T. Queen, Charles J. Queen, and James King & Co.]

Mr. Wallach, for defendants,

moved the court to quash an execution issued upon su-persedeas; and also the supersedeas itself, because it did not truly recite the original judgment. The original judgment was for $200 damages, to be released on the payment of $100 with interest from the 13th of April, 1820. A payment of $50 is noted on the docket The supersedeas stated the debt to be $50, taking no notice of the damages to be released on the payment of a smaller sum.

THE COURT

(THRUSTON, Circuit Judge, absent)

quashed the execution and superse-deas, because'the original judgment was not truly recited in the supersedeas judgment, and because a judgment against James King & Co. was too uncertain.
No. 58340.

protests 110810-K, etc. (Buffalo).

#### C. J. Tower & Sons *v.*United States,

*345Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise are similar in all material respects to the Western white spruce lumber the subject of *C. J. Tower & Sons*v. *United States*(31 Cust. Ct. 13, C. D. 1538), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained as to said items.
No. 61179.

protest 286798-K (New York).

#### Lian Bros., Inc. *v.*United States,

*414Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of tablecloths and napkins similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 59733, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
August 27, 2013



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

DERRICK W. PARKER , Appellant

NO. 14

- 12

- 00085

- CV V.

BRITTANI A. DENNIS , Appellee

______ __________________________ This cause, an appeal from the judgment in favor of appellee Brittani A. Dennis signed, January 18, 2012, was heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find no error in the judgment. We order the ju dgment of the court below AFFIRMED

. We order appellant Derrick W. Parker to pay al l costs incurred in this appeal. We further order this decision certified below for observance.
No. 57544.

#### Arthur Doniger Paper Co., Inc *v.*United States,

protests 191344-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of paper napkins similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Freund Mayer & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(39 C. C. P. A. 123, C. A. D. 474), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Before the Second Division,

May 25, 1964

No. 68577.

protest 294193-K (Philadelphia).

#### F. B. Vandegrift & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the ■merchandise and issues herein are similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *Schmidt Pritchard & Co. et al.*(47 CCPA 152, C.A.D. 750), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 67682.

#### Liasson Co. *v.*United States,

protest 62/11037 (New York).

*289Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with oral stipulation of counsel that the articles are integral and essential parts of resistance thermometers and that said thermometers have as an essential feature an electrical element or device, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 54477.

#### Mutual Trading Company *v.*United States,

protest 151082-K (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Cole, J.

The protest was dismissed.
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,

J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk December 21, 2009

s1214 

# Order

December 21, 2009

139385

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 139385 COA: 283750 Wayne CC: 07-015195-FC RONALD BOYD WHITE, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 4, 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
Exhibit 31.1

 

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO EXCHANGE ACT RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a)

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

I, Trung Tri Doan, certify that:

 

|  | 1. |  | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of SemiLEDs Corporation (the “Registrant”); |
|--|----|--|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

|  | 2. |  | Based on my knowledge, this 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 this report. |
|--|----|--|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

| Dated: December 27, 2016 | /s/ Trung Tri Doan                                              |
|-------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
|                          | Name: Trung Tri DoanTitle: Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |

 

 

----
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

BOND REVOCATION AND DETENTION ORDER

PAGE -1-

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

 AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

)

Plaintiff, ) CASE NO. CR06-149 RSM

)

v. )

) BOND REVOCATION AND

RHONDA L. SCHWEITZER, ) DETENTION ORDER

)

Defendant. )

)

_____________________________ )

The Court conducted a Bond Revocation hearing on October 26, 2006. The bond

was revoked and defendant ordered detained. Defendant is alleged to have violated the

conditions of her release in the following respects:

(1) Violation of a special condition of bond that she not use, consume or possess

alcohol by consuming alcohol during the week of October 1, 2006 to October 7,

2006.

(2) Violation of a special condition of bond that she not use, consume or posses any

controlled substances by using Cocaine on October 14,15, 16, and 17, 2006.

(3) Violation of a special condition that she submit to drug testing as directed, by

failing to submit to a scheduled urinalysis on October 16, 2006.

(4) Violation of a special condition that she participate in substance abuse counseling

as directed by failing to attend her scheduled treatment session on October 17, and

Case 2:06-cr-00149-RSM Document 233 Filed 10/27/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

BOND REVOCATION AND DETENTION ORDER

PAGE -2-

19, 2006.

The defendant stipulated to violations 1-3. Court finds that grounds are established as to

violations 4-5.

It is therefore ORDERED:

(1) Defendant shall be detained pending trial and committed to the custody of

the Attorney General for confinement in a correctional facility separate, to

the extent practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences, or being

held in custody pending appeal;

(2) Defendant shall be afforded reasonable opportunity for private consultation

with counsel;

(3) On order of a court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the

Government, the person in charge of the correctional facility in which

Defendant is confined shall deliver the defendant to a United States Marshal

for the purpose of an appearance in connection with a court proceeding; and

 (4) The clerk shall direct copies of this order to counsel for the United States,

to counsel for the defendant, to the United States Marshal, and to the United

States Pretrial Services Officer.

DATED this 27th day of October, 2006.

AMONICA J. BENTON

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 2:06-cr-00149-RSM Document 233 Filed 10/27/06 Page 2 of 2
No. 56252.

protests 169235-K, etc. (New York).

