alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2005148EN.01003201.xml

| 11.6.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 148/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.6.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 148/32

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 886/2005

of 10 June 2005

supplementing the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 2400/96 as regards the entry of a name in the Register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Miel de Granada) — (PDO)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 of 14 July 1992 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 6(3) and (4) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | In accordance with Article 6(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92, Spain’s application to register ‘Miel de Granada’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

In accordance with Article 6(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92, Spain’s application to register ‘Miel de Granada’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

| (2) | An objection was lodged with the Commission under Article 7 of Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92. As this objection met none of the admissibility conditions laid down in Article 7(4) of that Regulation, the name should accordingly be entered in the Register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

An objection was lodged with the Commission under Article 7 of Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92. As this objection met none of the admissibility conditions laid down in Article 7(4) of that Regulation, the name should accordingly be entered in the Register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name in the Annex to this Regulation is hereby added to the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 2400/96 (3).

Article 2

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

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

Done at Brussels, 10 June 2005.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 208, 24.7.1992, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 806/2003 (OJ L 122, 16.5.2003, p. 1).

1

(2)  
  OJ C 89, 14.4.2004, p. 3.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 327, 18.12.1996, p. 11. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 737/2005 (OJ L 122, 14.5.2005, p. 15).

3

---

ANNEX

PRODUCTS LISTED IN ANNEX I TO THE EC TREATY, INTENDED FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION

Other animal products (eggs, honey, various milk products except butter, etc.)

SPAIN

Miel de Granada (PDO)

---
Exhibit 31.1 

CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 

PURSUANT TO 

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 

I, Nicholas J. Sutton, certify that: 

| 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Resolute Energy Corporation; and |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 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 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 report. |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

 

| /s/ Nicholas J. Sutton  |
|-------------------------|
| Nicholas J. Sutton      |
| Chief Executive Officer |
| April 30, 2015          |
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed December 1, 

2011.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals 

____________ 

NO. 14-11-00975-CV

____________

GARY HORNDESKI, M.D., Appellant

V.

ALVIN G. WILLIAMSON, Appellee

On Appeal from the 10th District Court

Galveston County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 07-CV-0632

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

This is an appeal from a judgment signed August 5, 2011. On November 17, 

2011, the parties filed a motion to dismiss the appeal in order to effectuate a compromise 

and settlement agreement. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1. The motion is granted.

Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges, Justices Anderson and Christopher.
#### STATE ex rel. Charles C. CARPENTER, Plaintiff-Relator, v. SHERIFF OF CALCASIEU PARISH, Defendant-Respondent.

No. 3470.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.

March 10, 1971.

Charles C. Carpenter, in pro. per.

Before FRUGÉ, SAVOY and CUL-PEPPER, JJ.

ORIGINAL APPLICATION FOR HABEAS CORPUS

PER CURIAM.

The relator, Carpenter, seeks to invoke the supervisory jurisdiction of this court, requesting that a writ of habeas corpus be issued and relief be granted in matters arising out of his detention under criminal charges in the Calcasieu Parish jail.

Article 7, Sections 10 and 29, of the Louisiana Constitution of 1921 grants appellate jurisdiction to the Supreme Court of Louisiana in matters arising out of criminal confinement. A Louisiana court of appeal has neither appellate nor supervisory jurisdiction over matters arising out of commitment because of criminal proceedings. State ex rel. Jackson v. Sheriff of Caddo Parish, 236 So.2d 93 (La.App.3d Cir. 1970); State ex rel. Billodeaux v. Sheriff of Calcasieu Parish, 224 So.2d 541 (La.App. 3d Cir. 1969); State ex rel. Simien v. Sheriff of Calcasieu Parish, 186 So.2d 669 (La.App.3d Cir. 1966); State ex rel. Jones v. Sheriff of Calcasieu Parish, 185 So.2d 80 (La.App.3d Cir. 1966).

The relator’s application is therefore denied.

Writ denied.
EXHIBIT
32





CERTIFICATION
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 Progreen Properties, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended January 31, 2010 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jan
Telander, President and 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 to the best of my 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 result of
operations of the Company.





