alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### CITY OF MIAMI, a municipal corporation of the State of Florida, Appellant, v. CITY OF CORAL GABLES, a municipal corporation of the State of Florida, Appellee.

Nos. 70-936, 70-943.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Nov. 3, 1970.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 25, 1970.

*500Alan H. Rothstein, City Atty., and Jack R. Rice, Jr., and John S. Lloyd, Asst. City Attys., for appellant.

Charles H. Spooner, City Atty., and Carr & Warren, Miami, for appellee.

Before PEARSON, C. J., and BARK-DULL and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This is another chapter in the saga of “Old Smokey”. Following the decision of this court, reported in City of Miami v. City of Coral Gables, Fla.App.1970, 233 So.2d 7, the matter proceeded for further hearing before the chancellor to determine if the City of Miami had corrected the “deleterious condition” at its Coconut Grove incinerator, at which time the trial judge refused to permit the evidence or proffer which related to a plan to abate the nuisance in the future, and permitted the Dade County Pollution Officer to testify as an expert. At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial judge [by his orders] enjoined the operation of “Old Smokey” and reserved jurisdiction to render such further orders as might be proper under the circumstances. This appeal ensued, contending the trial judge erred in issuing the injunction, abused his discretion in declining the evidence and the proffer tendered, and committed error in permitting the expert to testify. We find no error in the orders here under review, and affirm.

The incinerator had already been declared to be a nuisance, which ruling was sustained on appeal. The proposed evidence and proffer did not tend to abate the nuisance, and it was appropriate for the court to deny same. No error has been demonstrated in permitting the expert to testify. Krohne v. Orlando Farming Corporation, Fla.App.1958, 102 So.2d 399; Home Insurance Company v. Wiggins, Fla.App.1962, 147 So.2d 157; Troj v. Smith, Fla.App.1967, 199 So.2d 285.

Therefore, the orders here under review be and the same are hereby affirmed.

Affirmed.
# C_2021252EN.01003905.xml

| 28.6.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 252/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.6.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 252/39

---

Order of the General Court of 6 May 2021 — Precisis v EUIPO — Easee (EASEE)

(Case T-66/21) (1)

(2021/C 252/67)

Language of the case: English

The President of the Tenth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 88, 15.3.2021.

---
```

[Federal Register: August 9, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 152)]
[Notices]               
[Page 47795-47796]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr09au10-40]                         

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

 
Sunshine Act Meetings

Time and Date: Wednesday, August 11, 2010; 11 a.m.-12 Noon.

Place: Hearing Room 420, Bethesda Towers, 4330 East West Highway, 
Bethesda, Maryland.

Status: Closed to the Public.

Matters to be Considered: Compliance Status Report.
    The Commission staff will brief the Commission on the status of 
compliance matters.
    For a recorded message containing the latest agenda information, 
call (301) 504-7948.

Contact Person for More Information: Todd A. Stevenson, Office of the 
Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West 
Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, (301) 504-7923.

[[Page 47796]]

    Dated: August 5, 2010.
Alberta Mills,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-19729 Filed 8-5-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
```
IV

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 6

Providing for the designation of certain minority employees.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 5, 1993

Mr. MICHEL submitted the following resolution; which was considered and

agreed to

RESOLUTION

Providing for the designation of certain minority employees.

Resolved, That pursuant to the Legislative Pay Act of

1929, as amended, the six minority employees authorized

therein shall be the following named persons, effective January 3, 1993, until otherwise ordered by the House, to-wit:

William R. Pitts, Jr., Walter P. Kennedy, Ronald W. Lasch,

Jay Pierson, William Gavin and B. Robert Okun, each to receive gross compensation pursuant to the provisions of House
2

•HRES 6 ATH

Resolution 119, Ninety-fifth Congress, as enacted into permanent law by section 115 of Public Law 95–94.

