alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**List of CP Cultivars Released Since 1969**  **a** ******* **Major cultivar   ** At least 5 %** *** of acreage**  1. CP 50 -28 1969 2. CP 56 - 59** 1969 3. CP 56 - 63 1969 4. CP 57 - 603 1969 5. CP 57 - 357** Louisiana 6. CP 57 - 614 1969 7. CP 59 - 73 1969 8. CP 62 - 374 1969 9. CP 63 - 306 1969 10. CP 63 - 588** 1969 11. CP 68 - 1026 1976 12. CP 68 - 1067 1972 13. CP 69 - 1052 1980 14. CP 70 - 1133 ** 1978 15. CP 70 - 1527 1984 16. CP 71 - 1038 1983 17. CP 72 - 1210 ** 1981 18. CP 72 -2086 ** 1984 19. CP 73 - 1547 * 1982

a This C anal P oint list is directly from the C anal P oint breeding program20. CP 74 -2005 * 1983

21. CP 75 - 1084 1986 22. CP 75 - 1553 1986 23. CP 75 - 1632 1984 24. CP 77 - 1776 1988 25. CP 78 - 1247 1988 26. CP 78 - 1628 ** 1991 27. CP 78 -2114 * 1986 28. CP 80 - 1743 ** 1993 29. CP 80 - 1557 1990 30. CP 80 - 1827 ** 1990 31. CP 81 - 1238 1994 32. CP 81 - 1254 1991 33. CP 81 - 1302 1991 34. CP 85 - 1382 1995 35. CP 81 - 1384 1993 36. CP 82 - 1172 1991 37. CP 82 - 1592 1991 38. CP 84 - 1198 ** 1994 39. CP 84 - 1591 1996 40. CP 85 - 1308 199541. CP 85 - 1432 1994

42. CP 85 - 1491 1994 43. CP 86 - 1633 1995 44. CP 84 - 1591 1996 45. CP 85 - 1308 1995 46. CP 85 - 1382 1995 47. CP 86 - 1633 1995 48. CP 88 - 1165 2008 49. CP 88 - 1508 1997 50. CP 88 - 1540 2000 51. CP 88 - 1762 ** 1997 52. CP 88 - 1834 2000 53. CP 89 - 1509 2000 54. CP 89 -2143 ** 2000 55. CP 89 -2376 2005 56. CP 89 -2377 2000 57. CP 92 - 1213 2001 58. CP 92 - 1641 2001 59. CP 92 - 1666 2001 60. CP 94 - 1100 2004 61. CP 94 - 1340 2004 62. CP 96 - 1252 200563. CP 96 - 1602 2005

64. CP 97 - 1989 2005 65. CP 97 - 1944 2005 66. CP 98 - 1029 2006 67. CP 00 - 1101 2008 (muck and sand) 68. CP 00 - 1446 2009 (sand) 69. CP 00 -2180 2009 (sand) 70. CP 01 - 1372 2009 (muck and sand) 71. CPCL97 -2730 2009 (sand) 72. CPCL99 -4455 2009 (muck and sand) 73. CPCL00 -4111 201 0 (muck) 74. CP 03 - 1912 201 0 (sand) 75. . CPCL02 - 1295 2011 (muck and sand) 76. CPCL02 - 0926 2011 (muck and sand) 77. CPCL95 -22 87 2011 (muck) 78. CP 04 - 1566 2011(sand) 79. CP 04 - 1844 2011 (sand) 80. CP 04 - 1935 2011 (sand) 81. CP 05 - 1526 2012 (muck and sand) 82. CPCL02 - 6848 2012 (muck and sand) 83. CPCL05 - 1102 2012 (muck) 84. CPCL05 - 1201 2012 (muck)85. CPCL05 - 1791 2012 (sand)
#### Phillip Dorr JOHNSTON, Appellant, v. Jeannette Eva JOHNSTON, Appellee.

No. I-394.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. First District.

