alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2022153EN.01013901.xml

| 3.6.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 153/139 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.6.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 153/139

---

COUNCIL DECISION (CFSP) 2022/885

of 3 June 2022

amending Decision 2014/145/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 29 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 17 March 2014, the Council adopted Decision 2014/145/CFSP (1). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 17 March 2014, the Council adopted Decision 2014/145/CFSP (1).

| (2) | The Union remains unwavering in its support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The Union remains unwavering in its support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.

| (3) | The Council considers that further derogation options from the asset freeze and the prohibition to make funds and economic resources available to designated persons and entities should be introduced. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The Council considers that further derogation options from the asset freeze and the prohibition to make funds and economic resources available to designated persons and entities should be introduced.

| (4) | Decision 2014/145/CFSP should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

Decision 2014/145/CFSP should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

In Article 2 of Decision 2014/145/CFSP, the following paragraph is added:

‘13.   Paragraphs 1 and 2 shall not apply to funds or economic resources that are strictly necessary for the provision of electronic communication services by Union telecommunication operators, for the provision of associated facilities and services necessary for the operation, maintenance and security of such electronic communication services, in Russia, in Ukraine, in the Union, between Russia and the Union, and between Ukraine and the Union, and for data centre services in the Union.’.

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 3 June 2022.

For the Council

The President

C. COLONNA

---

(1)  Council Decision 2014/145/CFSP of 17 March 2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (OJ L 78, 17.3.2014, p. 16).

1

---
# L_2022096DE.01004901.xml

| 24.3.2022 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 96/49 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.3.2022

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 96/49

---

Berichtigung der Durchführungsverordnung (EU) 2022/160 der Kommission vom 4. Februar 2022 zur Festlegung einheitlicher Mindesthäufigkeiten bestimmter amtlicher Kontrollen zur Überprüfung der Einhaltung der Tiergesundheitsanforderungen der Union gemäß der Verordnung (EU) 2017/625 des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates und zur Aufhebung der Verordnungen (EG) Nr. 1082/2003 und (EG) Nr. 1505/2006

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 26 vom 7. Februar 2022
  )

Seite 15, Artikel 5 Satz 2 Buchstabe c:

Anstatt:

| „c) | Betriebe mit mittlerem Risiko werden mindestens einmal alle drei Kalenderjahre untersucht.“ |
| --- | --- |

„c)

Betriebe mit mittlerem Risiko werden mindestens einmal alle drei Kalenderjahre untersucht.“

muss es heißen:

| „c) | Betriebe mit geringem Risiko werden mindestens einmal alle drei Kalenderjahre untersucht.“ |
| --- | --- |

„c)

Betriebe mit geringem Risiko werden mindestens einmal alle drei Kalenderjahre untersucht.“

---
Before the First Division,

September 30, 1954

No. 58401.

protests 192859-K, etc. (Boston).

#### Nichols & Company, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

It was stipulated that for duty purposes the clean content of the wool in question was determined in accordance with the instructions *368contained! n T. D. 53159, which was issued following *United States*v. *Fred Whitaker Company, Inc.*(40 C. C. P. A. 19, C. A. D. 492). In that case, it was held that the statutory language, clean content of wool, as used in paragraph 1102 (b), was construed to mean the product commercially usable as wool and from which all the weight of grease and foreign material has been removed, including the wool fibers which are unavoidably and irrevocably lost as a result of commercially applied cleaning processes. Accordingly, the wool in question was held dutiable at the rate applied by the collector on the basis of the percentages of clean content as set forth in the column headed “Clean Content under T. D. 53159” in schedule “A,” attached to and made a part of the decision in this case.
No. 57538.

