alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2008206EN.01000701.xml

| 13.8.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 206/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 206/7

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

12 August 2008

(2008/C 206/05)

1 euro=

1 euro

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,4907 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 163,97 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4597 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,7844 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,3889 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,6215 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 121,93 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,012 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 23,954 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 236,47 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7042 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,2753 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 3,539 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 30,343 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,7609 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,7048 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5936 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 11,6396 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 2,1389 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,1029 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 541,01 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 11,571 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 10,231 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,2065 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 13 669,72 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,9588 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 66,58 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 36,154 |
| THB | Thai baht | 50,222 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,4134 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 15,1288 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,4907

JPY

Japanese yen

163,97

DKK

Danish krone

7,4597

GBP

Pound sterling

0,7844

SEK

Swedish krona

9,3889

CHF

Swiss franc

1,6215

ISK

Iceland króna

121,93

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,012

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

23,954

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

236,47

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7042

PLN

Polish zloty

3,2753

RON

Romanian leu

3,539

SKK

Slovak koruna

30,343

TRY

Turkish lira

1,7609

AUD

Australian dollar

1,7048

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5936

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

11,6396

NZD

New Zealand dollar

2,1389

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,1029

KRW

South Korean won

1 541,01

ZAR

South African rand

11,571

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

10,231

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,2065

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

13 669,72

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,9588

PHP

Philippine peso

66,58

RUB

Russian rouble

36,154

THB

Thai baht

50,222

BRL

Brazilian real

2,4134

MXN

Mexican peso

15,1288

---

(1)

1

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Source:

---
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,
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 March 5, 2012

h0227 

# Order

March 5, 2012

143940

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 143940 COA: 304868 GEORVAL PETRIS PENNI NGTON, Jackson CC: 09-005863 FC Defendant-Appellant.

___________________ _________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 3, 2011 order of the Court of Appeals is consider ed, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.
Case: 2:12-cv-00171-EAS-MRA Doc #: 26 Filed: 10/15/13 Page: 1 of 1  PAGEID #: <pageID>

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2015-05-12T14:31:42-0400
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
U.S. Department 1200 New Jersey Ave., S.E.

of Transportation Washington, DC 20590

Federal Railroad

Administration

The FRA Deputy Administrator’s Declaration of 

Emergency Event: Hurricane Ida

Pursuant to Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) § 211.45, Federal Railroad 

Administration Deputy Administrator Amit Bose has determined that the imminent threat of

Hurricane Ida with damaging winds, flooding rains, power outages, and coastal flooding

conditions predicted to occur along the Gulf Coast of the United States constitutes an 

“emergency event” as related to railroad operations. 

In making this determination, the Deputy Administrator notes that the National Weather

Service has predicted strong winds, heavy rains, and life-threatening flooding will impact

Louisiana and states along the Gulf Coast of the United States. Louisiana has issued a State

of Emergency in anticipation of the impending storm. Therefore, the Deputy Administrator

has activated the Emergency Relief Docket (FRA-2021-0001) as related to Hurricane Ida, as 

of August 28, 2021, and the emergency relief provisions of 49 CFR § 211.45 are in effect.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 214 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 214

To authorize representation by the Senate Legal Counsel in the case of 
       Jones v. Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community, et al.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 26, 2005

     Mr. Frist (for himself and Mr. Reid) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
To authorize representation by the Senate Legal Counsel in the case of 
       Jones v. Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community, et al.

