alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2007196EN.01002001.xml

| 24.8.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 196/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.8.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 196/20

---

MEDIA 2007

MEDIA 2007

Call for proposals — EACEA/18/07

Measures to support promotion and market access: Audiovisual festivals

(2007/C 196/09)

1.   Objectives and Description

This notice of a call for proposals is based on Decision No 1718/2006/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 November 2006 concerning the implementation of a programme of support for the European audiovisual sector (MEDIA 2007) (1).

1

The objectives of the above mentioned Council Decision include:

| — | facilitating and encouraging the promotion and movement of European audiovisual and cinema works at trade shows, fairs and audiovisual festivals in Europe and around the globe, insofar as such events may play an important role in the promotion of European works and the networking of professionals. |
| --- | --- |

—

facilitating and encouraging the promotion and movement of European audiovisual and cinema works at trade shows, fairs and audiovisual festivals in Europe and around the globe, insofar as such events may play an important role in the promotion of European works and the networking of professionals.

2.   Eligible applicants

The present notification is addressed to European organisations; those registered in and controlled by nationals from the Member States of the European Union and countries of the European Economic Agreement participating in the MEDIA 2007 Programme (Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway) and Switzerland.

Such organisations must implement audiovisual festivals which contribute to the afore mentioned objectives and which screen a minimum of 70 % European films from at least 10 States participating in the MEDIA Programme, in their total programme.

3.   Budget and project duration

The maximum amount available under this call for proposals is EUR 2 500 000 (providing the EU budget for 2008 is approved).

The financial support from the Commission cannot exceed 50 % of the total eligible costs.

The present Call for Proposals is only valid for projects which start between 1st May 2008 and 30th April 2009.

4.   Deadline

Closing dates for submitting proposals:

| — | 15th October 2007 — for projects starting between 1st May 2008 and 31st October 2008, |
| --- | --- |

—

15th October 2007 — for projects starting between 1st May 2008 and 31st October 2008,

15th October 2007

| — | 30th April 2008 — for projects starting between 1st November 2008 and 30th April 2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

30th April 2008 — for projects starting between 1st November 2008 and 30th April 2009.

30th April 2008

5.   Further information

The complete text of the Call for Proposals, as well as the application forms are available on:

http://ec.europa.eu/media

Applications must respect all conditions set out in this complete text and must be submitted using the application forms provided.

---

(1)  OJ L 327, 24.11.2006, p. 12.

1

---
#### B. Altman & Co. *v.*United States

No. 7498.

Entry No. 769810.

Invoices dated London, England, May 10, 1946, etc.

Entered at New York, N. Y., June 19, 1946.

(Decided January 7, 1948)

*Marlow*cfc *Hines*for the plaintiff.

*Paul P. Rao,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Lawrence, Judge:

It has been agreed between the parties hereto that the issues herein relating to the above-mentioned merchandise are the same in all material respects as those decided in *United States*v. *Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp.,*
      *34633 C. C. P. A. (Customs) 183, C. A. D. 334, and that the record therein may be incorporated herein.

Upon the agreed facts I find the export value, as defined in section 402 (d), Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for determining the values of said merchandise, and that such values are the appraised values less additions made by importer on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
#### UNITED STATES, Appellee v MELVIN L. MYERS, Private First Class, U. S. Army, Appellant

17 USCMA 437, 38 CMR 235

No. 20,792

March 8, 1968

*Colonel Daniel T. Ghent, Major David J. Passamaneck,*and *Captain John F. Morrow*were on the pleadings for Appellant, Accused.

*Lieutenant Colonel David Rarick, Major John F. Webb, Jr.,*and *Captain William R. Steinmetz*were on the pleadings for Appellee, United States.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM:

Despite evidence of the accused’s prior good record and other matters in mitigation and extenuation, the law officer’s instructions regarding punishment were limited to a statement of the maximum imposable sentence and the mechanics of voting. This was error and, under the circumstances presented, prejudicial to the accused’s substantial rights. United States v Wheeler, 17 USCMA 274, 38 CMR 72.

