alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# IMMC.EESC-2020-02018-AC.ENG.xhtml.EESC-2020-02018-00-02-AC-TRA-EN.docx

EN

INT/905

INT/905

Control of the acquisition and possession of weapons

Control of the acquisition and possession of weapons

OPINION


  European Economic and Social Committee


  Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on control of the acquisition and possession of weapons (codification)

  [COM(2020) 48 final - 2020/0029 (COD)]

OPINION

European Economic and Social Committee

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on control of the acquisition and possession of weapons (codification)

[COM(2020) 48 final - 2020/0029 (COD)]

Referral

| Referral | European Parliament, 09/03/2020


  Council, 27/02/2020 |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union |
| | |
| Section responsible | Single Market, Production and Consumption |
| Adopted at plenary | 10/06/2020 |
| Plenary session No | 552 |
| Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions) | 210/0/4 |

Referral

European Parliament, 09/03/2020

European Parliament, 09/03/2020

Council, 27/02/2020

Council, 27/02/2020

Legal basis

Legal basis

Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Section responsible

Section responsible

Single Market, Production and Consumption

Single Market, Production and Consumption

Adopted at plenary

Adopted at plenary

10/06/2020

10/06/2020

Plenary session No

Plenary session No

552

552

Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions)

Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions)

210/0/4

210/0/4

Since the Committee endorses the content of the proposal and has already set out its views on the subject in its earlier opinions CES 1166/1987
  1
  , CESE 1157/2006
  2
  and 6789/2015
  3
  , it decided, at its 552nd plenary session of 10 and 11 June 2020 (meeting of 10 June), by 210 votes with 4 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text and to refer to the position it had taken in the above-mentioned documents.

Since the Committee endorses the content of the proposal and has already set out its views on the subject in its earlier opinions CES 1166/1987

1

, CESE 1157/2006

2

and 6789/2015

3

, it decided, at its 552nd plenary session of 10 and 11 June 2020 (meeting of 10 June), by 210 votes with 4 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text and to refer to the position it had taken in the above-mentioned documents.

Brussels, 10 June 2020

Brussels, 10 June 2020

Luca JAHIER

Luca JAHIER

The president of the European Economic and Social Committee

_____________
Karen Hays, Chief 

Georgia Environmental Protection Division 

Air Protection Branch 

4244 International Parkway Suite 120 

Atlanta Georgia 30354-3906 

Dear Ms. Hays: 

Thank you for the recommendations that your agency sent us on September 14, 2015, regarding the 

attainment status for selected areas in the State of Georgia under the 2010 sulfur dioxide (S02) national 

ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). As you know, we are subject to a March 2, 2015, court order 

directing us to promulgate S02 designations for these areas under section 107 of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) by July 2, 2016. Specifically, we are required to promulgate designations for these areas because 

they contain sources meeting the S02 emissions criteria identified in the consent decree. The 

information you provided on September 14, 2015, will greatly help us meet this duty, and ensure 

protection of public health in the State of Georgia. 

In addition to your updated recommendation, we have recently received modeling and related 

information from the Sierra Club that is relevant to a subset of the areas to be addressed by July 2, 2016. 

In your state, we have received information pertinent to the area near the Robert W. Scherer Power 

Plant in Monroe County, Georgia. The CAA provides for designations to be developed through a 

partnership of state agencies and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, however we also believe it 

is important to consider significant and relevant information that members of the public provide to us. 

Consistent with the structure of the CAA, we believe that the best first step in addressing this 

information is to understand your agency's review of the information. 

We understand you also received information directly from Sierra Club and conducted a review of the 

elements of their analysis. Furthermore, we acknowledge that your September 14, 2015, updated 

recommendations provides a summary of your review including a quantitative comparisons of data used 

in Sierra Club's analysis compared to the data used in your analysis. This comparison will help us 

evaluate the elements of the two analyses. Your review provides us valuable assistance in our 

assessment of your designation recommendations and the development of our intended designations, 

which we are aiming to complete by the end of January 20 16. 

Internet Address (URL) • hUp://www.epa.gov 

Recycled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 30% Postconsumer) 
We will publish notice of our intended designations for public comment, and, as required by the CAA, 

promulgate fmal designations no sooner than 120 days after giving you notice of them. Please contact 

me, or have your staff contact Twunjala Bradley (404-562-9325) or Rick Gillam at (404-562-9049) if 

you have any questions about the information we have received or if you need any additional 

information. 

cc: James Boylan, Program Manager, GA EPD 

Elizabeth Munsey, GA EPD 

Sincerely. 