Whereas, in the case of Jones v. Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community, et 
        al., Civ. No. 05-1944, pending in the United States District Court for 
        the District of Arizona, the plaintiff has named as defendants Senators 
        John McCain and Jon Kyl; and
Whereas, pursuant to sections 703(a) and 704(a)(1) of the Ethics in Government 
        Act of 1978, 2 U.S.C.  288b(a) and 288c(a)(1), the Senate may direct 
        its counsel to defend Members of the Senate in civil actions relating to 
        their official responsibilities: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate Legal Counsel is authorized to represent 
Senators John McCain, Jon Kyl, and other unnamed Members of the Senate 
in the case of Jones v. Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community, et 
al.
                                 <all>
```
07/25/2011 10:17 FAX 2024935142 FAA 

07/22/2011 FRI 11:03 M 817 222 5092 regional counsel 

- OMS !]001/002 

001)1/00; 

Stephanie McClain 

To: Hearing Docket Clerk. AGC-430 

Company: Federal Aviation Administration 

Telephone: 

P^= 202.493.5142 

From: James Archier 

''^*'®- Agency Attorney 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

Southwest Region 

Office of Regional Coun;>el 

Fort Worth. Texas 76137 

Package/Courier Address 

2601 Meacham Boulevard 

Fort Worth, Texas 76137 

T (817.222.5078) 

F (817.222.5945/5092) 

Date: July 22. 2011 

Pages w/cover 2 

h hMS c^D/l- OL^J^ 

Facsimile 

Please Note: "This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to 

which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and 

exempt from disclosure under applicable law." 

e U.S. DopKirtrnonl MTrtinsportatlon 
07/25/2011 1017 FAX 

^}i/Wl\)[[ KKI 11:U; 

202493514 2 FAA 

FAX 817 222 5092 regional counsel 

r DMS 3002/00 2 

i002/002 

o 

U.S. Deporlmenl 

or Transconatlon 

Fodfiral Jlvi(3hon 

Adminlshvrtion 

D-:R^RTMENT OF 

-i^6(^SPpRWI0N 

ji-Kti OPERATIONS 

Southwest Resign 

ArUantw. LoufcJfcirra, Ij'} O C A ((• C 

New Mexict.. CrttlaticmV- *^ ^ M tl - D 

Tcxaa 

Office cf Roglonal Counsel, ASW-7 

2601 MfeacTiam Bivd 

FonWon^l.TT7€l^7 

(817)222-5099 

fei7> 222-5B45^5oes FA:< 

July 22r 2011 

via Ftuc 

Ms. Stephanie McClciin 

Hearing Docket Clark, .^GC-430 

Hearing Docket 

Federal Avi.'ation Administration 

600 Independence Av.5nu^, SW 

Wilbi.ir WrighL Building, Si-ir.e 2W1000 

Washinqron, O.C. 20591 

Re: In the Matter of Katzional Ba:rn Conrpany, FRA Case No 

2011SW700016 

WITHDRAVTM. OF COMglAItTT 

The Federal ftviaizion Administration has oettlsd the abovecaptioned mati;er. I:: hereby withdraws its complainb in thi:; 

Sincerely, 

DAVI D L . DONNLLJ L 

P.'fjgional Counsel 

Southwest Rfeaion 

g^ey 

Jam-^5 Arcrtie.r 

(S17J 222'501-1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

WORTHINGTON CYLINDER CORP.,

Plaintiff, Case No. 2:12-cv-554

JUDGE GREGORY L. FROST

v. Magistrate Judge Mark R. Abel

SCHRADER-BRIDGEPORT 

INTERNATIONAL, INC.,

Defendant.

ORDER

This matter is before the Court for consideration of the January 3, 2014 motion for a stay.

(ECF No. 80.) In this motion, Plaintiff asks this Court to stay briefing on Defendant’s pending

motion to exclude (ECF No. 70) until disposition of Defendant’s motion for summary judgment

(ECF Nos. 54, 55). Plaintiff also requests that, if the Court denies the stay, the Court grant

Plaintiff 21 days from the date of that denial in which to file a memorandum in opposition to the

motion to exclude. 

None of Plaintiff’s five arguments for a stay warrant the relief requested. First, there is

no prohibition against filing a motion early, only a prohibition against filing such a motion late. 

Second, this Court is fully capable of separating the motion to exclude from the motion for

summary judgment so that the motion to exclude does not serve as an impermissible supplement

to the summary judgment arguments. If the motion to exclude is a mere impermissible attempt

at supplementing the summary judgment briefing, the motion to exclude will be treated

accordingly. Third, the merits of the motion to exclude do not warrant a stay. Fourth, the

prompt disposition of all pending motions and the ability of the Court to recognize moot issues

outweigh any minimal expenditure of resources that briefing on and the disposition of the motion

Case: 2:12-cv-00554-GLF-MRA Doc #: 81 Filed: 01/07/14 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
to exclude will entail. Any burden on Plaintiff should be minimal given Plaintiff’s contention

that the motion to exclude arguments essentially mirror the motion for summary judgment

arguments. Fifth, the fact that Defendant would likely suffer no prejudice as a result of a stay is

not sufficient grounds for a stay. 

The Court DENIES the motion for a stay and its contingent request for an extension of

briefing. (ECF No. 80.) Because Plaintiff has not presented good cause for an extension of the

motion to exclude briefing, the original deadline under S.D. Ohio Civ. R. 7.2(a)(2) for filing the

memorandum in opposition remains applicable.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 /s/ Gregory L. Frost 