Attest:

Clerk.
Exhibit 32.1  SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION  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 Medizone International, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Edwin G. Marshall, 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, 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/ Edwin G. Marshall Edwin G. Marshall, Principal Executive Officer  Date: July 23, 2008  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 32.2



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 on Form 10-QSB ("Form 10-QSB") of Smart-tek

Solutions, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended September 30,2005 as filed with

the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Denis Gallant, 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 Form 10-QSB 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 Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all

material respects, the financial condition and results of operations

of the Company.



/s/ Denis Gallant

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

Denis Gallant

Chief Financial Officer

November 17, 2005
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1050 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to ensure the issuance of regulations 

applicable to the Coast Guard regarding consideration of a request for 

a permanent change of station or unit transfer submitted by a member 

of the Coast Guard who is the victim of a sexual assault. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 23, 2013 

Ms. COLLINS (for herself, Mrs. MCCASKILL, Mr. BLUNT, Mr. BLUMENTHAL, 

Ms. MURKOWSKI, Mr. BEGICH, Mr. COCHRAN, Mr. JOHANNS, Ms. 

AYOTTE, Mrs. GILLIBRAND, and Ms. KLOBUCHAR) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

A BILL 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to ensure the 

issuance of regulations applicable to the Coast Guard 

regarding consideration of a request for a permanent 

change of station or unit transfer submitted by a member 

of the Coast Guard who is the victim of a sexual assault. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Coast Guard STRONG 

5 Act’’. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1050 IS

1 SEC. 2. ISSUANCE OF REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE 

2 COAST GUARD REGARDING CONSIDERATION 

3 OF REQUEST FOR PERMANENT CHANGE OF 

4 STATION OR UNIT TRANSFER BY VICTIM OF 

5 SEXUAL ASSAULT. 

6 Section 673(b) of title 10, United States Code, is 

7 amended by striking ‘‘The Secretaries of the military de8 partments’’ and inserting ‘‘The Secretary concerned’’. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### LAKE FOREST RACQUET CLUB, INC. v. LAKE FOREST, INC.

No. 62826.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 22, 1978.

In re: Lake Forest Racquet Club, Inc., applying for writs of review, certiorari and mandamus. Parish of Orleans.

Writ denied.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

February 7, 2011 

0131 

Order 

 

February 7, 2011 

141935 

ANTHONY HANSKNECHT, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 141935 

 COA: 297010 

Ionia CC: 2009-027135-CZ 

CLEAR CHANNEL BROADCASTING, 

INC., d/b/a B-93 and WBCT-FM, 

Defendant-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the September 8, 2010 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
From: John Summerhays/R5/USEPA/US To: "Schmidt Cortney" <CKSchmidt@vcsmc.com>, Cc: "Straw Ann" <ALStraw@vcnainc.com>, "Cox Dirk" <DACox@vcsmc.com>, FDindoffer@BODMANLAW.COM, "Gower Matthew" <MMGower@vcsmc.com>, Daniel Schaufelberger/R5/USEPA/US@EPA, Douglas Aburano/R5/USEPA /US@EPA, Jane Woolums/R5/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 10/15/2012 02:32 PM Subject: Cost-Effectiveness and Emissions Calculations



### Cortney and others:

Again, thank you for coming to Chicago and participating in a productive meeting.

Attached are three files. The first file provides emissions data for your facility in excel format. Of particular interest are the 30-day averages (computed on a 30 consecutive operating day basis) and the 12-month averages (computed on a calendar month basis). These averages are computed using data from 2006 to 2008, which are the 3 most recent years of data that we have. The values 2 standard deviations above the mean, which with a normal distribution would be the 97.7th percentile, are 5.824 pounds per ton of clinker and 4.768 pounds per ton of clinker, respectively.

The second file provides sample calculations of cost effectiveness for two control options, also in excel format. The first worksheet provides cost estimates for an option based on the existing plant configuration, accounting for capital costs for modest structural changes to minimize material buildup and some production losses. The second worksheet address an option based on the existing configuration supplemented by a system for injecting lime. These worksheets are predicated on a 12-month NOx emission limits of 3.4 pounds per ton of clinker, which is about 30 percent below the mean plus two standard deviations value of 4.768 pounds per ton of clinker and about 25 percent below the overall average value of 4.52 pounds per ton of clinker.