The decision of the board of review is reversed and the record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Army. The board may reassess the sentence or order a rehearing thereon.
No. 53678.

protests 135762-K, etc. (New York).

#### Charles W. Baum Co. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
No. 58113.

protest 150068-K (Duluth).

#### F. E. Macartney *v.*United States,

Opinion 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.
No. 48641.

#### Protest 89685-K of Rothschild Bros. Hat Co. (St. Louis).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

All of the original bills in this case covering embroidered cotton gloves, wool gloves, and printed matter are embraced in a single consular invoice (No. 6449) and it was held that the consular invoice in this case is the “invoice” which Congress had in mind when it made provision for relief (section 505) when an importer abandoned to the Government 10 percent or more of the total value or quantity of merchandise in any invoice. From the record it was *237found that the abandonment of merchandise to the value of $412 would not be .an abandonment of 10 percent of goods on an invoice having a total value of $7,795. It was therefore held that the collector properly rejected the plaintiff’s ■offer of abandonment of the two cases involved. • The protest was overruled.
EXHIBIT 32.1
 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350
  1.
    
    The quarterly report on Form 10-Q of NeuStar, Inc. for the quarter ended
September 30, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    Information contained in such quarterly report on Form 10-Q fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of NeuStar,
Inc.
 May 12, 2008
    By:
    /s/ Jeffrey E. GanekJeffrey E. GanekChief Executive Officer May 12, 2008
    By:
    /s/ Jeffrey A. BabkaJeffrey A. BabkaChief Financial Officer
118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8932 

AN ACT 

To establish an earlier application processing cycle for the 

FAFSA. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 8932 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘FAFSA Deadline Act’’. 

3 SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF EARLIER APPLICATION PROC4 ESSING CYCLE. 

5 Section 483(d)(4) of the Higher Education Act of 

6 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1090(d)(4)) is amended by striking ‘‘not 

7 later than January 1 of the applicant’s planned year of 

8 enrollment, to the maximum extent practicable, on or 

9 around October 1 prior to the applicant’s planned year 

10 of enrollment’’ and inserting ‘‘not later than October 1 

11 prior to the applicant’s planned year of enrollment’’. 

12 SEC. 3. CERTIFICATION AND TESTIMONY REQUIREMENTS. 

13 Section 483(d)(4) of the Higher Education Act of 

14 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1090(d)(4)) is further amended— 

15 (1) by striking ‘‘The Secretary’’ and inserting 

16 the following: 

17 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary’’; and 

18 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

19 ‘‘(B) CERTIFICATION AND TESTIMONY RE20 QUIREMENTS.—The Secretary shall, with re21 spect to each application processing cycle, prior 

22 to the initiation of such processing cycle— 

23 ‘‘(i) on a date that is not later than 

24 September 1— 

25 ‘‘(I) certify to the authorizing 

26 committees that the Department will 
3 

•HR 8932 EH

1 meet the October 1 deadline specified 

2 in subparagraph (A) for such proc3 essing cycle; or 

4 ‘‘(II) certify to such committees 

5 that the Department will not meet 

6 such deadline; and 

7 ‘‘(ii) in the case of a certification de8 scribed in clause (i)(II), on a date that is 

9 not later than September 30, testify before 

10 the authorizing committees on— 

11 ‘‘(I) the anticipated failure to 

12 meet such deadline; and 

13 ‘‘(II) the financial impact such 

14 failure will have on students and fami15 lies.’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives November 15, 

2024. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 
118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8932 

AN ACT 

To establish an earlier application processing cycle 

for the FAFSA.
Exhibit 31.2



Certification of Chief Executive Officer

of Periodic Report Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)
and Rule 15d-14(a)



I, Ellida McMillan, certify that:



1) I have reviewed this Amendment
No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of PhenixFIN Corporation;



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.