GREGORY L. FROST

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case: 2:12-cv-00554-GLF-MRA Doc #: 81 Filed: 01/07/14 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
(logo) plante moran

 Plante & Moran, PLLC

 

10 South Riverside Plaza

 

9th floor

 

Chicago, IL 60606

 

Tel: 312.207.1040

 

Fax: 312.207.1066

 

plantemoran.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

Report of IndependentRegistered Public Accounting Firm

 

 

 

 

 

To the Board of Directors

 

National Tax Search, LLC

 

 

 

We have examined National Tax Search,LLC’s (the “Company”) compliance with the Securities and Exchange Commission’sRegulation AB Servicing Criteria, set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Security andExchange Commission’s Regulation AB for the National Tax Search TaxQ system(the “Platform”) as of and for the year ended December 31, 2016. The Companyhas determined that only certain servicing criteria, 1122(d)(l)(ii),1122(d)1(iv), 1122(d)2(ii), 1122(d)2(v), 1122(d)2(vi), 1122(d)(4)(xi), and1122(d)(4)(xii), are applicable to the activities performed by it with respectto the Platform covered by this report. The Company has determined that theremaining servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the SEC Regulation ABare not applicable to the activities performed by it with respect to thePlatform covered by this report.

 

 

 

Management is responsible forthe Company's compliance with those servicing criteria. Our responsibility isto express an opinion on management's assertion about the Company's compliancewith the servicing criteria based on our examination. Our examination wasconducted in accordance with standards of the Public Company AccountingOversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a testbasis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the applicable servicingcriteria and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in thecircumstances. Our examination included a selection of a sample of transactionsand compliance activities related to the Platform during the examination periodand determining whether the Company processed those transactions and performedthose activities in compliance with the servicing criteria. Our testing ofselected transactions and compliance activities was limited to calculations,reports, and activities performed by the Company during the period covered bythis report. Our procedures did not include determining whether errors may haveoccurred prior to our tests that may have affected the balances or amountscalculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this reportfor the selected transactions or any other transactions. We believe that ourexamination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination doesnot provide a legal determination on the Company’s compliance with theservicing criteria.

 

 

 

In our opinion, management’sassertion that the Company complied with the aforementioned servicing criteriaas of and for the year ended December 31, 2016 for the Platform is fairlystated in all material respects.

 

 

 

 

 

/s/ Plante & Moran, PLLC

 

 

 

Chicago, IL

 

January 27, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

(logo) Praxity 

 

MEMBER

 

GLOBAL ALLIANCE OF 

 

INDEPENDENT FIRMS
# C_2008137EN.01000602.xml

| 4.6.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 137/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.6.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 137/6

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5008 — Vivendi/Activision)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/C 137/05)

On 16 April 2008, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M5008. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu). |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M5008. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

---
No. 50223.

#### Protests 58662-K, etc., of Rolls Razor, Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel the court found that the facts herein agreed upon were'such as to bring the case within the holding in *John Barr*v. *United States*(11 Cust. Ct. 88, C. D. 801), which record was incorporated herein. (See *John Barr*v. *United States,*324 U. S. 83, decided February 5, 1945.) In accordance therewith it was held that the currency of the invoices should be converted at the buying rate in the New York market at noon on the day of exportation (the “free” rate of exchange for pounds sterling), as certified by the Federal Reserve bank and set forth by the collector on each of the entries. The protests were sustained to this extent.
# Official Journal C 40/2012

| | ISSN 1977-091X
  doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2012.040.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 40 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5511 February 2012 |

ISSN 1977-091X

doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2012.040.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 40

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5511 February 2012