The third file is an excerpt from the EPA Control Cost Manual that addresses costing for selective noncatalytic reduction systems. Note especially the table on page 1-32 of this document (which is the 36th page of the file, or the 424th page of the full control cost manual). You will note numerous differences from the cost estimation techniques for gas absorbers, which is on the 532nd page of the full control cost manual.

SMC-Charlevoix Emissions 10-15.pd f SMC-Charlevoix Emissions 10-15.pd SMC-Charlevoix Costs - Sample Calculations.xlsx SMC-Charlevoix Costs - Sample Calculations.xlsxOAQPS CCM

- SNCR.pd f SNCR.pd
Exhibit 32.2

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 on Form 10-QSB, filed pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended, of The First Bancshares, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended March 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Donna T. Rutland, the
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 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 Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
|-- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



/s/ DeeDee LoweryName:

DeeDee LoweryTitle:

Executive Vice President and ChiefFinancial OfficerDate:

May 10, 2006


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 required by Section 906, has been provided to The First Bancshares, Inc., and will be retained by The First
Bancshares, Inc., and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Lawtis Donald RHODEN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-693.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Jan. 6, 1972.

Walter N. Colbath, Jr., Public Defender, and Jeffrey H. Barker, Asst. Public Defender. West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Charles W. Musgrove, Asst. Atty., Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

On the basis of the briefs and the record, we hold that appellant has not made error appear. The judgment appealed from is, therefore, affirmed.

Affirmed.

REED, C. J., and WALDEN and OWEN, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AT JUNE 30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FORM 10-K FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1997.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                         800,346
<SECURITIES>                                   282,142
<RECEIVABLES>                                   55,237
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     79,701
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,136,424
<PP&E>                                       2,319,012
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              15,474,753
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,553,194
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                       367,092
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    141,287
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                15,474,753
<SALES>                                      2,503,512
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,503,512
<CGS>                                        2,612,402
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             8,801,723
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              86,292
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (8,761,501)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (8,298,466)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                789,426
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (7,509,040)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.25)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.23)
        


</TABLE>
# C_2023007EN.01003001.xml

| 9.1.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 7/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.1.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 7/30

---

Judgment of the General Court of 26 October 2022 — Siremar v Commission

(Case T-668/21) (1)

(State aid - Maritime transport - Rescue aid - Decision declaring the aid unlawful - Decision declaring the aid in part compatible and in part incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery - Service of general economic interest - Obligation to submit a restructuring or liquidation plan - Six-month time limit - Extension - Tax exemption - Advantage - Effect on trade between Member States - Adverse effect on competition - Length of proceedings - Legitimate expectations - Legal certainty - Principle of sound administration)

(2023/C 7/38)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Sicilia Regionale Marittima SpA — Siremar (Rome, Italy) (represented by: B. Nascimbene, F. Rossi Dal Pozzo and A. Moriconi, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Braga da Cruz, C.-M. Carrega and D. Recchia, Agents)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment in part of Commission Decision C(2021) 4268 final of 17 June 2021 on the measures SA.32014, SA.32015, SA.32016 (2011/C) (ex 2011/NN) implemented by Italy for Siremar and its acquirer Società Navigazione Siciliana (SNS).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Sicilia Regionale Marittima SpA to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Sicilia Regionale Marittima SpA to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 2, 3.1.2022.

