alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# EUR-Lex - 32005R1787 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 32005R1787

**Commission Regulation (EC) No 1787/2005 of 28 October 2005 fixing the minimum selling price for butter for the 29th individual invitation to tender issued under the standing invitation to tender referred to in Regulation (EC) No 2771/1999 **

*
Official Journal L 288 , 29/10/2005 P. 0025 - 0025 *

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1787/2005

of 28 October 2005

fixing the minimum selling price for butter for the 29th individual invitation to tender issued under the standing invitation to tender referred to in Regulation (EC) No 2771/1999

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 2771/1999 of 16 December 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 as regards intervention on the market in butter and cream [2], intervention agencies have put up for sale by standing invitation to tender certain quantities of butter 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 2771/1999.

(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 29th individual invitation to tender pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 2771/1999, in respect of which the time limit for the submission of tenders expired on 25 October 2005, the minimum selling price for butter is fixed at 261,00 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 333, 24.12.1999, p. 11. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2250/2004 (OJ L 381, 28.12.2004, p. 25).

--------------------------------------------------
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

402 CAF 11-00665 PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, CARNI, AND SCONIERS, JJ.

IN THE MATTER OF WYQUANZA J. AND SINCERE J.

------------------------------------------- ERIE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PETITIONER-RESPONDENT;

LISA J., RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.

ALAN BIRNHOLZ, EAST AMHERST, FOR RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.

JOSEPH T. JARZEMBEK, BUFFALO, FOR PETITIONER-RESPONDENT.

DAVID C. SCHOPP, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILDREN, THE LEGAL AID BUREAU OF BUFFALO, INC., BUFFALO (CHARLES D. HALVORSEN OF COUNSEL), FOR WYQUANZA J. AND SINCERE J.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Erie County (Margaret O. Szczur, J.), entered March 7, 2011 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10. The order, among other things, adjudged that respondent had abused and neglected the subject children.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: Respondent mother appeals from an order determining that she abused and neglected her two-month-old child and derivatively abused and neglected her two-year-old child. We reject the mother’s contention that the evidence is legally insufficient to support the determination. Petitioner presented evidence, including the testimony of a physician, establishing that the younger child sustained fractures of his left humerus, right humerus, left tibia and several ribs, and that the injuries were inflicted at different times. Petitioner thereby established a prima facie case of child abuse and neglect with respect to the younger child pursuant to Family Court Act § 1046 (a) (ii), “and the mother failed to rebut the presumption of parental responsibility” ( Matter of Seth G. , 50 AD3d 1530, 1531; see Matter of Michael I ., 276 AD2d 839, 840-841, lv denied 96 NY2d 701; see generally Matter of Philip M. , 82 NY2d 238, 245-247).
Petitioner also established by a preponderance of the evidence that the older child was derivatively abused and neglected, inasmuch as the abuse and neglect of the younger child “is so closely connected with the care of [the older] child as to indicate that [he] is equally at risk” ( Matter of Marino S ., 100 NY2d 361, 374, cert denied 540 US 1059). Indeed, the abuse and neglect of the younger child-2- 402 CAF 11-00665
“demonstrates such an impaired level of judgment by the [mother] as to create a substantial risk of harm for any child in her care” ( Matter of Aaron McC ., 65 AD3d 1149, 1150).

Entered: March 23, 2012 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
Form Approved OMB No:2030-0020 Approval Expires 04/2012

 ADDITIONAL KEY CONTACTS (Use as many sheets as needed.) 

Major Co-Investigators: Individual responsible for the completion of major portions of the proposed 

work.

Name: _____________________________________________________________________________ 

Title: ______________________________________________________________________________ 

Mailing Address: ____________________________________________________________________ 

___________________________________________________________________________________ 

Phone Number: ______________________________________________________________________ 

FAX Number: _______________________________________________________________________ 

E-Mail Address: _____________________________________________________________________ 

Web URL: __________________________________________________________________________

Major Co-Investigators: Individual responsible for the completion of major portions of the proposed 

work.

Name: _____________________________________________________________________________ 

Title: ______________________________________________________________________________ 

Mailing Address: ____________________________________________________________________ 

___________________________________________________________________________________ 

Phone Number: ______________________________________________________________________ 

FAX Number: _______________________________________________________________________ 

E-Mail Address: _____________________________________________________________________ 

Web URL: __________________________________________________________________________

Major Co-Investigators: Individual responsible for the completion of major portions of the proposed 

work.

