alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2010261EN.01000501.xml

| 5.10.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 261/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.10.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 261/5

---

DECISION OF THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE MEMBER STATES

of 29 September 2010

appointing a judge to the Court of Justice

(2010/592/EU)

THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE MEMBER STATES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 19 thereof,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 253 and 255 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to Articles 5 and 7 of the Protocol on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union and as a result of the resignation of Mr Pranas KŪRIS, a judge should be appointed to the Court of Justice for the remainder of the term of office of Mr Pranas KŪRIS, which ends on 6 October 2012. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to Articles 5 and 7 of the Protocol on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union and as a result of the resignation of Mr Pranas KŪRIS, a judge should be appointed to the Court of Justice for the remainder of the term of office of Mr Pranas KŪRIS, which ends on 6 October 2012.

| (2) | The panel set up by Article 255 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union has given an opinion on the suitability of Mr Egidijus JARAŠIŪNAS to perform the duties of Judge of the Court of Justice, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The panel set up by Article 255 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union has given an opinion on the suitability of Mr Egidijus JARAŠIŪNAS to perform the duties of Judge of the Court of Justice,

HAVE ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

Mr Egidijus JARAŠIŪNAS is hereby appointed judge to the Court of Justice for the period from 6 October 2010 to 6 October 2012.

Article 2

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

Done at Brussels, 29 September 2010.

For the Council

The President

J. DE RUYT

---
576 S.E.2d 769

#### 7-ELEVEN, INC., f/k/a, The Southland Corporation, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, Appellee.

Record No. 2380-01-2.

Court of Appeals of Virginia.

Feb. 19, 2003.

Before FITZPATRICK, C.J, and BENTON, ELDER, ANNUNZIATA, BUMGARDNER, FRANK, HUMPHREYS, CLEMENTS, AGEE, FELTON and KELSEY, JJ.

UPON A PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

On December 26, 2002 came the appellant, by counsel, and filed a petition praying that the Court set aside the judgment *728rendered herein on December 10, 2002, and grant a rehearing *en banc*thereof.

On consideration whereof, the petition for rehearing *en banc*is granted, the mandate entered herein on December 10, 2002 is stayed pending the decision of the Court *en banc,*and the appeal is reinstated on the docket of this Court.

The parties shall file briefs in compliance with Rule 5A:35. The appellant shall attach as an addendum to the opening brief upon rehearing *en banc*a copy of the opinion previously rendered by the Court in this matter. It is further ordered that the appellant shall file with the clerk of this Court twelve additional copies of the appendix previously filed in this case.
CERTIFICATION UNDER
                               SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


     To my  knowledge,  this Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended June
30, 2003,  fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities  Exchange Act of 1934, and the  information  contained in this Report
fairly presents, in all material respects,  the consolidated financial condition
and results of operations of Central Bancorp, Inc.



                              By:/s/John D. Doherty
                                 --------------------------------------------
                                 John D. Doherty
                                 Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer



                              By:/s/Michael K. Devlin
                                 --------------------------------------------
                                 Michael K. Devlin
                                 Senior Vice President, Treasurer
                                 and Chief Financial Officer


Date:  August 14, 2003
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE COMPANY'S
FORM 10-Q FOR THE FISCAL QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 27, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-27-1997
<CASH>                                          11,092
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   34,760
<ALLOWANCES>                                       440
<INVENTORY>                                     26,929
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                77,057
<PP&E>                                          23,375
<DEPRECIATION>                                  12,553
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  92,889
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           33,782
<BONDS>                                          8,610
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            97
<OTHER-SE>                                      48,212
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    92,889
<SALES>                                         63,258
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                63,258
<CGS>                                           48,102
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   48,102
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                13,791
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    21
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 471
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    873
<INCOME-TAX>                                       409
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                464
<DISCONTINUED>                                    (253)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       211
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.03<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.03<F1>
<FN>
<F1>THE EARNINGS PER SHARE ("EPS") INFORMATION HAS BEEN PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE
WITH STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING STANDARD NO. 128, EARNINGS PER SHARE.
AS SUCH, BASIC EPS AND DILUTED EPS HAVE BEEN ENTERED IN PLACE OF PRIMARY AND FULLY
DILUTED, RESPECTIVELY.
</FN>