#### American Express Co., Transferee, et al. *v.*United States,

protests 202435-K, etc. (Boston).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

It was stipulated that for duty purposes the clean content of the wool in question was determined in accordance with the instructions contained in T. D. 53159. Said T. D. 53159 was issued following the decision in *Fred Whitaker*Company, *Inc.*v. *United States*(27 Cust. Ct. 168, C. D. 1365), affirmed in *United States*v. *Fred Whitaker Company, Inc.*(40 C. C. P. A. 19, C. A. D. 492), wherein the statutory language, clean content of wool, as used in paragraph 1102 (b), was construed to mean the product commercially usable as wool and from which all the weight of grease and foreign material has been removed, including the wool fibers which are unavoidably and irrevocably lost as a result of commercially applied cleaning processes. Accordingly, the wool in question was held dutiable at the rate applied by the collector on the basis of the percentages of clean content as set forth in the column headed “Clean Content under T. D. 53159” in the schedule attached to and made a part of the decision in this case.
EXHIBIT 32.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned
officer of Universal Travel Group (the "Company") does hereby certify, to such
officer's knowledge, that the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the Company for
the year ended December 31, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained
in that Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated: March 27, 2007                                    /s/ Xin Zhang
                                                         -----------------------
                                                         Xin Zhang
                                                         Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit
      1**




**Management's
      Assertion Concerning Compliance**


**with
      USAP Minimum Servicing Standards**




March
      17,
      2006




As
      of and
      for the year ended December 31, 2005, Bank of America, N.A. (the "Company"),
      has complied
      in all material respects with the minimum servicing standards set forth in
      the
      Mortgage Bankers
      Association of America's *Uniform
      Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers* ("USAP").




As
      of and
      for this same period, the Company had in effect a fidelity bond and errors
      and
      omissions policy in the amounts of $270,000,000 and $110,000,000,
      respectively.






/s/
                  Floyd S. Robinson
                Floyd
                  R. Robinson
                Senior
                  Vice President
                President
                  Consumer Real Estate
                Bank
                  of America, N.A.
              /s/
                  H. Randall Chestnut
                H.
                  Randall Chestnut
                Senior
                  Vice President
                Bank
                  of America, N.A./s/Mike
                  Kula
                Mike
                  Kula
                Senior
                  Vice President
                Finance
                  Executive
                Bank
                  of America, N.A.
              /s/
                  Robert Caruso
                Robert
                  Caruso
                Senior
                  Vice President
                National
                  Servicing Executive
                Bank
                  of America, N.A./s/
                  J. Mark Hanson
                J.
                  Mark Hanson
                Senior
                  Vice President
                Bank
                  of America, N.A.
Before the Second Division,

September 23, 1954

No. 58398.

protests 178112-K, etc. (New York).

#### A. Tanzi Engineering Co. and Schneider Bros. & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the machines consist of noodle-making machines similar in all material respects to those the subject of *A. Tanzi Engineering Co.*and *Schneider Bros. & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(30 Cust. Ct. 4, C. D. 1490), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. R67/105.

No. R67/106.

#### Cardeb Company et al. *v.*United States, reappraisements R61/3000, etc. (Houston). Kurt Orban Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States, reappraisements R61/19052, etc. (Port Everglades).

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the issues of fact and law are the same in all material respects as those in *Kurt Orban Company, Inc.*v. *United States*(52 CCPA 20, C.A.D. 851), the court found and held that export value, as that value is defined in section 402(b), Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, is the proper basis of value for the galvanized wire and round steel wire in issue and that said value is the appraised value, less inland freight and f .o.b. charges of $8 per metric ton.
(Reap. Dec. 10623)

#### Yamaha International Industries et al. *v.*United States

Entry No. 5122, etc.

(Decided November 13, 1963)

*G-lacl & Tuttle*for the plaintiffs.

*John W. Douglas,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Wilson, Judge:

These appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule “A,” hereto attached and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation entered into between counsel for the respective parties:

> *IT IS HEREBY*STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and *between*the parties hereto, subject to the approval of the court, as follows

> 1. That this stipulation is limited to the items marked “A” and initialed GK3T (Examiner’s Initials) by Examiner George K. Xamauchi (Examiner’s Name) on the invoices covered by the appeals for reappraisement listed on Schedule “A” annexed.

> 2. That the merchandise was imported after the effective date of the Customs Simplification Act of 1956 (Public Law 927, 84th Congress, T.D. 54165).

> . 3. That the items marked “A” consist of motorcycles; that said items are not identified on the Final List published by the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to said Customs Simplification Act (T.D. 54521), and accordingly are subject to appraisement under the provisions of section 402 of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended by said Customs Simplification Act.

> 4. That on or about the dates of exportation, the prices at which such or similar merchandise was freely sold in the principal markets of the country of exportation, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade lor exportation to the United States, said prices including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other expenses incidental to placing the merchandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United States, were equal to the F.O.B. invoice unit prices.