Sept. 5, 1967.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
# C_2021490EN.01004501.xml

| 6.12.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 490/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.12.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 490/45

---

Order of the President of the General Court of 8 October 2021 — Paccor Packaging v Commission

(Case T-148/21 R)

(Interim relief - Environment - Directive (EU) 2019/904 - Reduction of the impact of certain plastic products on the environment - Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/2151 - Harmonised marking specifications for beverage cups - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - No urgency)

(2021/C 490/54)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Paccor Packaging GmbH (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: P. Kugel and G. Dávid, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: S. Bourgois and L. Haasbeek, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Articles 278 and 279 TFEU for suspension of the operation of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/2151 of 17 December 2020 laying down rules on harmonised marking specifications on single-use plastic products listed in Part D of the Annex to Directive (EU) 2019/904 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the reduction of the impact of certain plastic products on the environment (OJ 2020 L 428, p. 57).

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The application for interim measures is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The application for interim measures is dismissed.

| 2. | The costs are reserved. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The costs are reserved.

---
Exhibit
31.1





CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER








I, Mary
G. Merritt, certify that:





1. I have
reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Preferred Voice,
Inc.;





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





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





4. I am
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures
(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant
and I have:





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





b.
evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and





c.
presented in this quarterly report my conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures based on my evaluation as of the Evaluation
Date;





5. I have
disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and
the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent function):





a. all
significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which
could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize
and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's auditors any
material weaknesses in internal controls; and





b. any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and





6. I have
indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes
in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect
internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation,
including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and
material weaknesses.







/s/ Mary G.
Merritt




Mary G.
Merritt


Chief
Executive Officer


(Principal
Executive Officer


and
Principal Financial Officer)


August 8,
2008
#### Jeffery PINCKNEY and Allen Pinckney, Appellants, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. T-156.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 14, 1974.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### Richard M. SAFFIR, and all those persons serviced by Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Company, etc., Appellant, v. SOUTHERN BELL TELEPHONE & TELEGRAPH COMPANY, etc., Appellee.

No. 72-161.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

June 6, 1972.

Rehearing Denied July 7, 1972.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
# C_2022213EN.01001501.xml

| 30.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 213/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 213/15

---

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 7 April 2022 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht, Autonome Sektion für die Provinz Bozen — Italy) — KW (C-102/21), SG (C-103/21) v Autonome Provinz Bozen

(Joined Cases C-102/21 and C-103/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Aid granted by Member States - Aid scheme for the construction of mini-hydroelectric power plants - Alpine and mountain huts without connection to an electricity grid - Authorisation by the European Commission - Expiry)

(2022/C 213/18)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht, Autonome Sektion für die Provinz Bozen

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: KW (C-102/21), SG (C-103/21)

Defendant: Autonome Provinz Bozen

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | The authorisation for the aid scheme for the construction of mini-hydroelectric power plants resulting from Commission Decision C(2012) 5048 final of 25 July 2012 on State aid SA.32113 (2010/N) — Italy: Aid scheme for energy savings, district heating and electrification of remote areas in Alto Adige/South Tyrol was no longer in force when the Autonome Provinz Bozen (Autonomous Province of Bolzano, Italy) granted subsidies to KW and SG; |
| --- | --- |

1.

The authorisation for the aid scheme for the construction of mini-hydroelectric power plants resulting from Commission Decision C(2012) 5048 final of 25 July 2012 on State aid SA.32113 (2010/N) — Italy: Aid scheme for energy savings, district heating and electrification of remote areas in Alto Adige/South Tyrol was no longer in force when the Autonome Provinz Bozen (Autonomous Province of Bolzano, Italy) granted subsidies to KW and SG;

| 2. | Article 108(3) TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that the European Commission is not required to request the Member State to recover unlawful aid within the meaning of Article 1(f) of Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 of 13 July 2015 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Article 108(3) TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that the European Commission is not required to request the Member State to recover unlawful aid within the meaning of Article 1(f) of Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 of 13 July 2015 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

---

(1)  OJ C 217, 7.6.2021.

---
#### STATE of Louisiana v. James MONK, Jr.

No. 63010.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 15, 1978.

In re: James Monk, Jr. applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and stay order.

