alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2005103EN.01003101.xml

| 22.4.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 103/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.4.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 103/31

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 624/2005

of 21 April 2005

concerning tenders notified in response to the invitation to tender for the export of oats issued in Regulation (EC) No 1565/2004

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1), and in particular Article 7 thereof,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals (2), and in particular Article 7 thereof,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1565/2004 of 3 September 2004 on a special intervention measure for cereals in Finland and Sweden for the 2004/2005 marketing year (3),

Whereas:

| (1) | An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of oats produced in Finland and Sweden for export from Finland and Sweden to all third countries, with the exception of Bulgaria, Norway, Romania and Switzerland was opened pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1565/2004. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of oats produced in Finland and Sweden for export from Finland and Sweden to all third countries, with the exception of Bulgaria, Norway, Romania and Switzerland was opened pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1565/2004.

| (2) | On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95, a maximum refund should not be fixed. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95, a maximum refund should not be fixed.

| (3) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

No action shall be taken on the tenders notified from 15 to 21 April 2005 in response to the invitation to tender for the refund for the export of oats issued in Regulation (EC) No 1565/2004.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 22 April 2005.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States

Done at Brussels, 21 April 2005.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 78.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 147, 30.6.1995, p. 7. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1431/2003 (OJ L 203, 12.8.2003, p. 16).

2

(3)  
  OJ L 285, 4.9.2004, p. 3.

3

---
Order entered December 2 9 , 2015

In The



## Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 15

- 01425

- CV

ACE CASH EXPRESS, IN C., Appellant

V.

COURTNEY COX, Appellee

On Appeal from the 95th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Cou rt Cause No. DC

- 15

- 05455



### O RDER

W e GRANT appellee’s December 22, 2015 motion to extend time and ORDER the brief

be filed no later than January 27, 2016

.

/s/ CRAIG STODDART

JUSTICE
Exhibit
32.1





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 of Bio Matrix Scientific Group, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the
undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:





1. The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and





2. The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




Dated:  May
5, 2008


By:
            /s/
      David KoosDavid
      KoosChief
      Executive Officer





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, or other document authentications, acknowledging, or otherwise
adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version
of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Bio
Matrix Scientific Group, Inc.  and will be retained by Bio Matrix
Scientific Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.
#### Peggy Mae RATCLIFF et al. v. W. C. “Dunk” CROSBY et ux.

No. 49903.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Feb. 1, 1978.

Pickering & McKenzie, Charles W. Pickering, J. Larry Walters, Laurel, for appellants.

Holifield & Harper, Matthew Harper, Jr., Laurel, for appellee.

Appeal from Chancery Court, Jones County; J. Shannon Clark, Chancellor.

Before SMITH, P. J., and ROBERTSON and LEE, JJ.

AFFIRMED.
### SAT Report PMN Number: P-14-0625 SAT Date: 6/26/2014 Print Date: 9/30/2014

Related cases :

Concern levels : Type of Concern: Health Eco Comments Level of Concern: 1-2 2

Persistence Bioaccum Toxicity Comments 2 11

Exposure Based Review : Health: Yes Ecotox: Yes
Routes of exposure : Health: Dermal Drinking Water Inhalation Ecotox: All releases to water Fate: ; Keywords : Keywords: DEVEL; IRR E, S, MM; UNCER SENSIT
Summary of Assessment :
Fate : Fate Summary: P-14-0625 FATE: Liquid with MP < 25 C (E) log Kow = 2.50 (E) S = 2.88 g/L at 25 C (E) VP = 2.6E-2 torr at 25 C (M) BP = 247 C ( N OMO5) based on 140-142 C @ 22 mm Hg (M) H = 7.92E-8 (E) log Koc = 2.60 (E) log Fish BCF = 1.31 (E) log Fish BAF = 1.18 (E)POTW removal (%) = 0 Time for complete ultimate aerobic biodeg = mo Sorption to soils/sediments = low PBT Potential: P2B1 *CEB FATE: Migration to ground water = rapid

Health : Health Summary: Absorption is good all routs based on analogs. There is a concern for developmental toxicity based on nitriles. Concern for irritation to the eye, skin, mucus membranes and uncertain concern for sensitization based on information in MSDS.