> 5. The appeals may be submitted-on this stipulation, the same being limited to the merchandise and issues described hereinabove and abandoned in all other respects.

On the agreed facts, I find and hold export value, as that value is defined’in section 402(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, T.D. 54165, to be the proper value for the determination of the Value of the merchandise here involved and that such values were the f.o.b. invoice unit prices.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
<PAGE>

                                 EXHIBIT (10)(b)

                         OPINION AND CONSENT OF ACTUARY

<PAGE>

                [Transamerica Life Insurance Company Letterhead]

September 24, 2003

Transamerica Life Insurance Company
4333 Edgewood Road NE
Cedar Rapids, Iowa  52499-0001

Re:      Flexible Premium Variable Annuity - C
         Separate Account VA R
         Registration on Form N-4

Dear Sir/Madam:

With regard to the above registration statement, I have examined such documents
and made such inquiries as I have deemed necessary and appropriate, and on the
basis of such examination, have the following opinions:

Fees and charges deducted under the Flexible Premium Variable Annuity - C
policies are those deemed necessary to appropriately reflect:

(1)      the expenses incurred in the acquisition and distribution of the
         policies,

(2)      the expenses associated with the development and servicing of the
         policies,

(3)      the assumption of certain risks arising from the operation and
         management of the policies and/or riders to the policy and that
         provides for a reasonable margin of profit.

Fees and charges assessed against the policy values in the variable account
include:

(i)      Service Charge and Administrative Charge

(ii)     Mortality and Expense Risk Fee (M&E)

(iii)    Taxes (including premium and other taxes if applicable)

(iv)     Surrender Charges

(v)      Any applicable rider fees or charges

<PAGE>

Transamerica Life Insurance Company
September 24, 2003
Page 2

The magnitude of each of the individual charges listed above in (i) through (v)
is established in the pricing of the Flexible Premium Variable Annuity - C, to
achieve a reasonable Return on Investment (ROI), which is within the range of
industry practice with respect to comparable variable annuity products.

Except by coincidence, it is not expected that actual charges assessed in a
given year would exactly offset actual expenses incurred. Acquisition expenses
(as well as major product and/or systems development expenses) are incurred "up
front" and recovered, with a reasonable profit margin, through future years'
charges. In addition, the company cannot increase certain charges under the
policies in the pricing process.

Therefore, in my opinion, the fees and charges deducted under the policies, in
the aggregate, are reasonable in relation to the services rendered, the expenses
expected to be incurred, and the risks assumed by the company.

I hereby consent to the use of this opinion, which is included as an Exhibit to
the registration statement.

/s/ Tim Bennett
-----------------------------------
Tim Bennett, ASA, MAAA
Assistant Actuary
Transamerica Life Insurance Company
<PAGE>   1



                                                      Exhibit 23.1





INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT



We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Registration Statement of
The Dial Corporation on Form S-8 of our reports dated January 29, 1999 and
June 7, 1999, appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of The Dial
Corporation for the year ended December 31,1998 and in the Annual Report on
Form 11-K of The Dial Corporation 401(k) Plan for Hourly Employees for the
eleven-month period ended November 30, 1998, respectively.




Phoenix, Arizona
June 14, 1999
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
UNDER SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbarnes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Steven
S. Myers, as Chief Executive Officer of SM&A (the Company) hereby certify
that, based on my knowledge: 1) the Companys quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
September 30, 2004 (the Report), fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and 2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company. Dated: October 22, 2004
    
    /s/ STEVEN S. MYERSSteven S. MyersChairman and Chief Executive Officer
 27
(Reap. Dec. 10899)

#### Acme Steel Company *v.*United States

Entry No. 17682, etc.

(Decided February 16, 1965)

*Barnes, Richardson & CoXbwrntor*the plaintiff.

*John W. Douglas,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Oliver, Chief Judge:

The following appeals for reappraisement enumerated in schedule “A,” hereto attached and made a part hereof, are before me for decision on a written stipulation, reading as follows:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the attorneys for the parties subject to the approval of the court:

> That the merchandise covered by the appeals for reappraisement listed in Schedule “A” attached hereto and made a part hereof, consists of steel strap similar in all material respects to the merchandise which was the subject of *Acme Steel Company*v. *United States,*C.A.D. 841.

