alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Appendix E

Year-long Modeling Results

# ii 

# T

HIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK



# .E-1Figure E-1. All emissions average January through March 2008 (ng/m3).E-2Figure E-2. All emissions average February through April 2008 (ng/m3).E-3Figure E-3. All emissions March through May 2008 (ng/m3).E-4Figure E-4. All emissions average April through June 2008 (ng/m3).E-5Figure E-5. All emissions average May through July 2008 (ng/m3).E-6Figure E-6. All emissions average June through August 2008 (ng/m3).E-7Figure E-7. All emissions average July through September 2008 (ng/m3).E-8Figure E-8. All emissions average August through October 2008 (ng/m3).E-9Figure E-9. All emissions average September through November 2008 (ng/m3).E-10Figure E-10. All emissions average October through December 2008 (ng/m3).E-11Figure E-11. All emissions average November through January 2008 (ng/m3)..E-12Figure E-12. All emissions December through February 2008 (ng/m3).
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the use in MDS Inc.'s Annual Report on Form 40-F of our report dated December 10, 2003 with respect to the consolidated financial statements of MDS Inc. for the fiscal years ended October 31, 2003, 2002 and 2001.  We also consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Forms S-8 (Nos. 333-12056, 333-12058, 333-12548, and 333-13538) of our report dated December 10, 2003 with respect to the consolidated financial statements of MDS Inc.for the fiscal years ended October 31, 2003, 2002 and 2001 included in the Annual Report on Form 40-F for the year ended October 31, 2003.



|Toronto, Canada, | /S/ Ernst & Young LLP
|---------------- | ---------------------
|March 3, 2004.   | Chartered Accountants
# C_2015056EN.01001701.xml

| 16.2.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 56/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.2.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 56/17

---

Order of the General Court of 4 December 2014 — Alstom v Commission

(Case T-164/12) (1)

1

((Competition - Action for damages brought before a national court - Request for cooperation - Article 15(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Decision of the Commission to transmit information to a national court - Withdrawal of the request - Withdrawal of the decision - No need to adjudicate))

(2015/C 056/23)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Alstom (Levallois-Perret, France) (represented: initially by J. Derenne, lawyer, N. Heaton, P. Chaplin and M. Farley, Solicitors, and subsequently by J Derenne, N Heaton and P Chaplin)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Antoniadis, N. Khan and P. Van Nuffel, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: National Grid Electricity Transmission plc (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: A. Magnus, C. Bryant, E. Coulson, Solicitors, J. Turner QC, D. Beard QC and L. John, Barrister)

Intervener in support of the defendant

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of the Commission’s decision, communicated to the applicant by letter of 26 January 2012 of the Director General of the Commission’s Directorate-General for Competition under reference D/2012/006840, to accede to the request for cooperation from the High Court of Justice of England and Wales, in so far as it involves the disclosure of information allegedly covered by the obligation of professional secrecy in the applicant’s reply to the statement of objections in Case COMP/F/38.899 — Gas insulated switchgear.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1) | There is no need to adjudicate on the action. |
| --- | --- |

1)

There is no need to adjudicate on the action.

| 2) | The parties shall bear their own costs, including those incurred in the proceedings for interim measures. |
| --- | --- |

2)

The parties shall bear their own costs, including those incurred in the proceedings for interim measures.

---

(1)  OJ C 165, 9.6.2012.

1

---
***Exhibit 23***

**Consent of Independent Auditors**

The Board of DirectorsHudson River Bancorp, Inc.

We consent to incorporation by reference in the following registration statements:

File No. 333-58615 on Form S-8,File No. 333-94567 on Form S-8, andFile No. 333-94571 on Form S-8

of Hudson River Bancorp, Inc. of our report dated May 2, 2003, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Hudson River Bancorp, Inc. and subsidiaries as of March 31, 2003 and 2002, and the related consolidated income statements, statements of changes in shareholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended March 31, 2003, which report appears in the 2003 Annual Report to Shareholders, which is incorporated by reference into the March 31, 2003 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Hudson River Bancorp, Inc. Our report refers to a change in the method of accounting for goodwill as of April 1, 2002.