Name: _____________________________________________________________________________ 

Title: ______________________________________________________________________________ 

Mailing Address: ____________________________________________________________________ 

___________________________________________________________________________________ 

Phone Number: ______________________________________________________________________ 

FAX Number: _______________________________________________________________________ 

E-Mail Address: _____________________________________________________________________ 

Web URL: __________________________________________________________________________

EPA Form 5700-54 (Rev 04/2012)
**Exhibit 32.01**

 

**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 Annual Report of FX Energy, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, David N. Pierce, 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 and belief:

 

|   | (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/ David N. Pierce

David N. Pierce

Chief Executive Officer

March 16, 2009

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 99.2

                            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 TargitInteractive, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending September 30, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Brian Richardson, Senior Controller of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.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 result of operations of
         the Company.




                                      /s/ Brian Richardson
                                      -----------------------------------
                                      Brian Richardson, Senior Controller

November 19, 2002
Exhibit 32









CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report of RedCell Power Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I Cameron King, Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(1)

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



(2)

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









/s/ Cameron King___



Cameron King

Chief Executive Officer, Acting Chief Financial Officer

April 22, 2005











---
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3703 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3703

 To clarify that an issuer may exclude a shareholder proposal pursuant 
   to section 240.14a-8(i) of title 17, Code of Federal Regulations, 
without regard to whether that proposal relates to a significant social 
                             policy issue.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 31, 2024

  Mr. Hagerty introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
    referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To clarify that an issuer may exclude a shareholder proposal pursuant 
   to section 240.14a-8(i) of title 17, Code of Federal Regulations, 
without regard to whether that proposal relates to a significant social 
                             policy issue.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Rejecting Extremist Shareholder 
Proposals that Inhibit and Thwart Enterprise for Businesses Act'' or 
the ``RESPITE for Businesses Act''.

SEC. 2. EXCLUSIONS AVAILABLE REGARDLESS OF SIGNIFICANT SOCIAL POLICY 
              ISSUE.