---
### IN THE UNI TED STAT ES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCU IT

N o
. 0 9

- 5 0 8 2 7 S u m m a r y C a l e n d a r

U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A ,
P l a i n t i f f

- A p p e l l e e

v
.
R I G O B E R T O L O P E Z

- G O M E Z ,
D e f e n d a n t

- A p p e l l a n t

A p p e a l f

r o m t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s D i s t r i c t C o u r t f o r t h e W e s t e r n D i s t r i c t o f T e x a s U S D C N o
. 3 : 0 9

- C R

- 1 5 0 3

- 1

B e f o r e D A V I S , S M I T H , a n d S O U T H W I C K , C i r c u i t J u d g e s
. P E R C U R I A M : *
T h e F e d e r a l P u b l i c D e f e n d e r a p p o i n t e d t o r e p r e s e n t R i g o b e r t o L o p e z G o m e z h a s m o v e d f

o r l e a v e t o w i t h d r a w a n d h a s f i l e d a b r i e f i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h
A n d e r s v
. C a l i f

o r n i a , 3 8 6 U

. S

. 7 3 8 ( 1 9 6 7 )

. L o p e z - G o m e z h a s n o t f i l e d a r e s p o n s e
. H e r e c e n t l y h a s b e e n r e l e a s e d f r o m i m p r i s o n m e n t a n d r e m o v e d f r o m t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s
. O u r i n d e p e n d e n t r e v i e w o f t h e r e c o r d a n d c o u n s e l ’ s b r i e f d i s c l o s e s n o

n o n f r i v o l o u s i s s u e f

o r a p p e a l

. A c c o r d i n g l y , c o u n s e l ’ s m o t i o n f o r l e a v e t o U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s

F i ft h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D August 26, 20 10 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Purs uant to 5 T H C I R

. R. 47.5 , the cour t has d ete rm ined t hat this op inion sho uld not * be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t for th in 5 T H C I R

. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 09-50827 Document: 00511215640 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/26/2010N o
. 0 9

- 5 0 8 2 7

w i t h d r a w i s G R A N T E D , c o u n s e l i s e x c u s e d f r o m f u r t h e r r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s h e r e i n ,

a n d t h e A P P E A L I S D I S M I S S E D i n p a r t a s f r i v o l o u s , s e e 5 T H C I R

. R

. 4 2

. 2 , a n d i n p a r t a s m o o t

. S e e U n i t e d S t a t e s v
. R o s e n b a u m
- A l a n i s , 4 8 3 F

. 3 d 3 8 1 , 3 8 3 ( 5 t h C i r
. 2 0 0 7 )

.

2 Case: 09-50827 Document: 00511215640 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/26/2010
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

JERRY LEE HUTTO, §

§

No. 08-15-00294-CR

Appellant,

§

Appeal from the

V.

§

97th District Court

of Montague County, Texas

THE STATE OF TEXAS, §

§

(TC# 2014-0179M-CR)

Appellee.

§

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was no error in the 

judgment. We therefore affirm the judgment of the court below. This decision shall be certified 

below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 25TH DAY OF MAY, 2016.

ANN CRAWFORD McCLURE, Chief Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez and Hughes, JJ.
# Formation of the disaccharide maltose from 2 glucose molecules

A disaccharide is produced by joining 2 monosaccharide (single sugar) units. In this animation, 2 glucose molecules are combined using a condensation reaction, with the removal of

water. In maltose, an alpha 1-4 glycosidic bond is formed between opposite sides of the 2 glucose units.

Contents page Front (index) page Website Guidance: BioTopics front page > Topics Contents Page > This Topic

< Feedback
Digestive system Biochemistry basics: Elements in Biochemistry
Carbohydrate structure Condensation & hydrolysis Monosaccharides condensation
Disaccharide hydrolysis Amino acid structure Amino acids condensation Dipeptide hydrolysis Page 1 of 1 Formation of a disaccharide

7/19/2010 http://www.biotopics.co.uk/as/disaccharideformation.html
#### Jerome Green CARTER a/k/a Marco Lacarter, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 71-8.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Jan. 12, 1972.

Walter R. Talley, Public Defender, and D. Turner Matthews, Asst. Public Defender, Bradenton, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Warren H. Petersen, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

In view of the fact that appellant has served his sentence of one year, which expired September 1971, the appeal appears to be moot; and for that reason it is dismissed sua sponte by this court.

LILES, A. C. J., and McNULTY, J., concur.

MANN, J., would affirm on authority of Steinhauser v. State, Fla.App.2d 1969, 228 So.2d 446.