 

|   |   |   |         |
|--------|--------|--------|--------------|
|        |   |   | /s/ KPMG LLP |
|   |   |   |         |

 

Albany, New YorkJune 25, 2003
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1639 

To amend title 36, United States Code, to authorize the American Legion 

under its Federal charter to provide guidance and leadership to the 

individual departments and posts of the American Legion, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 3, 2011 

Mr. TESTER (for himself and Mr. HELLER) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend title 36, United States Code, to authorize the 

American Legion under its Federal charter to provide 

guidance and leadership to the individual departments 

and posts of the American Legion, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. ADDITIONAL POWER OF AMERICAN LEGION 

4 UNDER FEDERAL CHARTER. 

5 Section 21704 of title 36, United States Code, is 

6 amended— 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1639 IS

1 (1) by redesignating paragraph (5) through (8) 

2 as paragraphs (6) through (9), respectively; and 

3 (2) by inserting after paragraph (4) the fol4 lowing new paragraph (5): 

5 ‘‘(5) provide guidance and leadership to organi6 zations and local chapters established under para7 graph (4), but may not control or otherwise influ8 ence the specific activities and conduct of such orga9 nizations and local chapters;’’. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
# C_2014024EN.01002001.xml

| 25.1.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.1.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/20

---

Judgment of the General Court of 5 December 2013 — Olive Line International v OHIM — Carapelli Firenze (Maestro de Oliva)

(Case T-4/12) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition procedure - International registration designating the European Community - Figurative mark Maestro de Oliva - Earlier national word mark MAESTRO - Genuine use of the earlier mark - Likelihood of confusion - Articles 8(1)(b) and 15(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2014/C 24/34

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Olive Line International, SL (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: M. Aznar Alonso, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: O. Mondéjar Ortuño, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Carapelli Firenze SpA (Tavarnelle Val di Pesa, Italy)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 21 September 2011 (Case R 1612/2010-2), concerning an opposition procedure between Carapelli Firenze SpA and Olive Line International, SL.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Olive Line International, SL to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Olive Line International, SL to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 89, 24.3.2012.

1

---
# C_2012227EN.01002401.xml

| 28.7.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 227/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.7.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 227/24

---

Action brought on 28 May 2012 — Saobraćajni institut CIP v Commission

(Case T-219/12)

2012/C 227/40

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Saobraćajni institut CIP d.o.o. (Belgrade, Serbia) (represented by: A. Lojpur, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul a call for tender published on 27 March 2012, concerning preparation of technical documentation for the rail modernization project ‘Doubling and upgrading of existing railway corridor Xb, section Novi Sad (excluding the junction)–Subotica–Hungarian border’ in accordance with EU interoperability standards, AGC, AGTC and the SEECP Agreement (OJ 2012/S 60-096517), excluding the applicant from participating in it; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul a call for tender published on 27 March 2012, concerning preparation of technical documentation for the rail modernization project ‘Doubling and upgrading of existing railway corridor Xb, section Novi Sad (excluding the junction)–Subotica–Hungarian border’ in accordance with EU interoperability standards, AGC, AGTC and the SEECP Agreement (OJ 2012/S 60-096517), excluding the applicant from participating in it;

| — | Award damages for the alleged pecuniary loss; |
| --- | --- |

—

Award damages for the alleged pecuniary loss;

| — | Order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging






  — | that there was no legal ground for a priori exclusion of the applicant in participating in a call for tender in question since there was no conflict of interest; |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging

—

that there was no legal ground for a priori exclusion of the applicant in participating in a call for tender in question since there was no conflict of interest;

a priori

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging






  — | that the applicant’s exclusion from tender is contrary to IPA Regulation (1); |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging

—

that the applicant’s exclusion from tender is contrary to IPA Regulation (1);

1

| 3. | Third plea in law, alleging






  — | that the conditions for awarding the contract were unlawful. |
| --- | --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law, alleging

—

that the conditions for awarding the contract were unlawful.

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1085/2006 of 17.7.2006 establishing an Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA) (OJ L 210, p. 82)

1

---
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1552 

To amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to provide an exception 

to that Act for actions carried out against grizzly bears in self-defense, 

defense of others, or a reasonable belief of imminent danger. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 14, 2011 

Mr. CRAPO (for himself and Mr. RISCH) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public 

Works 

A BILL 

To amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to provide 

an exception to that Act for actions carried out against 

grizzly bears in self-defense, defense of others, or a reasonable belief of imminent danger. 

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


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1552 IS

1 SECTION 1. EXCEPTION TO ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT OF 

2 1973 FOR SELF-DEFENSE, DEFENSE OF OTH3 ERS, OR REASONABLE BELIEF OF IMMINENT 

4 DANGER REGARDING GRIZZLY BEARS. 

5 Section 10 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 

6 (16 U.S.C. 1539) is amended by adding at the end the 

7 following: 

8 ‘‘(k) SELF-DEFENSE, DEFENSE OF OTHERS, OR

9 REASONABLE BELIEF OF IMMINENT DANGER REGARDING

10 GRIZZLY BEARS.—Notwithstanding any other provision of 

11 law (including regulations), the provisions of this Act shall 

12 not apply with respect to the taking of any grizzly bear 

13 by an individual who demonstrates to the Secretary by a 

14 preponderance of the evidence that the individual carried 

15 out the taking as a result of— 

16 ‘‘(1) self-defense; 

17 ‘‘(2) defense of another individual; or 

18 ‘‘(3) a reasonable belief of imminent danger 

19 posed by the grizzly bear to any individual.’’. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency 

          - [FEMA-1692-DR] 

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of New York (FEMA-1692-DR), dated April 24, 2007, and related determinations. 