    An issuer may exclude a shareholder proposal pursuant to section 
240.14a-8(i) of title 17, Code of Federal Regulations, or any successor 
regulation, without regard to whether that shareholder proposal relates 
to a significant social policy issue.
                                 <all>
```
1... See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.4.

COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 2-08-141-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF K.A.P. AND D.R.P., CHILDREN

----------

FROM THE 16 DISTRICT COURT OF DENTON COUNTY TH

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT 1

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

Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal from the trial court’s March 20,

2008 “Order Holding Respondent In Contempt For Failure To Pay Child Support,

Granting Judgment For Arrearages, And Suspending Commitment.” The trial

court subsequently granted appellant’s motion for new trial on April 17, 2008,

while it still had plenary jurisdiction over the case. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 329b(e).

On April 30, 2008, we informed the parties that it appeared the trial

court’s granting of the motion for new trial rendered this appeal moot and that
2

the appeal would be dismissed as moot unless, on or before May 12, 2008, any

party desiring to continue the appeal filed a response showing grounds for

continuing the appeal. Neither party filed a response.

Therefore, on this court’s own motion, we dismiss the appeal as moot.

See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f). 

PER CURIAM

PANEL D: DAUPHINOT, HOLMAN, and GARDNER, JJ.

DELIVERED: May 29, 2008
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            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 Diversified Product
Inspections, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30,
2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, John Van Zyll, Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer
and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

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

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


Dated: November 14, 2006                   By: /s/ John Van Zyll
                                               ---------------------------------
                                               John Van Zyll
                                               Chief Executive Officer, Chairman
                                               of the Board and Chief Financial
                                               Officer
# L_2005091EN.01001201.xml

| 9.4.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 91/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.4.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 91/12

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 548/2005

of 8 April 2005

on the issue of import licences for high-quality fresh, chilled or frozen beef and veal

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in beef and veal (1),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 936/97 of 27 May 1997 opening and providing for the administration of tariff quotas for high-quality fresh, chilled and frozen beef and for frozen buffalo meat (2),

Whereas:

| (1) | Regulation (EC) No 936/97 provides in Articles 4 and 5 the conditions for applications and for the issue of import licences for meat referred to in Article 2(f). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Regulation (EC) No 936/97 provides in Articles 4 and 5 the conditions for applications and for the issue of import licences for meat referred to in Article 2(f).

| (2) | Article 2(f) of Regulation (EC) No 936/97 fixes the amount of high-quality fresh, chilled or frozen beef and veal meeting the definition laid down therein which may be imported on special terms for the period 1 July 2004 to 30 June 2005 at 11 500 t. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Article 2(f) of Regulation (EC) No 936/97 fixes the amount of high-quality fresh, chilled or frozen beef and veal meeting the definition laid down therein which may be imported on special terms for the period 1 July 2004 to 30 June 2005 at 11 500 t.

| (3) | It should be recalled that licences issued pursuant to this Regulation will, throughout the period of validity, be open for use only in so far as provisions on health protection in force permit, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

It should be recalled that licences issued pursuant to this Regulation will, throughout the period of validity, be open for use only in so far as provisions on health protection in force permit,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

1.   All applications for import licences from 1 to 5 April 2005 for high-quality fresh, chilled or frozen beef and veal as referred to in Article 2(f) of Regulation (EC) No 936/97 shall be granted in full.

2.   Applications for licences may be submitted, in accordance with Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 936/97, during the first five days of May 2005 for 9 369,992 t.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 11 April 2005.

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

Done at Brussels, 8 April 2005.

For the Commission

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 21. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 (OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 1).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 137, 28.5.1997, p. 10. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1118/2004 (OJ L 217, 17.6.2004, p. 10).

2

---
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1039 

CA 14-00100 

PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, VALENTINO, WHALEN, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ. 

 

CHERYL DOBINSKI, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

GEORGE O. LOCKHART AND MILAGROS LOCKHART, 

DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

 

WALSH, ROBERTS & GRACE, BUFFALO (MARK P. DELLA POSTA OF COUNSEL), FOR

DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS. 

DENNIS J. BISCHOF, LLC, WILLIAMSVILLE (DENNIS J. BISCHOF OF COUNSEL), 

FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.

 

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Diane Y.

Devlin, J.), entered November 15, 2013. The order denied the motion

of defendants for summary judgment dismissing the amended complaint. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is

unanimously reversed on the law without costs, the motion is granted,

and the amended complaint is dismissed. 

Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this action seeking damages for

injuries she sustained when she collided with a dog owned by

defendants while riding her bicycle in front of defendants’ house. We

agree with defendants that Supreme Court erred in denying their motion

seeking summary judgment dismissing the amended complaint. Here,

defendants met their initial burden by establishing that they lacked

actual or constructive knowledge that the dog had a propensity to

interfere with traffic (see Myers v MacCrea, 61 AD3d 1385, 1386; see

also Smith v Reilly, 17 NY3d 895, 896; Buicko v Neto, 112 AD3d 1046,

1046-1047). In opposition to the motion, plaintiff failed to raise a

triable issue of fact in that respect (see Buicko, 112 AD3d at 1047;

Myers, 61 AD3d at 1386; see generally Zuckerman v City of New York, 49

NY2d 557, 562). We therefore reverse the order, grant defendants’

motion, and dismiss the amended complaint.

Entered: October 3, 2014 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
Exhibit 32
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADDED BY
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; and2.
    
    The information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the consolidated financial condition and results of
the Company as of and for the period covered by this Report.
 By:
    /s/ Tim CarterTim CarterPresident and Chief Executive
Officer March 10, 2011By:
    /s/ Deborah B. WilkinsonDeborah B. WilkinsonSenior Executive Vice President and 
Chief Financial Officer March 10, 2011
Exhibit 32.1






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 Annual Report of AIVTech International Group Co. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, JinLin Guo, Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




(1)

The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(2)

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




AIVTECH INTERNATIONAL GROUP CO.Date: March 31, 2011
By:
/s/ JinLin GuoJinLin Guo

President, CEO and Chairman of the Board of Directors
Part III - Administrative, Procedural, and Miscellaneous 

Clarification of Troubled Asset Relief Program funds under section 597 

Notice 2008-101 

 The purpose of this notice is to provide clarification on the treatment under 

section 597 of the Internal Revenue Code (Code) of amounts furnished to a financial 

institution pursuant to the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) of the Emergency 

Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, Div. A of Pub. Law No. 110-343 (EESA), which was 

enacted on October 3, 2008. 

Unless and until guidance is issued by the Department of the Treasury and the 

Internal Revenue Service to the contrary, no amount furnished by the Department of the 

Treasury to a financial institution pursuant to the TARP established by the Secretary 

under EESA will be treated as the provision of Federal financial assistance within the 

meaning of section 597 of the Code and the regulations thereunder. Any future contrary 

guidance will not apply to transactions with the Department of the Treasury, or to 

securities issued by financial institutions to the Department of the Treasury, prior to the 

publication of that guidance, or pursuant to written binding contracts entered into prior 

to that date. 

Except with respect to the treatment of amounts furnished pursuant to TARP as 
expressly described in this notice, no inference should be drawn from this notice 

regarding the treatment under section 597 of the Code or the regulations thereunder of 

any other program or payments.