Ecotox :
Test Organism Test Type Test End Point Predicted Measured Comments

fish 96-h LC50 16.5 daphnid 48-h LC50 2.1 green algal 96-h EC50 1.5 fish

_ chronic value 0.804 daphnid

_ chronic value 0.181
algal

_ chronic value 0.53
Sewage Sludge 3-h EC50

_ Sewage Sludge

_ Chronic Value _

Ecotox Values Comments: Predictions are based on SARs for ; SAR chemical class = , MW = 182; liquid with unknown MP (P); log Kow = 2.5; S = 2,880 mg/L at 20 C (M); p H7; effective concentrations based on 100% active ingredients and nominal concentrations; hardness <180.0 mg/L as CaCO3; and TOC <2.0 mg/L;

Factors Values Comments Assessment Factor 10 Concentration of Concern ( p pb) 18

SARs SAR Class Ecotox Category

Ecotox Factors Comments:

SAT Chair: Viktor Morozov
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          49,797
<SECURITIES>                                    31,857
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,065
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (548)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,017
<PP&E>                                           8,058
<DEPRECIATION>                                  (1,509)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  97,933
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           13,902
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       105,788
<OTHER-SE>                                        (404)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    97,933
<SALES>                                         11,097
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                11,097
<CGS>                                            8,216
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   14,020
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 384
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (10,771)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (10,771)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (1.76)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (1.76)


</TABLE>
NIHSeniorHealth: Transcript "Pain and Cancer Treatment"

file:///C|/Users/mames/Downloads/lac4_transcript.htm[2/25/2014 7:49:16 AM]

Transcript: "Pain and Cancer Treatment"

Pain is another area that people say is a persistent problem for them after treatment. It may be due to the cancer or

surgery they've had or the kinds of drugs or medicines that they've received as part of their treatment. Again,

conversation with your healthcare provider is important to find out where the pain might be coming from and what

might be causing it. One way to have a good dialogue about that is to keep a pain diary--to note down on a piece of

paper when you have the pain, the kind of pain you have, where it occurs, what it feels like. Is it jabbing pain? Is it

dull pain? Does it throb? What makes it worse? What makes it better? That log or diary can be very helpful in

informing a dialogue about what might be helpful in controlling the pain. What we know about pain is there are a lot

of very good treatments that can be very helpful. No one should be suffering pain unnecessarily after cancer treatment.
Exhibit
32.1




CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. §1350), the
undersigned, David P. Hanlon, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Empire
Resorts, Inc., a
Delaware corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to his knowledge,
that:




The
Annual Report Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007 of the Company (the
“Report”) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.




March
      17, 2008By:
            /s/
      David P. HanlonDavid
      P. HanlonChief
      Executive Officer
- filed at

Case 11-22840-JAD Doc 1770 Filed 02/26/16 Entered 02/26/16 14:48:28 Desc Main

Document Page 1 of 8
Case 11-22840-JAD Doc 1770 Filed 02/26/16 Entered 02/26/16 14:48:28 Desc Main

Document Page 2 of 8
Case 11-22840-JAD Doc 1770 Filed 02/26/16 Entered 02/26/16 14:48:28 Desc Main

Document Page 3 of 8
Case 11-22840-JAD Doc 1770 Filed 02/26/16 Entered 02/26/16 14:48:28 Desc Main

Document Page 4 of 8
Case 11-22840-JAD Doc 1770 Filed 02/26/16 Entered 02/26/16 14:48:28 Desc Main

Document Page 5 of 8
Case 11-22840-JAD Doc 1770 Filed 02/26/16 Entered 02/26/16 14:48:28 Desc Main

Document Page 6 of 8
FILED

CLERK

U.S. BANKRUPTCY

COURT - WDPA 2/26/16 2:03 pm

Case 11-22840-JAD Doc 1770 Filed 02/26/16 Entered 02/26/16 14:48:28 Desc Main

Document Page 7 of 8
Case 11-22840-JAD Doc 1770 Filed 02/26/16 Entered 02/26/16 14:48:28 Desc Main

Document Page 8 of 8
MINNESOTA - AGENCY CONTACTS

MN State MNDOT Rachel Broughton Project Development Engineer,

Local State Aid

Rachel.Broughton@state.mn.us 612-427-3907

MN FHWA FHWA EFL Jacinda Russell Access Program Manager Jacinda.Russell@dot.gov 571-434-1543

MN FHWA FHWA EFL Lewis Grimm Planning Team Leader Lewis.Grimm@dot.gov 703-404-6289

MN LPA Minnesota

County

Engineers

Association

Seth Greenwood Public Works Director/County

Engineer, Nicollet County

Public Works

seth.greenwood@co.nicollet.mn.us 507-931-1760

MN FHWA FHWA DO David Scott Assistant Division 

Administrator

David.Scott@dot.gov 651- 291-6103

MN FLMA NPS Mark Mitts Midwest Region FLTP

Coordinator

mark_mitts@nps.gov 913-709-3106

MN FLMA FWS Brandon Jutz Regional Coordinator, Refuge

Roads Program

Brandon_Jutz@fws.gov 612-713-5407

MN FLMA FWS Nathan Beauchamp Transportation Program 

Analyst

nathan_beauchamp@fws.gov 703-358-2226

MN FLMA USFS Jim Forseth R9 Transportation Engineer James.Forseth@usda.gov 414-297-3960