</TABLE>
-80 -79 -78 -77 -76

 38

 39

 40

★

▲ ▲

▲

▲

★

▲

▲ ▲ ▲ 500

 1000

 1500

 1000

18 12 06 00

07/08

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 08 Jul 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.90 N 76.65 W Meters AGL
```

[115th Congress Public Law 162]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

[[Page 132 STAT. 1250]]

Public Law 115-162
115th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
  621 Kansas Avenue in Atchison, Kansas, as the ``Amelia Earhart Post 
         Office Building''. <<NOTE: Apr. 3, 2018 -  [S. 2040]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. AMELIA EARHART POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 621 Kansas Avenue in Atchison, Kansas, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Amelia Earhart Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Amelia 
Earhart Post Office Building''.

    Approved April 3, 2018.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--S. 2040:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 164 (2018):
            Mar. 7, considered and passed Senate.
            Mar. 20, considered and passed House.

                                  <all>
```
**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
      SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Inform Worldwide Holdings, Inc., a
      Colorado corporation, (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the quarter
      ended September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
      Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Ashvin Mascarenhas, Chairman,
      President and Secretary of the Company, certify the following pursuant to
      Section 18, U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002:





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.











/s/
      Ashvin Mascarenhas


_______________________________


Ashvin
      Mascarenhas,


Chairman,
      President and Secretary





December 31, 2007
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 175 (Wednesday, September 10, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47656-47657]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-23914]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP97-151-005]


Mid Louisiana Gas Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas 
Tariff

September 4, 1997.
    Take notice that on August 29, 1997, Mid Louisiana Gas Company (Mid 
Louisiana) tendered for filing its become part of FERC Gas Tariff, 
Third Revised Volume No. 1, Third Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 
87, with an effective date of June 1, 1997.
    Mid Louisiana asserts that the purpose of this filing is to comply 
with the Commission's Letter Order, dated August 21, 1997 in Docket No. 
RP97-151-004, in which the Commission directed Mid Louisiana to refile 
the stated tariff sheet indicating corrected version numbers for GISB 
EDM standards incorporated by reference. The sheet is submitted with 
the effective date unchanged, June 1, 1997.
    Any person desiring to protest said filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,

[[Page 47657]]

888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, in accordance with 
Section 385.211 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such 
protests must be filed in accordance with Section 154.210 of the 
Commission's Regulations. Protests will be considered by the Commission 
in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve 
to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Copies of this 
compliance filing are on file with the Commission and are available for 
public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-23914 Filed 9-9-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 174 (Tuesday, September 9, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 47486]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-23792]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP97-486-000]


Young Gas Storage Company Ltd.; Notice of Tariff Compliance 
Filing

September 3, 1997.
    Take notice that on August 27, 1997, Young Gas Storage Company Ltd. 
(``Young''), Post Office Box 1087, Colorado Springs, Colorado 80944, 
tendered for filing to become part of its FERC gas tariff, Original 
Volume No. 1, Second Revised Sheet No. 71 to be effective September 26, 
1997.
    Young states it is making this filing to comply with the Order No. 
636-C (78 FERC para. 61,186) issued February 26, 1997 (Order). 
Specifically Young states that sheet is filed to comply with ordering 
paragraph (B) of the Order which states ``Within 180 days of the 
issuance of this order, any pipeline with a right of first refusal 
tariff provision containing a contract term cap longer than five years 
must revise its tariff consistent with the new cap adopted herein.''
    Young further states that copies of this filing have been served on 
Young's jurisdictional customers and public bodies and that this filing 
is available for public inspection at Young's offices in Colorado 
Springs, Colorado.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing should file a motion to 
intervene or protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Section 
385.214 and Sections 385.211 of the Commission's Regulations. All such 
motions or protests must be filed as provided in Section 154.210 of the 
Commission's Regulations. Protests will be considered by the Commission 
in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve 
to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to 
become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing 
are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection 
in the Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-23792 Filed 9-8-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### Robert G. WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 77-672.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Jan. 17, 1978.

Brian R. McComb, Miami, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen. and Joel D. Rosenblatt, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before PEARSON, HENDRY and BARKDULL, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The defendant, Robert G. Williams, appeals an adjudication of guilty of murder in the first degree and a sentence of life imprisonment. Williams was found guilty by a jury of having murdered one Ernest Hunter. On this appeal, two points are presented. The first urges that the trial court committed reversible error in allowing testimony of the alleged fact that Williams had previously robbed one Roosevelt Hunter, the brother of the deceased victim. The second point urges that the trial court erred in denying defendant’s motion for a mistrial after reference was made by a witness to the defendant’s having been in prison.

With regard to the second point, we have examined the record in the light of this contention and find that there was a full, curative instruction given by the court and that the inadvertent statement by the witness was not sufficient to require reversal for the failure to declare a mistrial. See the rule of law in *Perry v. State,*146 Fla. 187, 200 So. 525 (1941); *Kelly v. State,*202 So.2d 901 (Fla.2d DCA 1967); and *Garcia v. State,*142 So.2d 318 (Fla.2d DCA 1962).