Date: January 28, 2022



|/s/ Ellida McMillan                                  | 
|---------------------------------------------------- | 
|Ellida McMillan                                      | 
|Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer
|(Principal Financial Officer)                        |
# C_2007247EN.01000201.xml

| 20.10.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 247/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.10.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 247/2

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof (Germany) lodged on 14 June 2007 — Ernst & Young Deutsche Allgemeine Treuhand AG v Finanzamt Stuttgart-Körperschaften

(Case C-285/07)

(2007/C 247/02)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Ernst & Young Deutsche Allgemeine Treuhand AG

Applicant:

Defendant: Finanzamt Stuttgart-Körperschaften

Defendant:

Questions referred

| 1. | Does Article 8(1) and (2) of Council Directive 90/434/EEC of 23 July 1990 (1) preclude the taxation rules of a Member State under which, on the transfer of shares in one European Union company limited by shares to another, the transferring party may maintain the book value of the shares transferred only if the receiving company has itself valued the shares transferred at their book value (‘double book value carryover’)? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does Article 8(1) and (2) of Council Directive 90/434/EEC of 23 July 1990 (1) preclude the taxation rules of a Member State under which, on the transfer of shares in one European Union company limited by shares to another, the transferring party may maintain the book value of the shares transferred only if the receiving company has itself valued the shares transferred at their book value (‘double book value carryover’)?

1

| 2. | If the answer is in the negative: are the above rules contrary to Articles 43 EC and 56 EC, even though the ‘double book value carryover’ is required also on a transfer of shares in a company limited by shares to one that is subject to unlimited taxation? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the answer is in the negative: are the above rules contrary to Articles 43 EC and 56 EC, even though the ‘double book value carryover’ is required also on a transfer of shares in a company limited by shares to one that is subject to unlimited taxation?

---

(1)  OJ 1990 L 225, p. 1.

1

---
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 9061 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 9061

To amend section 436 of the Social Security Act to increase funding for 
the retention, recruitment, and training of caseworkers, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 18, 2024

   Ms. Chu (for herself, Mr. Davis of Illinois, Ms. DelBene, and Mr. 
    Evans) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend section 436 of the Social Security Act to increase funding for 
the retention, recruitment, and training of caseworkers, and for other 
                               purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Promoting a Strong Child Welfare 
Workforce Act of 2024''.

SEC. 2. INCREASED FUNDING FOR RETENTION, RECRUITMENT, AND TRAINING OF 
              CASEWORKERS.

    (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 436(a) of the Social 
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 629f(a)) is amended by striking 
``$345,000,000'' and inserting ``$385,000,000''.
    (b) Reservation for Retention, Recruitment, and Training of 
Caseworkers.--Section 436(b) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 629f(b)) is 
amended--
            (1) in the heading, by striking ``Support for Monthly 
        Caseworker Visits'' and inserting ``Support for Caseworker 
        Recruitment and Retention'';
            (2) in paragraph (4)(A), by striking ``$20,000,000'' and 
        inserting ``$60,000,000''; and
            (3) in paragraph (4)(B)(i), by inserting ``, including with 
        respect to ensuring the safety and well-being of caseworkers'' 
        before the period.

SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendments made by this Act shall take effect on the 1st day of 
the 1st fiscal year that begins after the date of the enactment of this 
Act.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

#### Certification Pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asAdopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

 

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of NorcrossSafety Products L.L.C. (the “Registrant”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended April 2,2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), I, David F. Myers, Jr.,Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, certify, 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 therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934; and

 

(2)                                  The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Registrant.

 
| Dated: May 11, 2005 | By:    | /s/ DAVID F. MYERS, JR.                            |   |
|---------------------|--------|----------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                |   | David F. Myers, Jr.                                |
|                |   | Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, |
|                |   | Secretary and Manager                              |
|                |   | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)       |

 

**A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 has been provided to the Registrant and will be retained bythe Registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request.**

 

----
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL 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
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended August 31, 2005 of the Trust Created February 25, 1986 (the Trust) as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report), and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned
officers does hereby certify that to the best of his knowledge:

| | (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 Trust.

| | Date:   October 13, 2005    | /s/ John A. Irwin
| | --------------------------- | -----------------
| | John A. Irwin              
| | Principal Executive Officer

| | Date:   October 13, 2005    | /s/ Lawrence J. Bolton
| | --------------------------- | ----------------------
| | Lawrence J. Bolton         
| | Principal Financial Officer

A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Trust and will be retained by
the Trust and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

EASTERN DIVISION

MICHAEL A. STALNAKER, 

Petitioner, CASE NO. 2:10-CV-1065

JUDGE GEORGE C. SMITH

v. MAGISTRATE JUDGE E.A. PRESTON DEAVERS

ROD JOHNSON, WARDEN, 

Respondent.