MN FLMA DOD 

(USACE)

Jeff Defosse

/LynnNeher

Natural Resources Program

Manager/ Natural Resources

Program Manager

Jeff.A.Defosse@usace.army.mil 

Lynn.N.Neher@usace.army.mil

513-684-3192

314-331-8880

MN FLMA DOD Douglas Briggs Chief/HND-SDDCTEA Douglas.E.Briggs.civ@mail.mil 618-220-5229

MN FLMA BIA Thomas Fronk Civil Engineer Thomas.Fronk@bia.gov 612-725-4553
#### W. H. HARWELL, Appellant, v. Lola Marie WILDER, as Administratrix of the Estate of W. E. Wilder, Deceased, Appellee.

No. 70-569.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 21, 1971.

*91Robert S. Edwards of Edwards & Sawyer, Plant City, for appellant.

Paul S. Buchman, Plant City, for appel-lee.

McNULTY, Judge.

Plaintiff-appellant replevied a boat he had earlier sold to appellee’s decedent and another. Some three months thereafter judgment was rendered in favor of the decedent for the boat, or its value,- and, in addition, for $350.00 in damages for wrongful replevin.

No error has been clearly made to appear on the merits of the replevin action itself; so that part of the judgment is affirmed. However, from the sparse record before us1 it affirmatively appears that there was virtually no evidence relating to damages suffered on account of appellant’s repossession of the boat herein, except the “loss of use” thereof during the pendency of the action. Moreover, there is no evidence that the value of such loss of use in this case is $350. Judgment for this specific amount in damages was therefore error.

Now it is rudimentary, of course, that the burden of proving damages is generally upon the person claiming them; and the peculiarities and/or alternative postures ascribable to a replevin action 2 do not require departure from this rule. Nevertheless, given the loss of use of something of value, and attributing such loss to the wrong of another, *some*damages are presumed; and in the absence of affirmative evidence of specific value of such loss it is well-settled that in a replevin action the value thereof may be measured by the interest on the value of the thing lost.3 We reaffirm this rule as expeditious and just.

Wherefore, the value of the boat having been properly found in this case to be $1,000, and there being no evidence bearing on a specific value for the loss of use of such boat while in the wrongful possession of appellant nor evidence relating to any other damages, the judgment appealed from is reversed as to the award of damages provided for therein. The cause is remanded for computation of the legal rate of interest on the value of the boat for and during the period of the loss, and, thereafter, for modification of the judgment as to damages accordingly.

Affirmed in part; reversed in part.

HOBSON, Acting C. J., and MANN, J., concur.

1

. The parties attempted to follow a recognized procedure to establish a record where, as here, there was no court reporter present. See, e. g., Downing v. Bird (Fla.App.1962), 145 So.2d 559 and Moyer v. Moyer (Fla.App.1959), 114 So.2d 638.

2

. Section 78.01 et seq., F.S.A.

3

. See, e. g., Florida Trust & Banking Co. v. Consolidated Title Co. (1923), 86 Fla. 317, 98 So. 915; Bryant v. Godfrey (Fla.1949), 40 So.2d 833; and Butler v. Mirabelli (Fla.App.1965), 179 So.2d 868. Cf., Ocala Foundry & Machine Works v. Lester (1905), 49 Fla. 199, 38 So. 51.
#### Jesse Lee SPELLER, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-686.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Sept. 18, 1973.

Jesse Lee Speller, in pro. per.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.

Before BARKDULL, C. J., and HEN-DRY and HAVERFIELD, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This court, proceeding in the manner outlined and recommended by the Supreme Court of the United States in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, having deferred ruling on a motion of the public defender to withdraw as counsel for the indigent defendant-appellant, and having furnished appellant with a copy of the public defender’s memorandum brief, and having allowed the appellant a reasonable specified time within which to raise any points that he chose in support of this appeal, and the appellant having failed to respond thereto, on consideration thereof upon full examination of the proceedings we conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous. Whereupon, the public defender’s said motion to withdraw is granted, and the order or judgment appealed is hereby affirmed.
EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS ACCESS PROGRAM