> That the issues are similar in all material respects to the issues involved in said O.A.D. 841, and that the record therein may be incorporated herein.

> That at the time of exportation the price at which such or similar merchandise was freely sold in the principal markets of Canada, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade for exportation to the United States, including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other expenses incidental to placing the merchandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United States, was the invoiced unit price.

> That the instant appeals are submitted for decision on the incorporated record and this stipulation.

Following the cited decision, I find the proper basis for appraisement of the merchandise in question, represented by the invoice items marked “A” and initialed “GTWA,” is export value, as defined in section 402(b), Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and hold that such statutory value is the invoice unit price.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
Amendment to Letter of Credit




 Exhibit 10.1 
  
 April 23, 2003 
  
 William O. Hunt 
 17604 Woods Edge Drive 
 Dallas, Texas 75287 
  

	 	Re:	 	Letter of Credit Security Commitment Agreement dated September 18, 2001 by and between Internet America, Inc. and William O. Hunt (the “Hunt Agreement”)


  
 Dear Bill: 
  
 As you are aware, Internet America has been in discussions with Cindy
Carradine regarding settlement of the judgment rendered against Internet America and the other defendants in the lawsuit styled Cindy Carradine v. Internet America, Inc., Michael T. Maples and William O. Hunt. If the defendants enter into a
settlement agreement with Carradine (a “Settlement Agreement”), certain amendments to the Hunt Agreement may be necessary or desirable. This letter is intended to amend the Hunt Agreement in accordance with Section 13.6 of the Hunt
Agreement. 
  
 If the defendants enter into a Settlement Agreement
with Carradine, you agree to waive Internet America’s obligation to give you thirty days prior written notice of a reduction in commitment, as contained in Section 2.3 of the Hunt Agreement. You agree to allow Internet America to give you
written notice of a reduction in commitment at the time of a Settlement Agreement. Should this occur, the Holder’s Election Notice, as defined in Section 2.3 of the Hunt Agreement, must be given within 120 days after the date of the Settlement
Agreement, and Internet America will continue to pay you the commitment fee referenced in Section 2.2 of the Hunt Agreement until thirty days after the date of the Settlement Agreement or until the Commitment Termination Date, as defined in Article
1 of the Hunt Agreement, whichever is later. Notwithstanding the foregoing, should the Commitment Termination Date occur after thirty days after the date of a Settlement Agreement, then the Holder’s Election Notice must be given within 90 days
after the Commitment Termination Date. 
  
 If you agree to this
amendment to the Hunt Agreement, please sign below and return the executed original to me at your earliest convenience 
  
 INTERNET AMERICA, INC. 
  
 /s/ Jack T.
Smith                         
 Jack T. Smith, Chairman and CEO 
  
 AGREED: 
  
 /s/ William O. Hunt 

William O. Hunt 
 Date: April 23, 2003
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

MARY ISABEL RUIZ,

 

 Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

State.

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-19-00181-CR

Appeal from the

County Criminal Court No. 4

of El Paso County, Texas 

 (TC# 20160C07963)

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the State’s third motion for extension of time within which to file the

brief until June 2, 2020. NO FURTHER MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE THE 

STATE’S BRIEF WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that the Hon. Jaime E. Esparza, State’s attorney, prepare the State’s 

brief and forward the same to this Court on or before June 2, 2020.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 4

th day of May, 2020.

PER CURIAM

Before Alley, C.J., Rodriguez and Palafox, JJ.
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION FURNISHED 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 SWS Group, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 24, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Donald W. Hultgren, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       |  |  |  |                          
|---------------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------
|                       |  | 
|Date: November 1, 2005 |  |  |  | /S/    DONALD W.
HULTGREN
|                       |  |  |  | Donald W. Hultgren       
|                       |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 15.1











Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm




We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement(Form S-8 No. 333-167613) pertaining to the Company’s 2005 Compensation Plan andthe Registration Statement (Form F-3 No. 333-166765)  of DHT Holdings, Inc. and in the related Prospectus of our reports dated January 31, 2011, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of DHT Holdings, Inc. and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of DHT Holdings, Inc., included in this Annual Report (Form 20-F) for the year ended December 31, 2010.




/s/Ernst & Young AS





Ernst & Young AS


Oslo, Norway


March 31, 2011