R. Scott Davis 

Chief 

Air Planning and Implementation Branch
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                             230
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    99962
<ALLOWANCES>                                     30000
<INVENTORY>                                     220189
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                292128
<PP&E>                                         3330548
<DEPRECIATION>                                 2908964
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  985528
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          2329261
<BONDS>                                         600000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                       9605
<COMMON>                                        177252
<OTHER-SE>                                   (1530590)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    985528
<SALES>                                        2363463
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               2363463
<CGS>                                          2088020
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   541452
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 44641
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               81239
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (391889)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (391889)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 917726
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    525837
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.03


</TABLE>
BEAUFORT SEA

BATHYMETRIC MAP. - - TESHEKPUK

‘4g0000m.£,

490000n.. l

Mc Tavish
Point Carlock
Island

7870000m.N,

(rom Pt.

7870000m.N,

ADMIRALTY BAY

Holiday
Area

TESHEK

7700007.N,

77g0000m..Y,

‘agoo00m.E,

Tapoooong

Bese ep information ining bathymetry was compl bythe Noval OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT MAP se ERMA AEIRIEM NS TESHEKPUK

Ocean Service (NOS). Bathymetry was compiled from NOS hydrographic

surveys supplemented by hydrographic information from other sources (see
index). NOS hydrographic survey data complies with International Hydro- UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOS NR 5-3 (OCS)
graphic Organization (IHO) Publication 44 accuracy standards or those NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION
used at the date of the surveys. This is a reproduction of a facsimile of the NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE Svoolmentay
bathymetric manuscript and does not necessarily represent the final publi-
cation. This information is not intended for navigational purposes. 1986
Bathymetric Contour Intervals: 10 meters to maximum depth, supplemented : . .
by 2 meter intervals. Produced at Washington, D.C. INDEX TO
Datum: Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW). for 159 ADJOINING SHEETS 150°.
Universal Transverse Mercator Grid. Zone 5; 10,000 meter ticks (--) are 72 7
i i . . vngglgon
shown inside the neatline. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR We | ORE |
Protraction Diagram data shown in a subdued (screened) black was com- MINERALS MANAGEMENT SERVICE . Ag'ee2
piled by the Minerals Management Service (MMS) —
THIS MAP IS NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT for Federal leasing purposes; for : . ce
such purposes use the MMS Outer Continental Shelf Official Protraction 70° 40°
Diagrams. Heavy lines) indicate fimis of th TRANSVERSE MERCATOR PROJECTION ee" ray Be bling he cet of erode oy we
Heavy line(s) indicate limits of these protraction ‘addressing the Director (N/CG243}, National Ocean
" Scale 1:250,000 Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admini
diagrams. 5 e 7 4 6 0 stetute vies iiaton, Rockule, Warylans 20883
yo i 69°
HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY INFORMATION 5 ie) 5 10 15 20 25 30 Kilometers oe 150°
————
survey survey sunvey une’ spacing 5 ° 5 10 15 Nautical Miles
AumeeR tae SINE Naor mes ; — )
1.7920 resis 1:40,000 05-39
yea isetsa 10900 ee
sofas seis 140.00 ones

~

‘as

CG
Exhibit 10.49


 


RELEASE


 


THIS RELEASE IS given as of this 6th
day of April, 2022, by Fan Zhou (the “Lender”), of the City of Richmond Hill, Ontario to and for the benefit of Visionary
Education Services & Management Inc. (the “Corporation”), a company incorporated under the laws of Ontario, Canada.


 


WHEREAS the Corporation has entered into
an Agreement of Purchase and Sale (the “Purchase Agreement”) for the purchase of the property municipally known as
95# - 105# Moatfield Dr, North York, ON M3B 3L6 (the “Property”) dated May 19, 2021, as amended from time to time,
with the closing date being May 26, 2022 (the “Closing Date”).


 


WHEREAS the Lender has loaned to the Corporation
the amount equivalent to $8,640,000 US Dollars prior to the date of this Release (the “Debt”).


 


WHEREAS under the Purchase Agreement the
Corporation has paid the equivalent amount of $8,640,000 US Dollars to date as deposits (the “Deposits”) for the closing
of the purchase of the Property (the “Transaction”).


 


AND WHEREAS the Lender has agreed to release
the Corporation from its obligations in connection with the Debt if the Corporation fails to close the Transaction on the Closing Date.