#### Inter-Maritime Forwarding Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Cole, J.

The protests were dismissed.
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1
 
                       CONSENT OF PEDERSEN & HOUPT, P.C.
 
     Pedersen & Houpt, P.C. hereby consents to all references made to it in the
Registration Statement on Form S-1 of SpinCycle, Inc., as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on June 29, 1998.
 
                                          /s/   PEDERSEN & HOUPT, P.C.
 
                                          --------------------------------------
                                                  Pedersen & Houpt, P.C.
 
Chicago, Illinois
June 29, 1998
### Page 1 of 3 **Disposition Comments Docket No:**  

### FAA - 201 3 - 0 9 29 These comments are in **Directorate ID:** 

### 201 3 - CE - 3 1 - AD response to an SNPRM Originating Office Tracking No.: **Next Step:** FRAN SNPRM 

### N o C omments/Only

Supportive Comments Received

– If this box is checked, no signatures are required. No 

### Has the reference d service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? I f ye s, list latest revision and attach a cop y. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance. Instructions: Summarize all comments **by issue** (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of each issue. **All comments relating to the sam e issue should be discussed together.**  Do not list all of the issues from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA - IR- M - 8040.1C Chapter 9. **ISSUE 1:** Select one o

f the following : If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD: If **NO** , we don’t agree because **ISSUE 2**  **:** Select one of the following :

If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because Make the following changes to the AD:

### Page 2 of 3

If **NO** , we don’t agree because **For additional issues, do uble**  **- click**  **here**

### Page 3 of 3 **S ignature Section**  Signature indicates concurrence with this action. Originating Office Tracking No.: **ASE** Printed Name **: Date** 

**Branch M anager**  **Date**
IV

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 88

Urging the Congress and the President to increase funding for the Pell

Grant Program and existing Campus-Based Aid Programs.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 20, 1999

Mr. MCKEON (for himself, Mr. GOODLING, Mr. PETRI, Mr. BALLENGER, Mr.

BARRETT of Nebraska, Mr. BOEHNER, Mr. HOEKSTRA, Mr. CASTLE, Mr.

GREENWOOD, Mr. GRAHAM, Mr. NORWOOD, Mr. SOUDER, Mr. DEAL of

Georgia, Mr. EHLERS, Mr. FLETCHER, Mr. DEMINT, Mr. ISAKSON, Mr.

HULSHOF, Mr. HERGER, Mr. ROGAN, Mr. KUYKENDALL, and Mr. GARY

MILLER of California) submitted the following concurrent resolution;

which was referred to the Committee on the Workforce

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Urging the Congress and the President to increase funding

for the Pell Grant Program and existing Campus-Based

Aid Programs.

Whereas the Basic Educational Opportunity Grant Program,

now known as the Pell Grant Program in honor of Senator Claiborne Pell of Rhode Island, was first authorized

in the 1972 amendments to the Higher Education Act of

1965;

Whereas the Pell Grant Program has become the largest

need-based Federal higher education scholarship program

and is considered the foundation for all Federal student

aid;
2

•HCON 88 IH

Whereas the purpose of the program is to assist students

from low income families who would not otherwise be financially able to attend a postsecondary institution by

providing grants to students to be used to pay the costs

of attending the postsecondary institution of their choice;

Whereas in the late 1970’s, the Pell Grant covered seventyfive percent of the average cost of attending a public

four-year college; by the late 1990’s, it only covered thirty-six percent of the cost of attending a public four-year

college;

Whereas families across the country are concerned about the

rising cost of a college education, and for children from

low income families, the cost of college continues to be

an overwhelming factor in their decision to forego a college education;

Whereas children from high income families are almost twice

as likely to enroll in college as children from low income

families;

Whereas higher education promotes economic opportunity for

individuals and economic competitiveness for our Nation;

Whereas the Pell Grant and Campus-Based Aid Programs

target aid to low income students as effectively as any

programs administered by the Federal government; and

Whereas student borrowing to finance a postsecondary education has increased to an average indebtedness of

$9,700, and therefore increased grant aid is more important than ever: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That the Congress and the President, should,

3 working within the constraints of the balanced budget
3

•HCON 88 IH

1 agreement, make student scholarship aid the highest pri2 ority for higher education funding by increasing the max3 imum Pell Grant awarded to low income students by $400

4 and increasing other existing campus-based aid programs

5 that serve low-income students prior to authorizing or ap6 propriating funds for any new education initiative.

Æ
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Order/U.S. v. Thomas Joseph - 1

CR06-5200RBL

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

1201 PACIFIC AVENUE, SUITE 700

TACOMA, WASHINGTON 98402

(253) 428-3800

Judge Leighton

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) NO. CR06-5200RBL

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) ORDER

)

THOMAS JOSEPH, )

)

Defendant. ) )

After consideration of the Stipulated Motion For Extension Of Time For Filing Of

Response To Defendant’s Franks Motion to Suppress, the government’s request for additional

time in order to file its response, is hereby GRANTED.

The government’s response to the Defendant’s Motion to Suppress is now due on

September 11, 2006.

 DATED this 5th day of September, 2006.

ARONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Proposed by:

s/ Gregory A. Gruber 

GREGORY A. GRUBER

Assistant United States Attorney

Case 3:06-cr-05200-RBL Document 28 Filed 09/05/06 Page 1 of 1