/s/ Jan TelanderJan
      Telander, President, Chief Executive Officerand
      Principal Financial Officer





March
17, 2010
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-6223

LEON LORENZO HARRIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus L. BARLOW, Superintendent PRJ; EDWARD I. GORDON, M.D.; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER, in Control Room; FRED HOOKS, INS inmate; INEZ MEEKS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-02-110-2) Submitted: June 9, 2005 Decided: June 15, 2005 Before NIEMEYER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Leon Lorenzo Harris, Appellant Pro Se. Carlene Booth Johnson, PERRY & WINDELS, Dillwyn, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Leon Lorenzo Harris appeals the district court’s January 5, 2005, order instructing Harris he may no longer file any papers in the action because it was dismissed on August 31, 2005. Because Harris has failed to establish error with respect to the January 5, 2005, order, we affirm. To the extent Harris desires to have this court review the August 31, 2005, order dismissing his complaint, we are without jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely as to that order. See Fed. R. App. P. 4. Accordingly, we affirm. We deny Harris’ motion seeking a transfer to another prison. 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
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 212 (Monday, November 3, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 59347]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-29026]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[I.D. 102797D]


North Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of Committee Meeting

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

SUMMARY: The North Pacific Fishery Management Council's Observer 
Advisory Committee (OAC) will meet in Seattle, WA.

DATES: The meeting will be held on Monday, November 24, 1997, beginning 
at 8:30 a.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Alaska Fisheries Science 
Center (Building 4, Observer Training Room) 7600 Sand Point Way, NE., 
Seattle, WA.
    Council address: North Pacific Fishery Management Council, 605 W. 
4th Ave., Suite 306, Anchorage, AK 99501-2252.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chris Oliver; telephone: 907-271-280 
9.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Committee will review a proposed joint 
partnership agreement structure and alternatives for the proposed 
third-party observer program.
    Although other issues not contained in this agenda may come before 
this Committee for discussion, in accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens 
Fishery Conservation and Management Act, those issues may not be the 
subject of formal Committee action during this meeting. Committee 
action will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in 
the agenda listed in this notice.

Special Accommodations

    This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. 
Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids 
should be directed to Helen Allen, 907-271-2809, at least 5 working 
days prior to the meeting date.

    Dated: October 28, 1997.
Bruce C. Morehead,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 97-29026 Filed 10-31-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
#### James E. GUSTAFSON, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 43704.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Dec. 19, 1973.

H. Franklin Robbins, Jr., James M. Russ, and Michael F. Cycmanick, the Law Offices of James M. Russ, Orlando, for petitioner.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and C. Marie Bernard, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari directed to the 4th District’s opinion reported at 273 So.2d 86 (1973), reflected apparent jurisdiction in this Court. We issued the writ and have heard argument of the parties. Upon further consideration of the matter we have determined that the cited decisions present no direct conflict as required by Article V, Section 3(b)(3) (1973), Florida Constitution, F.S.A. Therefore, the writ must be and is hereby

Discharged.

It is so ordered.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, ADKINS, BOYD and DEKLE, JJ., concur.

ERVIN and McCAIN, JJ., dissent.
##### 



Exhibit 23.1 Consent of Independent Auditors The Board of Directors
Corrpro Companies, Inc.: We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No.
333-58376) on Form S-8 of Corrpro Companies, Inc. and subsidiaries (Company) of
our report dated June 20, 2003, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of
Corrpro Companies, Inc. and subsidiaries as of March 31, 2003 and 2002, and the
related consolidated statements of operations, shareholders equity, and cash
flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended March 31, 2003,
which report appears in the March 31, 2003 Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of
Corrpro Companies, Inc. and subsidiaries. Our report dated June 20, 2003 contains an explanatory paragraph that states
the Company has suffered recurring losses from operations and was not in
compliance with certain financial covenants contained in its banking
agreements. These matters raise substantial doubt about the Companys ability
to continue as a going concern. The consolidated financial statements do not
include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of these
uncertainties. Our report refers to changes in the methods of accounting in fiscal 2003 for
goodwill and other intangible assets. /s/ KPMG LLP Cleveland, Ohio
February 13, 2004
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

     As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation
of our reports dated February 13, 1997, included in this Form 10-K into
Metrocall's previously filed Registration Statements on Form S-3, File No.
33-81606; Form S-3, File No. 33-92520; Form S-3, File No. 333-13123; Form S-8,
File No. 33-83452, and Form S-8; File No. 33-99556.