OPINION AND ORDER

On June 19, 2012, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation recommending

that the instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 be dismissed. 

Although the parties were advised of the right to object to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and

Recommendation, and of the consequences of failing to do so, no objections have been filed. 

The Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED and AFFIRMED. This action is hereby

DISMISSED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 \s\ George C. Smith 

GEORGE C. SMITH

United States District Judge 

Case: 2:10-cv-01065-GCS-EPD Doc #: 11 Filed: 07/18/12 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: <pageID>
No. 46263.

#### Protests 978066-G, etc., of Chinese Gems Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the articles are similar to those passed upon in *Cathay Crafts Corp.*v. *United States*(6 Cust. Ct. 87, C. D. 434) the claim at 40 percent under paragraph 214 was sustained.
March 6, 1957

Reap. Dec. 8759.

#### S. *S. Kresge Co. et al.*v. *United States.*

Entered at New York, N. Y. [Not published.] Motion by plaintiffs.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

October 31, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 128977 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 128977 

 COA: 253295 

Calhoun CC: 2003-000940-FC 

TRINITY MILFORD MATTHISEN, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 15, 2005 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

KELLY, J., would hold this case in abeyance for People v Drohan, lv gtd 472 Mich 

881 (2005). 

l1024 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

October 31, 2005 

Clerk
### UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

No

. 21

- 3092

LUIS DIAZ ALMANZAR

P etitioner

v.

ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Agency No. A058

- 293

- 120)

Present: KRAUSE, BIBAS, and AMBRO

, Circuit Judges

1. Motion by Petitioner to publish opinion dated 07/28/2023

_________________________________ORDER________________________________

The foregoing motion is GRANTED. Accordingly, th e court’s non

- precedential

opinion in this matter dated July 27, 2023 will be redesignated as precedential and

published in the Federal Reporter

. The filing date of the judgment is not changed.

By the Court,

s/ Cheryl Ann Krause

Circuit Judge

Dated: March 29, 2024

T mm/ cc: All Counsel of Record
Exhibit 32.1

                            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 BioVeris Corporation  (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter  ended  December 31, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  the
undersigned,  in the capacity and on the date indicated below,  hereby certifies
pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350,  as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

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 operation of the Company.




February 13, 2004                                    /s/Samuel J. Wohlstadter
                                                     ------------------------
                                                     Samuel J. Wohlstadter
                                                     Chief Executive Officer

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such
Act, be deemed filed by BioVeris Corporation. for purposes of Section 18 of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to BioVeris Corporation and will be retained by BioVeris Corporation
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.



<PAGE>
For reasons of economy, this document is printed in a limited number. Delegates are 

kindly asked to bring their copies to meetings and not to request additional copies.

I:\MEPC\59\2-8-Corr-1.doc 

INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION

IMO 

E

MARINE ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION 

COMMITTEE 

59th session 

Agenda item 2 

MEPC 59/2/8/Corr.1

 29 June 2009

 ENGLISH/SPANISH ONLY

HARMFUL AQUATIC ORGANISMS IN BALLAST WATER

Application for Basic Approval of the AquaTriCombTM Ballast Water Treatment System

Corrigendum 

In page 9 of the annex to document MEPC 59/2/8, the first paragraph of 

section “2.2.1.2 The cavitation bubble” is replaced by the following: 

“Sound is a form of energy. Sound is generated by the vibration of molecules in media 

(air, water, solid matter) and is travelling as a wave. The wavelength is defined as: 

 λ = c/f (2) 

where c is the speed of sound and f is the frequency. Acoustic sound frequency range 

is 20 Hz to 20 kHz. Above a frequency of 20 kHz up to 500 MHz (for liquids and solids) 

sound becomes inaudible and is referred to as ultrasound (US).” 

___________