Writ denied. Adequate remedy by review in the event of conviction.
II

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1229

To repeal the provisions of the Service Contract Act of 1965.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 14 (legislative day, JUNE 30), 1993

Mr. BROWN (for himself, Mr. MCCAIN, Mr. PRESSLER, Mr. MACK, Mr.

SMITH, Mr. FAIRCLOTH, MR. BENNETT, and Mr. CRAIG) introduced the

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

Labor and Human Resources

A BILL

To repeal the provisions of the Service Contract Act of

1965.

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

3 SECTION 1. REPEAL.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Service Contract Act of 1965

5 (41 U.S.C. 351 et seq.) is repealed.

6 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The repeal under subsection

7 (a) shall be effective on and after the date of the enact8 ment of this Act and such repealed provisions may not

9 be enforced with regard to any contract entered into

10 before the date of the enactment of this Act.
2

•S 1229 IS

Æ
# C_2021098EN.01001801.xml

| 22.3.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 98/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.3.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 98/18

---

Action brought on 1 February 2021 — European Commission v Kingdom of Belgium

(Case C-60/21)

(2021/C 98/18)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: W. Roels, V. Uher, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Belgium

Form of order sought

The Commission claims that the Court should:

| — | Declare that, by maintaining provisions that: |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare that, by maintaining provisions that:

by refusing the deduction of maintenance annuities or capital sums in lieu of such annuities and supplementary annuities from taxable income to debenture holders who are not resident in Belgium and who receive less than 75 % of their professional income there and who cannot benefit from the same deduction in their Member State of residence on the basis of the small amount of their taxable income in that State,

the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 45 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and Article 28 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA), and

| — | Order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of its action, the Commission relies on a single plea in law alleging that the legislation at issue is liable to deter non-resident taxpayers from exercising the freedoms of movement ensured by the Treaties and, more particularly, the freedom of movement of workers laid down in Article 45 TFEU and Article 28 of the EEA Agreement.

A non-resident taxpayer who does not derive at least 75 % of his or her taxable professional income from Belgium and who cannot effectively benefit from the deduction of maintenance annuities in his or her State of residence in the absence of sufficient taxable income in that State is deprived by Belgian legislation of the benefit of any deduction of those annuities. However, it follows from the case-law of the Court of Justice and in particular its judgment of 10 May 2012 in Case C-39/10, European Commission v Estonia that, in such a case, it is for the State of employment to take into account the personal and family circumstances of the non-resident taxpayer.

---
#### Willie Mae MARTIN v. STATE of Mississippi.

Misc. No. 88.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

May 26, 1969.

Martha Wood, Jackson, for appellant.

A. F. Summer, Atty. Gen., by G. Garland Lyell, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.

ROBERTSON, Justice:

ON MOTION

The motion to set bail pending appeal of a post-conviction order of the Circuit Court of Choctaw County is denied. See Petition of Broom, 251 Miss. 25, 168 So.2d 44 (1964).

All Justices concur.
II

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1242

To extend the temporary suspension of the duty on 4-chloro-2-nitroaniline.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 15 (legislative day, JUNE 30), 1993

Mr. CHAFEE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To extend the temporary suspension of the duty on 4-chloro2-nitroaniline.

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

3 SECTION 1. 4-CHLORO-2-NITROANILINE.

4 Heading 9902.29.25 of subchapter II of chapter 99

5 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States

6 is amended by striking ‘‘12/31/92’’ and inserting

7 ‘‘12/31/94’’.

8 SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

9 (a) IN GENERAL.—The amendment made by this Act

10 applies with respect to articles entered, or withdrawn from
2

•S 1242 IS

1 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after

2 the date of the enactment of this Act.