                                          ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

Washington, D.C.
March 28, 1997
From: Richard Parker [mailto:richardparkerdc@gmail.com] 

Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 6:01 PM 

To: tballo@earthjustice.org; ScottB@lvmetals.com; Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com; gbf1@pge.com; 

adelaski@standardsasap.org; rroy@nrdc.org; snadel@aceee.org; eduardorobles@eaton.com; 

rgreeson@federalpacific.com; vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com; chad.kennedy@us.schneiderelectric.com; john.caskey@nema.org; dave.millure@metglas.com; john.cymbalsky@ee.doe.gov; 

mark.e.stoering@xcelenergy.com; mwaltner@nrdc.org; carlosgsiqueiros@eaton.com; 

thomas.patzner@us.schneider-electric.com; paul.ryan@hitmet.com; Daniel.Cohen@hq.doe.gov; Robert 

Berman; Phil Hopkinson; Caitlin Johnson; Freeman, Jeremiah (CONTR); Michael Rivest; Brian Coffey; 

Zhimei Luo; Chris Bolduc 

Subject: Re: Roster of LV Committee Members 

Colleagues, 

Please look over the attached contact sheet previously distributed to make sure that our 

information for you is correct. Any additions, deletions, changes should be brought to the 

attention of Caitlin Johnson, caitlin.johnson@navigant.com, who is maintaining the master list. 

Thanks. 

On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 3:06 PM, Richard Parker <richardparkerdc@gmail.com> wrote: 

Dear Colleagues, 

Attached is a list of selected members and alternates for the Low-Voltage Transformer 

Negotiating Work Group. Like its Medium Voltage counterpart, it's a distinguished and broadly 

representative group chosen from nominations received in response to last month's Federal 

Register call for nominations. Though only committee members sit at the table and vote, all 

representatives, advocates and members of the public are welcome to attend our meetings and to 

speak. 

The first meeting of the Low-Voltage (LV) Committee will be Sept. 28 in Washington, DC, from 

9 am - 5 pm. Details to follow. 

I look forward to working with you. 

All best, 

Richard Parker 

Convenor and Facilitator
<PAGE>
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                    EXHIBIT 4.26



PROPOSAL EXHIBIT A - FIXED RATE

<Table>
<Caption>
TAKEDOWN DATE                                                      LEASE RATE FACTOR
-------------                                                      -----------------

<S>                                                                <C>
January 2003                                                           1.640275

February 2003                                                          1.638003

March 2003                                                             1.635806

April 2003                                                             1.633694

May 2003                                                               1.632312

June 2003                                                              1.630309

July 2003                                                              1.619320

August 2003                                                            1.616224

September 2003                                                         1.613053

October 2003                                                           1.613990

November 2003                                                          1.611044

December 2003                                                          1.608156
</Table>

Proposal is based on the following assumptions:

         o        Minimum funding amount is $5,000,000 and maximum funding
                  amount is $12,000,000 for calendar year 2003

         o        Payments are due on the 15th of each month
No. 9629.

#### Baird et al. *v.*Langenbach et al.

(Decided December 21, 1906.)

Error to Circuit Court of Harrison County.

*Mr. D. A. Hollingsworth,*for plaintiffs in error.

*Mr. C. C. Bow*and *Mr. R. H. Minteer,*for defendants in.error.

Judgment affirmed on' ground stated in journal entry in the circuit court.

Price, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.
# EUR-Lex - 32005R1788 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 32005R1788

**Commission Regulation (EC) No 1788/2005 of 28 October 2005 fixing the minimum selling price for skimmed-milk powder for the 28th individual invitation to tender issued under the standing invitation to tender referred to in Regulation (EC) No 214/2001 **

*
Official Journal L 288 , 29/10/2005 P. 0026 - 0026 *

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1788/2005

of 28 October 2005

fixing the minimum selling price for skimmed-milk powder for the 28th individual invitation to tender issued under the standing invitation to tender referred to in Regulation (EC) No 214/2001

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products [1], and in particular Article 10(c) thereof,

Whereas:

(1) Pursuant to Article 21 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 214/2001 of 12 January 2001 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 as regards intervention on the market in skimmed milk [2], intervention agencies have put up for sale by standing invitation to tender certain quantities of skimmed-milk powder held by them.