 


NOW THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF good
and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are mutually acknowledged, the Lender agrees as follows:


 


		1.	The Lender hereby agrees, that where the Corporation is unsuccessful in closing the Transaction by the Closing Date, as extended:



 


		a.	The Lender hereby releases the Corporation from any and all obligation in connection with the Debt, including
but not limited to any obligation by the Corporation to repay any principal amount, interest or any other amounts due to the Lender, and
the Lender agrees that she releases the Corporation from any and all claims and proceedings of any kind which the Lender may make against,
or engage in with respect to, the Corporation, in connection with the Debt.



 


		2.	General:



 


		a.	This Release shall be governed by the laws of Ontario and the laws of Canada as applicable therein;



		b.	This Release shall enure to the benefit of the successors, permitted assigns and legal representatives
of the Lender and Corporation;



		c.	This Release may only be assigned with the written consent of the Lender and Corporation;



		d.	This Release may only be amended in writing with the consent of the Lender and Corporation; and



		e.	This Release may be signed in counterparts and any electronic signatures shall be deemed to binding upon
the Lender and Corporation.



 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Lender hereto executed this Release
on the date first set out above:


 


 


	/s/ Lu Wang	 	 /s/ Fan Zhou	 
	Witness:	 	Fan Zhou
No. 46336.

#### Protests 826715-G, etc., of National Wiping Cloth Co. (Philadelphia).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

It was stipulated that certain of the cotton rags in question are the same in all material respects as those the subject of *United States*v. *Schapiro*(24 C. C. P. A. 343, T. D. 48771). The protests were sustained in part, in accordance' with the percentage of the rags used chiefly for paper making as set forth in the stipulation.
EXHIBIT 99.1



                    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  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q of Consumers Financial
Corporation  (the  "Company") for the period ended March 31, 2003, as filed with
the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Donald  J.  Hommel, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, 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 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      May  20,  2003               By  /S/ Donald  J.  Hommel
     ----------------------                ---------------------------------
                                           Donald  J.  Hommel
                                           Chief Executive Officer


Consumers Financial Corporation                                          Page 21
Form 10-Q                                                         March 31, 2003


<PAGE>
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 12-10746

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 8:07-cr-00033-EAK-EAJ-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

CHARLES MAROVSKIS, 

 Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

________________________

(January 15, 2014)

Before HULL, PRYOR and MARTIN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: 

Daniel M. Hernandez, appointed counsel for Charles Marovskis in this direct 

criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of Marovskis 

and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 

Case: 12-10746 Date Filed: 01/15/2014 Page: 1 of 2 
2

L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that 

counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because 

independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, 

counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Marovskis’s convictions and 

sentences are AFFIRMED.

Case: 12-10746 Date Filed: 01/15/2014 Page: 2 of 2
No. 44198.

#### Protests 553993-G, etc., of Olivier Straw Goods Corp. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Bbown, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of bodies, hoods, forms, or shapes similar to that the subject of *Cohn*v. *United States*(4 Cust. Ct. 166, C. D. 314). The protests were sustained accordingly.
# C_2016260EN.01000902.xml

| 18.7.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 260/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.7.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 260/9

---

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 26 May 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof — Austria) — GD European Land Systems — Steyr GmbH v Zollamt Eisenstadt Flughafen Wien

(Case C-262/15) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Common Customs Tariff - Classification of goods - Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 - Combined Nomenclature - Heading 8710 and Subheading 9305 91 00 - Note 3 to Section XVII and point (c) of note 1 to Chapter 93 - Tanks and other armoured fighting vehicles - Military weapons - Classification of a turret system))

(2016/C 260/12)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Verwaltungsgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: GD European Land Systems — Steyr GmbH

Appellant:

Respondent: Zollamt Eisenstadt Flughafen Wien

Respondent:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Combined Nomenclature set out in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, in the version resulting from Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1001/2013 of 4 October 2013, must be interpreted as meaning that a turret system, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which was imported for the production of armoured fighting vehicles and was indeed used subsequently for that purpose, comes under heading 8710 of the Common Nomenclature if it is ‘principally’ intended for use on an armoured fighting vehicle, this being a matter for the referring court to determine on the basis of the objective characteristics and properties of the turret system, without the end use to which it is put in the case at hand being determinant for the purpose of its classification. If that is not the case, that turret system must be classified, as a part or accessory of a ‘military weapon’, under subheading 9305 91 00 of the Combined Nomenclature.