# EFFECTIVE DATE:

May 9, 2007. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2705. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of New York is hereby amended to include the following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of April 24, 2007: 

Ulster County for Individual Assistance (already designated for Public Assistance.) 

Montgomery County for Public Assistance.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and Households Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050 Individuals and Households Program—Other Needs, 97.036, Public Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.)

R. David Paulison, 

Administrator,  Federal Emergency Management Agency.

 [FR Doc. E7-9511 Filed 5-16-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATE OF CEO PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. §1350, AS ADOPTED


PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Annual Report of Network 1 Financial Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A for the year ended June 30, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Damon Testaverde, Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer) hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 as of and for the period covered by the Report.





Date: October 21, 2011
/s/ Damon TestaverdeDamon TestaverdeChief Executive Officer
# C_2013032EN.01002201.xml

| 2.2.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 32/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.2.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 32/22

---

Action brought on 27 November 2012 — Pågen Trademark v OHIM (gifflar)

(Case T-520/12)

2013/C 32/34

Language of the case: Swedish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Pågen Trademark AB (Malmö, Sweden) (represented by J. Norderyd, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 27 September 2012 (1) in Case R 46/2012-2 and declare that Community trade mark No 1 009 0331 GIFFLAR (fig) applied for by Pågen Trademark AB is to be published and registered, or, in the alternative, order OHIM to publish and register the trade mark; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 27 September 2012 (1) in Case R 46/2012-2 and declare that Community trade mark No 1 009 0331 GIFFLAR (fig) applied for by Pågen Trademark AB is to be published and registered, or, in the alternative, order OHIM to publish and register the trade mark;

1

| — | Order the defendant to pay the applicant’s costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay the applicant’s costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark containing the word element ‘gifflar’ for goods in Classes 29, 30 and 31 — application for registration of Community trade mark No 1 009 0331

Community trade mark concerned:

Decision of the Examiner: Rejection in part of the application for registration

Decision of the Examiner:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law:

Pleas in law:

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation No 207/2009 |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation No 207/2009

| — | Infringement of Article 7(3) of Regulation No 207/2009 |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(3) of Regulation No 207/2009

---

(1)  Translator’s note: The correct date of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) in Case R 46/2012-2 is 18 September 2012 as stated in the OHIM database.

1

---
<PAGE>

                                                          EXHIBIT 21.1

                              IBS INTERACTIVE, INC.

                              LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES

         The  following  is a  list  of  all of  the  subsidiaries  of  the  IBS
Interactive,  Inc. and the jurisdictions of incorporation of such  subsidiaries.
All of the listed subsidiaries do business under their names presented below:

1.       CCL Telecommunication, Inc.
         Delaware
         (state of incorporation)

2.       IBS Holdings Corp.
         Delaware
         (state of incorporation)

3.       Halo Network Management, LLC
         New Jersey
         (state of formation)

4.       Spectrum Information Services, Inc.
         Alabama
         (state of incorporation)

5.       Realshare, Inc.
         New Jersey
         (state of incorporation)

6.       Spencer Analysis, Inc.
         New York
         (state of incorporation)

7.       digital fusion, inc.
         Florida
         (state of incorporation)
EXHIBIT 31.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED BY SECTION 302 OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Jeff Finkelstein, the Chief Financial Officer of SmarTire Systems, Inc.
certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of SmarTire Systems, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the registrant and have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this annual report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such
evaluation; and presented in this annual report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures;

c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting that occured during the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal control
over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and
have identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in
internal control over financial reporting; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting; and


October 28, 2005                                /s/ Jeff Finkelstein
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Jeff Finkelstein, CFO
No. 44336.

#### Protests 844172-G(E), etc., of Ampol, Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of *Stokby*v. *United States*(4 Cust. Ct. 343, C. D. 358) it was held that the merchandise is properly dutiable at 3)4 cents per pound under paragraph 703, Tariff Act of 1930, on the basis of the net weight of the contents of the cans less 10 percent allowance for the gelatinous material.
No. 50689.

#### Protests 111582-K, etc., of C. J. Tower *&*Sons (Buffalo).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is the same in all material respects as that passed upon in *Tower & Sons*v. *United States*(14 Cust. Ct. 94, C. D. 919). In accordance therewith the merchandise was held entitled to free entry as claimed.