3 (b) RELIQUIDATION.—Notwithstanding section 514

4 of the Tariff Act of 1930 or any other provision of law,

5 upon proper request filed with the appropriate customs of6 ficer on or before the 90th day after the date of the enact7 ment of this Act, any entry of an article described in sub8 heading 9902.29.25 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of

9 the United States that was made—

10 (1) after December 31, 1992, and

11 (2) before the date which is 15 days after the

12 date of the enactment of this Act,

13 shall be liquidated or reliquidated as though such entry

14 occurred on or after the date that is 15 days after the

15 date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.3

                             WEBLINK WIRELESS, INC.
                    COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS (LOSS)

<Table>
<Caption>

                                                                 SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 2002
                                                        ------------------------------------------------
                                                          NUMBER            PERCENT         EQUIVALENT
                                                        OF SHARES         OUTSTANDING         SHARES
                                                        ----------        -----------     --------------
<S>                                                     <C>               <C>             <C>
COMMON STOCK
   From Founders' Stock                                  2,300,000          100.00%            2,300,000
   Stock Options Exercised                               2,508,997          100.00%            2,508,997
   Preferred Stock Converted to Common Stock            15,310,943          100.00%           15,310,943
   1994 Common Stock Offerings                          11,242,857          100.00%           11,242,857
   1995 Common Stock Offerings                           4,323,874          100.00%            4,323,874
   1996 Common Stock Offering                            6,000,000          100.00%            6,000,000
   1999 Treasury Stock Transaction                          (6,588)         100.00%               (6,588)
   March 2000 Debt Swap                                  3,789,715          100.00%            3,789,715
   Canadian Transaction                                    714,286          100.00%              714,286
   Cancelation/Surrender of Stock                         (291,723)         100.00%             (291,723)
   Employee Stock Purchase Plan Shares Issued              190,651          100.00%              190,651
   Warrants Exercised                                      134,737          100.00%              134,737
                                                        ----------                        --------------
                                                        46,217,749                            46,217,749

WEIGHTED AVERAGE SHARES OUTSTANDING                                                           46,217,749

NET LOSS                                                                                  $  (18,969,202)

NET LOSS PER SHARE                                                                        $        (0.41)
                                                                                          ==============
</Table>
#### John Joseph RICH, Jr., Appellant, v. Robert A. GEORGE, Appellee.

No. 69-633.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

July 8, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
Exhibit
32.1




CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) OF THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AND 18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
OF 2002






Each of
the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities
and Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
and the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.





This 13th
day of March 2009.








/s/ David D.
Stovall


Chief
Executive Officer








/s/ Annette
Banks


Chief
Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Statement of Financial Condition at June 30, 1999 (Unaudited) and the
Statement of Operations for the three months ended June 30, 1999 (Unaudited)
and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                       6,949,284
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   41,231
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,500
<INVENTORY>                                    205,979
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             7,315,378
<PP&E>                                         451,344
<DEPRECIATION>                                 129,454
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,999,121
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          576,042
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       164,128
<OTHER-SE>                                   7,250,011
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,999,121
<SALES>                                        206,013
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               206,013
<CGS>                                          364,618
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,400,421
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               110,218
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 217
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (5,084,407)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (5,084,407)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.34)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.34)


</TABLE>
# C_2022024EN.01001102.xml

| 17.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/11

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Okręgowy w Warszawie (Poland) lodged on 21 July 2021 — J.K., B.K. v Przedsiębiorstwo Państwowe X

(Case C-452/21)

(2022/C 24/15)

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Okręgowy w Warszawie

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants: J.K., B.K.

Respondent: Przedsiębiorstwo Państwowe X

Question referred

Must Article 191(1) and (2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Articles 7, 17 and 37 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, read in conjunction with Article 1(1) and Articles 2, 8 and 9 of Directive 2002/49/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 June 2002 relating to the assessment and management of environmental noise, (1) be interpreted as precluding an interpretation of a provision of national law, namely Article 129(4) of the Ustawa z dnia 27 kwietnia 2001 r. — Prawo ochrony środowiska (Environmental Protection Law of 27 April 2001), which provides for a time limit of three years for bringing a claim related to a restriction on the manner of use of property, and which prevents the owners of property within a restricted use area associated with the operation of an airport from obtaining compensation for a reduction in the value of their property and reimbursement for the costs of soundproofing, as in the present case?

---

(1)  OJ 2002 L 189, p. 12.

---