---

(1)  OJ C 294, 7.9.2015.

1

---
No. 49856.

#### Protests 82282-K, etc., of Columbia Co. et al. (San Francisco).

Opinion by

Cole, J.

It was.stipulated that the medicinal preparations are the same in all material respects as those passed upon in *Wing Duck Co.*v. *United States*(6 Cust. Ct. 133, C. D. 446) and *Shun Yuen Hing & Co.*v. *United States*(11 Ct. Cust. Appls. 331, T. D. 39143), which records were incorporated heroin. The merchandise was therefore held not subject to the internal revenue tax.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT RUSSELL JUNIOR DIEHL, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. No. 96-1361 BRYAN E. SAUBLE, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. William G. Connelly, Magistrate Judge. (CA-94-2673-S) Submitted: February 13, 1997 Decided: February 27, 1997 Before WIDENER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

_________________________________________________________________ Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________ COUNSEL Michael L. Sandul, LAW OFFICE OF ROBERT GRAHAM FIORE, Annapolis, Maryland, for Appellant. W. Barry Wraga, Kensington, Maryland, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________ Unpublished opinions are not binding pr ecedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).OPINION PER CURIAM: Brian Lee Sauble appeals from a jury verdict requiring him to pay $20,900 in future medical expenses to the plaintiff in a civil diversity car accident case. We affirm. Sauble claims that the amount awarded for future medical expenseswas in excess of that established by the plaintiff's expert and therefore not supported by reasonable certainty. He does not attack the evidence by which future injury justifying future medical expenses wasdemonstrated, and we therefore express no opinion as to the sufficiency of that evidence. Under Maryland law if a jury believes the plaintiff's expert as to a condition which will result in future damages, the amount to be awarded is a question for the jury. DiLeo v. Nugent , 592 A.2d 1126, 1135 (Md. Ct. Spec. App.), cert. granted , 599 A.2d 90 (Md. 1991). Further, the question of whether a verdict is either excessive or inadequate is one for the trial court, in the exercise of itssound discretion, to decide on a motion for a new trial. Kujawa v. Baltimore Transit Co. , 167 A.2d 96, 102 (Md. 1961). Sauble did not move for a new trial, but rather moved for the verdict to be made to conform to the evidence and to the amount claimed in discovery. We find nothing in the material submitted by the parties which suggests an abuse of discretion in the denial of this motion and accordingly we affirm.We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
2
Comment Info: ================= General Comment:? U.S. DOT/FAA - Regulatory Evaluation Form
III 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 73 

Honoring the life of Enrique ‘‘Kiki’’ Camarena. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 8, 2005 

Mr. BIDEN submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Honoring the life of Enrique ‘‘Kiki’’ Camarena. 

Whereas Enrique ‘‘Kiki’’ Camarena, a Special Agent of the 

Drug Enforcement Administration for 11 years, was abducted and brutally murdered by drug barons in 1985; 

Whereas Enrique Camarena dedicated his life to serving the 

law enforcement community and the Nation as a whole 

and was the devoted husband of Geneva Alvarado and 

loving father of Enrique, Daniel, and Eric; 

Whereas Enrique Camarena received 2 Sustained Superior 

Performance Awards and a Special Achievement Award 

while serving the Drug Enforcement Administration; 

Whereas Enrique Camarena’s dedication to reducing the 

scourge of drugs eventually cost him his life; 
2 

•SRES 73 IS

Whereas ‘‘Camarena Clubs’’ to combat drug abuse have been 

created in high schools across the Nation to honor his 

memory; 

Whereas Enrique Camarena is honored each year during National Red Ribbon Week; and 

Whereas the 20th Anniversary of Enrique Camarena’s death 

will be specially honored on March 9, 2005, at the Drug 

Enforcement Administration headquarters: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) mourns the loss of Enrique ‘‘Kiki’’ 

3 Camarena; 

4 (2) recognizes the contributions of Enrique 

5 Camarena to our National efforts to combat drug 

6 abuse; 

7 (3) admires the courage and dedication of 

8 Enrique Camarena in his work as a Special Agent 

9 of the Drug Enforcement Administration; 

10 (4) expresses gratitude for the legacy left by 

11 Enrique Camarena; and 

12 (5) directs the Secretary of the Senate to trans13 mit an enrolled copy of this resolution to the family 

14 of Enrique Camarena. 

Æ
No. 46903.

#### Protest 6149-K of General Dyestuff Corp. (New York).

Opinion by

Walker, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protest.