Turning to the more serious question presented by the first point, it is clear from the record that the State secured the agreement of the trial court to the admissibility of the objectionable evidence by a statement that it would present witnesses who would show that the robbery was relevant to the question of motive for the murder. The State urged in the trial court that its witnesses would show (1) that the defendant committed a robbery of the goods of Roosevelt Hunter, (2) that Roosevelt Hunter and his brother, Ernest Hunter, were known to be “looking for” Robert G. Wil*113liams concerning the robbery, and (3) that in order to protect himself, Robert G. Williams then killed Ernest Hunter.

We have carefully reviewed the record in the light of this contention and although we find that the State did not come forward with all of the evidence that it promised the court, nonetheless there was sufficient evidence in the record from which a jury could determine that the motive for the murder was an attempt by Williams to protect himself from the revenge which he had reason to anticipate from the victim, Ernest Hunter, and his brother, Roosevelt Hunter. We therefore, hold that the admission of the evidence was not error. See *State v. State-wright,*300 So.2d 674 (Fla.1974); and *Licht v. State,*148 So.2d 295 (Fla.3d DCA 1963). See also *Williams v. State,*110 So.2d 654 (Fla.1959).

Accordingly, the judgment and sentence are affirmed.
**EXHIBIT 31(a)**

 

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

 

I, Christopher E. Tihansky, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of SSI Surgical Services, Inc.; 

 

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 tomake 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; 

 

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

 

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

 

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

 

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

 

c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) 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 officer and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

 

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date:March 22, 2004 

 

/s/ CHRISTOPHER E. TIHANSKY
Christopher E. TihanskyChief Executive Officer and President
 

2
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1800 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the new markets 

tax credit. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 29, 2005 

Ms. SNOWE (for herself, Mr. ROCKEFELLER, and Mr. BUNNING) introduced 

the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee 

on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend 

the new markets tax credit. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘New Markets Tax 

5 Credit Reauthorization Act of 2005’’. 

6 SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF NEW MARKETS TAX CREDIT. 

7 (a) EXTENSION.— 

8 (1) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (1) of section 

9 45D(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relat-
2 

•S 1800 IS

1 ing to new markets tax credit) is amended to read 

2 as follows: 

3 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—There is a new markets tax 

4 credit limitation of $3,500,000,000 for each of cal5 endar years 2008 through 2012.’’. 

6 (2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Paragraph (3) 

7 of section 45D(f) of such Code is amended by strik8 ing ‘‘2014’’ and inserting ‘‘2019’’. 

9 (b) INFLATION ADJUSTMENT.—Subsection (f) of sec10 tion 45D of such Code is amended by inserting at the end 

11 the following new paragraph: 

12 ‘‘(4) INFLATION ADJUSTMENT.— 

13 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—In the case of any cal14 endar year beginning after 2008, the dollar 

15 amount in paragraph (1) shall be increased by 

16 an amount equal to— 

17 ‘‘(i) such dollar amount, multiplied by 

18 ‘‘(ii) the cost-of-living adjustment de19 termined under section 1(f)(3) for the cal20 endar year, determined by substituting 

21 ‘calendar year 2007’ for ‘calendar year 

22 1992’ in subparagraph (B) thereof. 

23 ‘‘(B) ROUNDING RULE.—If a dollar 

24 amount in paragraph (1), as increased under 

25 subparagraph (A), is not a multiple of 
3 

•S 1800 IS

1 $1,000,000, such amount shall be rounded to 

2 the nearest multiple of $1,000,000.’’. 

3 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

4 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

5 December 31, 2007. 

Æ
# DDSI celebrates workforce with Family Day

/ Published Oct. 25, 2018
SIGONELLA, Italy, DLA Distribution Sigonella, Italy, celebrated its local culture and the yearlong efforts of its workforce with a Family Day.  More than 150 employees and family members attended the event which featured food and entertainment.
254 La. 813

#### CAR CITY INSURANCE COMPANY and Robert F. Frazier v. MISSOURI PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY et al.

No. 50058.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 23, 1969.

In re: Missouri Pacific Railroad Company et al. applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Parish of Allen. 224 So.2d 182.

Writ refused. The judgment is not final.
##### 



Exhibit 32.2
 
  (1)
    
    The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended
September 8, 2007 (the Form 10-Q) fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Act); and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial conditions and results of operations of the Company as of the
dates and for the periods referred to in the Form 10-Q.
 /s/ Alfred H. DrewesAlfred H. DrewesSenior Vice President and
Chief Financial OfficerOctober 12, 2007