(2) In the light of the tenders received in response to each individual invitation to tender a minimum selling price shall be fixed or a decision shall be taken to make no award, in accordance with Article 24a of Regulation (EC) No 214/2001.

(3) In the light of the tenders received, a minimum selling price should be fixed.

(4) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the 28th individual invitation to tender pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 214/2001, in respect of which the time limit for the submission of tenders expired on 25 October 2005, the minimum selling price for skimmed milk is fixed at 186,00 EUR/100 kg.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 29 October 2005.

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

Done at Brussels, 28 October 2005.

For the Commission

Mariann Fischer Boel

Member of the Commission

[1] OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 48. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 186/2004 (OJ L 29, 3.2.2004, p. 6).

[2] OJ L 37, 7.2.2001, p. 100. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2250/2004 (OJ L 381, 28.12.2004, p. 25).

--------------------------------------------------
#### Evan KRAUS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-572.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Jan. 19, 1971.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 10, 1971.

Horton & Schwartz, and Gerald Kogan, Miami, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Melvin Grossman, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before PEARSON, C. J., and CHARLES CARROLL and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by the defendant from a judgment of conviction on two counts of possession and one count of sale of marijuana. Two one year sentences were imposed, to run concurrently, and probation was granted on one count. On consideration of the record and briefs we conclude no reversible error has been demonstrated, and affirm.

The motion to suppress, as evidence, the marijuana involved in the alleged sale, was properly denied on the showing relating to its custody, on the authority of Stunson v. State, Fla.App. 1969, 228 So.2d 294.

The appellant contends the judgment should be reversed and a new trial granted for denial by the trial court of his motion to require the state to disclose the identity of a confidential informant. The testimony presented by the state on the sale count revealed a sale of marijuana made by the defendant to an officer (who so testified) at a time when the informant was present. Appellant relies on Monserrate v. State, Fla.App.1970, 232 So.2d 444. That case is distinguishable. There the evidence disclosed that the sale of a drug was made to the informant, who then delivered it to an officer who it appears was present, whereas here the evidence showed the sale was made to the officer. In the situation presented in this case the failure to require disclosure of the state’s confidential informant was not reversible error. See Harrington v. State, Fla.App.1959, 110 So.2d 495, 497-498; Garcia v. State, Fla.App.1959, 110 So.2d 709, 711; Treverrow v. State, Fla.1967, 194 So.2d 250, 252. Cf. Roviaro v. United States, 353 U.S. 53, 59, 77 S.Ct. 623, 1 L.Ed.2d 639.

A further contention of the appellant is that the court committed error in denying his motion for mistrial made on the ground that the prosecutor in argument had commented on failure of the defendant to testify. We do not so view the prosecutor’s *215statement, which was a comment on the evidence. See Gray v. State, 42 Fla. 174, 28 So. 53, 54; Clinton v. State, 56 Fla. 57, 47 So. 389, 390.

Judgment affirmed.
Deutsche Investment Management Americas Inc.
                                  One Beacon Street
                                  Boston, MA 02108

                                  February 3, 2009



Securities and Exchange Commission
100 F Street, N.E.
Washington, DC  20549


RE:      DWS High Income Fund (the "Fund"), a series of DWS High Income Series
         (the "Trust") (Reg. No. 2-60330) (811-2786)


Ladies and Gentlemen:

Pursuant to Rule 497(j) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, the Fund
hereby certifies that the form of Prospectuses and Statements of Additional
Information that would have been filed on behalf of the Fund pursuant to Rule
497(c) upon the effectiveness of Post-Effective Amendment No. 54 to the Fund's
Registration Statement on Form N-1A (the "Amendment"), do not differ from that
contained in the Amendment, which is the most recent Amendment to such
Registration Statement and was filed electronically on January 28, 2009.

Any comments or questions on this filing should be directed to the undersigned
at (617) 295-3357.

                                 Very truly yours,


                                 /s/Thomas H. Connors

                                 Thomas H. Connors, Esq.
                                 Director and Senior Counsel
                                 Deutsche Investment Management Americas Inc.


cc:      Jose Del Real, Esq., Vedder Price P.C.