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | V   Announcements |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Parliament |
| 2012/C 040/01 | Decision | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Parliament

2012/C 040/01

Decision

1

---

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

EN
In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-14-00038-CV

GARY WAYNE MOORE, Appellant

V.

EMALENA FAY MESTEL, Appellee

On Appeal from the 336th District Court

Fannin County, Texas

Trial Court No. PO-13-41485

Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Moseley
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Gary Wayne Moore, appellant, filed a notice of appeal in this matter on May 5, 2014. 

Both the clerk’s and reporter’s records were due to be filed with this Court on or before April 17, 

2014. Neither of the records has been filed, and there is no indication that Moore has paid or 

made arrangements for payment of the fees associated with their preparation. Further, Moore 

has not tendered the mandatory $195.00 filing fee associated with the appeal.

“A party who is not excused by statute or these rules from paying costs must pay—at the 

time an item is presented for filing—whatever fees are required by statute or Supreme Court 

order. The appellate court may enforce this rule by any order that is just.” TEX. R. APP. P. 5; see

TEX. R. APP. P. 20.1(c). Similarly, unless otherwise excused, an appellant must either pay or 

make arrangements for the payment of the fees related to preparation of the appellate record to 

ensure that the record is timely filed. TEX. R. APP. P. 35.3(a) (2), (b)(3); see TEX. R. APP. P.

20.1(c), 37.3(b).

By letter dated May 19, 2014, and pursuant to Rules 37.3(b) and 42.3(b) of the Texas 

Rules of Appellate Procedure, our clerk’s office provided Moore with notice of and an 

opportunity to cure these defects. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b), 42.3(b). The clerk’s letter further 

warned Moore that if he did not submit an adequate response to our defect letter within ten days 

of the date of the letter, his appeal would be subject to dismissal for want of prosecution. Id. We 

have received no communication from Moore responsive to the May 19 correspondence from 

our clerk’s office, and we have received neither the required filing fee nor the appellate record.
3

Pursuant to Rules 37.3(b) and 42.3(b) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, we 

dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution.

Bailey C. Moseley

Justice

Date Submitted: June 12, 2014

Date Decided: June 13, 2014
No. 39006.

#### Protest 903324-G of W. R. Zanes & Co. (Galveston).

Opinion by

Evans, J.

On the record presented the protest was overruled.
U.S. DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

EASTERN DIVISION (COLUMBUS) 

DARLENE BLANKENSHIP and ) 

JOHN GLINKA, ) 

 ) 

 Plaintiffs, ) Case No. 2:12-cv-163 

 ) 

v. ) 

 ) 

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., ) MAG. JUDGE MARK R. ABEL 

individually and as successor to ) 

BAC HOME LOAN SERVICING, LP and ) AGREED DISMISSAL ORDER

LERNER, SAMPSON & ROTHFUSS, ) 

 ) 

 Defendants. ) 

 

Plaintiffs, Darlene Blankenship and John Glinka, Defendants, Bank of America, N.A., 

individually and as successor to BAC Home Loan Servicing, LP, and Lerner, Sampson & 

Rothfuss, announce to the Court that all claims in this matter have been settled and compromised 

by separate agreement, and that the above-styled civil action may now be dismissed with 

prejudice. 

 For good cause shown, and there being no objection thereto, it is hereby ORDERED that 

this case is DISMISSED, WITH PREJUDICE. 

 ENTERED this 21stday of May 2012. 

 

 s/ Mark R. Abel 

United States Magistrate Judge 

Approved by: 

 /s/ 

Jason E. Causey #0081933 

Counsel for Plaintiffs 

Case: 2:12-cv-00163-MRA Doc #: 21 Filed: 05/22/12 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
 /s/ 

Monica Lacks #0078649 

Counsel for Defendant Bank of America, N.A., 

Individually and as successor to BAC 

Home Loan Servicing, LP 

 /s/ 

Rick DeBlasis #0012992 

Counsel for Defendant 

Lerner, Sampson & Rothfuss 

Case: 2:12-cv-00163-MRA Doc #: 21 Filed: 05/22/12 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
**Exhibit 32.1**

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

I, Peyton R. Patterson, Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer hereby certify that NewAlliance Bancshares, Inc.’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained therein fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of NewAlliance Bancshares, Inc.

|   |   | /s/ Peyton R. Patterson              |
|--------|--------|--------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                      |
|   |   | Peyton R. Patterson                  |
|   |   | Chairman of the Board, President and |
|   |   | Chief Executive Officer              |

Date: May 7, 2008

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.

Note: A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to NewAlliance Bancshares, Inc. and will be retained by NewAlliance Bancshares, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.