Application 

No. Project/Facility Name Project Type Federal Land Accessed Applicant County

Fiscal 

Year*

WI-20 Fairview Road Roadway Resurfacing

Fish & Wildlife Service -

Iron River National Fish 

Hatchery/Forest ServiceChequamegon-Nicolet 

National Forest

Tripp Township Bayfield 2017

WI-23 Rock Creek Bridge Bridge Replacement

U.S. Forest ServiceChequamegon-Nicolet 

National Forest

Town of Fence Florence 2016

WI-24 Little Popple Bridge Bridge Replacement

U.S. Forest ServiceChequamegon-Nicolet 

National Forest

Town of Popple 

River

Forest 2016

WI-28 Squaw Creek Crossing Roadway Reconstruction

U.S. Forest ServiceChequamegon-Nicolet 

National Forest

Town of Fifield Price 2017

WI-30 Old County Highway K Roadway Reconstruction

National Park Service - 

Apostle Islands National 

Lakeshore

Town of Russell 

Roads 

Committee

Bayfield 2016

WI-35

Goose Island Park & 

Campground

Roadway Reconstruction 

& Boat Landing 

Improvements

U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers - Goose Island 

Park

LaCrosse County LaCrosse 2016

The Programming Decisions Committee (PDC) responsible for the Wisconsin Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP) has selected its multiyear 

Program of Projects. The projects identified for programming for the Wisconsin FLAP are listed below in no particular order and include:

Wisconsin Program of Projects for Federal Fiscal Years 2015-2018

* Fiscal Year Programmed/Project Schedule is subject to change
EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS ACCESS PROGRAM

The next step in the process will be to develop project agreements between Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division and the State/Local Agency 

partners. The amount of funds allocated will depend on finalizing these project agreements. The Wisconsin PDC does not have a firm date for the 

next Call for Projects under the Access Program, but another call is anticipated within the next year. 

If you have any questions regarding the Call for Projects, please contact Mr. Lewis Grimm, Planning Team Leader, at 703-404-6289 or 

Lewis.Grimm@dot.gov. For questions regarding project agreements and funding, please contact Ms. Jacinda Russell, Access Program Manager, at 

571-434-1543 or Jacinda.Russell@dot.gov.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Kenneth PORTER.

No. 59921.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 23, 1977.

William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., Ossie B. Brown, Dist. Atty., Ralph L. Roy, Marilyn C. Castle, Asst. Dist. Attys., for plaintiff-appellee.

Stephen E. Covell, Baton Rouge, for defendant-appellant.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
259 La. 74

#### STATE of Louisiana v. Guy Erskine RAY.

No. 51553.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 25, 1971.

In re: Guy Erskine Ray applying for writ of prohibition, certiorari and mandamus.

Writs denied. Insanity; whether present or at the time of the crime, is neither an issue in or defense to an extradition proceeding. LSA-C.Cr.P. Art. 268; 31 Am. Jur.2d, Extradition, Sec. IS, pp. 932-933, Sec. SI, pp. 958-959.
#### Edward Peter KNAPP, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-431.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 22, 1970.

Edward Peter Knapp, in pro. per.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before BARKDULL, HENDRY and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This court, proceeding in the manner outlined and recommended by the Supreme Court of the United States in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, having deferred ruling on a motion of the public defendant to withdraw as counsel for the indigent-defendant and having furnished appellant with a copy of the public defender’s memorandum brief, and having allowed the appellant a reasonable specified time within which to raise any points that he chose in support of his appeal, and the appellant having failed to respond thereto, on consideration thereof upon full examination of the proceedings we conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous and affirm the actions of the trial court in denying the relief sought by the petitioner’s third petition for relief pursuant to CrPR 1.850, 33 F.S.A.
×
 Step 1
                    Identify
                    Stakeholders
 Step 2
                    Use
                    Safety Data
 
 Step 3
                    Choose Proven
                    Solutions
 Step 4
                    Implement
                    Solutions
 Finish Line
  There are many countermeasures proven to save lives on rural roads. It’s just a matter of deploying them in the right places. This page has lots of videos and other examples of specific countermeasures to address the most common crash types on local and rural roads. Have a look and discover which ones are best for your community.
 Local Agency Insights: Choose Proven Solutions Local Agency Insights: Choose Proven Solutions Video Thumbnail Roadway Departure Countermeasure Videos Local Agency Insights: Choose Proven Solutions Video Thumbnail Intersection Countermeasure Videos Local Agency Insights: Choose Proven Solutions Video Thumbnail Pedestrian Countermeasure Videos Local Agency Insights: Choose Proven Solutions Video Thumbnail Cross-cutting Solutions Videos Local Agency Insights: Choose Proven Solutions Video Thumbnail
 Content will open in a new window Tools and Resources Countermeasures  FHWA Proven Safety Countermeasures
                        NHTSA Countermeasures That Work Tech Brief
                        Manual for Selecting Safety Improvements on High Risk Rural Roads
                        NHTSA Countermeasures That Work Tenth Edition
                        Decision Tree Tools - COMING SOON
                        Decision Tree Example 1
                       Decision Tree Example 2
 Training  Tutorial - Choose Proven Solutions
                        Systemic Approach Training – Part 2
                        Low-Cost Safety Improvements Training
 Helpful Links  FHWA Crash Modification Factors Clearinghouse