alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2013179EN.01001701.xml

| 25.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 179/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 179/17

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

24 June 2013

2013/C 179/05

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,3086 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 128,54 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4590 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,85115 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 8,8884 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2241 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,0400 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,865 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 299,97 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7016 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,3500 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,5408 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,5445 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4246 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3797 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,1520 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6969 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,6746 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 521,12 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 13,2811 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,0415 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,4775 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 12 997,20 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,2112 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 57,433 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 43,0660 |
| THB | Thai baht | 40,724 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,9575 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 17,5222 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 78,1230 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,3086

JPY

Japanese yen

128,54

DKK

Danish krone

7,4590

GBP

Pound sterling

0,85115

SEK

Swedish krona

8,8884

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2241

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,0400

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,865

HUF

Hungarian forint

299,97

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7016

PLN

Polish zloty

4,3500

RON

Romanian leu

4,5408

TRY

Turkish lira

2,5445

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4246

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3797

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,1520

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6969

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,6746

KRW

South Korean won

1 521,12

ZAR

South African rand

13,2811

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,0415

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,4775

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

12 997,20

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,2112

PHP

Philippine peso

57,433

RUB

Russian rouble

43,0660

THB

Thai baht

40,724

BRL

Brazilian real

2,9575

MXN

Mexican peso

17,5222

INR

Indian rupee

78,1230

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN THE COMPANY'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE SIX
MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          16,093
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   17,258
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (4,177)
<INVENTORY>                                      6,526
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                47,271
<PP&E>                                         284,269
<DEPRECIATION>                                (31,882)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,179,791
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          110,381
<BONDS>                                        334,329
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     444,360
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,179,791
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                56,790
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  140,331
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (34,537)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (130,909)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (40)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (130,949)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (130,949)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
No. 00-7267.

#### Jackson *v.*Caddo Correctional Center.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### UNIVERSAL HEALTH SPAS, INC. and Western World Insurance Company, Inc., Petitioners, v. Paul Alan RACZKOWSKI, Respondent.

No. 77-2665.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Aug. 2, 1978.

*1310Joe N. Unger, Miami, and Pomeroy, Betts & Wiederhold, Fort Lauderdale, for petitioners.

Ronald Sales, Palm Beach, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Certiorari denied.

CROSS, ANSTEAD and MOORE, JJ., concur.
# C_2012144EN.01000101.xml

| 23.5.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 144/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.5.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 144/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.6544 — Royal Bank of Canada/RBC Dexia investor services limited)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2012/C 144/01

On 11 May 2012, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32012M6544. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32012M6544. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
Exhibit 32.2.1



Certification Required Under Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



I, Eugene R. McGrath, the Chief Executive Officer of Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. (the Company) certify that
the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004, which this statement accompanies, (the Form 10-K) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that the information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



/s/    Eugene R. McGrathEugene R. McGrath




Dated: February 24, 2005
NACWA 

A t .. C ___ ....... '._ .. 

EXECUTIVE COMMITI(E 

PlIl�IDt"'l 

Marian A. Orfeo 

0;,«"" ofPl<'n.,"t. 

¢C-di""�9#1 

Muud,"�tJ W�, .. 

Rrsou", .. AII,hori'� 

B"n,,"_ MA 

VICF PII[SIDfNT 

Kmn L Shaf .. 

&«uti<I D"", 

Mllwaulu!e MotropoliL1n 

Sewe�g. D,SUlC' 

M'''�kt', WI 

rUA�'JRfR 

fMa,u", DntfIN 

, .. -. 

Meuopolun St. La",! 

�r[),,,nCl 

s.L" .. ,/<oIfO 

HeRl lAKY 

o.r.arw 

DaYid R. Wiliams 

.. ..er 

E .. , !!;oy M",;cip;ol 

U,d t)' DOSIn'! 

o.lJ...J, CA 

M�l PIILSIDLNI cn

..opiler M. Wuthoff 

As\:"ron, ell)' Air" 

Podllo: WO<Q Gentro! c"un.el 

City of Los An",les 

I.e, Anyit's, CA 

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 

K..,lGrk 

Nuional Association of 

Clean W._ Apncies 

'816J�IT.r..," PI"c�. NW 

Wuhington DC 20036·2505 

February 2, 2009 

EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC) 

United States Environmental PrOtection Agency 

U.S. EPA (2822T) 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW 

Washington, D.C. 20460 

Re: Comments of the National Association ofClcan Water Agencies 

(NACWA) on U.S. EPA's Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 74 Fed. 

Reg. 41 Oanuary 2,2009) Seeking Input on Defining "Solid Waste" as it 

Applies to Non·Hazardous Materials 

Amntion Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-200s..0329 

Dear Sir or Madam: 

These comments are submitted by the National Association of Clean Water Agencies 

("NACWA") in response to the United States Environmental Protection Agency's 

("EPA's"»)anuary 2, 2009 request for public comments on the meaning of "solid waste" 

under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ("RCM") published at 74 Fed. 

Reg. 41-61. NACWA asks that EPA clarify in its upcoming rule making that "solid 

waste" does not include the sewage sludge (biosolids) processed at Publicly Owned 

Treatment Works ("POT'X's") that are the "solid and dissolved materials in domestic 

sewage" that Congress expressly exempts from its definition of solid waste at 42 U.S.c. 

§ 6903(27). The solid waste definition rule presents an opportunity to clarify and 

codify that the statutory Domestic Sewage Exclusion applies to the sewage sludge 

extracted from domestic sewage and combusted or land applied. Express exclusion 

of POTW sewage sludge from the definition of solid waste is consistent with NACWA's 

position that sewage sludge incinerators ("SSIs") should be regulated under Section 

112 instead of Section 129 of the Clean Air Act ("CAA"). 

NACWA represents the interests of nearly three hundred of chI" nation's POTWs, 

which collectively serve the majority of the sewered population in the United States. 

For over thirty-five years, NACWA has maintained a leadership role in legal and 

policy issues affecting dean water agencies, and has been at the forefront of the 

development and implementation of scientifically-based, technically-sound, and 

cost-effective environmental programs for protecting public and ecosystem health. 

Congress' Domestic Sewage Exclusion recognizes the unique function and purpose of 

p202.8332672 r202.833 4657 ww

.nacwa..org Info�nacwa..0'i
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 11
 
                          DATUM INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
 
                    COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE
 
                (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT SHARE AND PER SHARE DATA)
 
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                 YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
                                                         ----------------------------------------
                                                            1996           1995           1994
                                                         ----------     ----------     ----------
<S>                                                      <C>            <C>            <C>
Primary earnings:
Net income.............................................  $    1,974     $       60     $      936
                                                         ----------     ----------     ----------
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding...   4,061,014      3,713,710      2,628,727
Effect of common stock equivalents.....................     192,005        240,597        104,085
                                                         ----------     ----------     ----------
Weighted average common shares outstanding as
  adjusted.............................................   4,253,019      3,954,307      2,732,812
                                                         ----------     ----------     ----------
Primary earnings per common share......................  $      .46     $      .02     $      .34
                                                         ==========     ==========     ==========
Assuming full dilution:
Net income.............................................  $    1,974     $       60     $      936
                                                         ----------     ----------     ----------
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding...   4,061,014      3,713,710      2,628,727
Effect of common stock equivalents.....................     232,817        253,157        126,706
                                                         ----------     ----------     ----------
Weighted average common shares outstanding as
  adjusted.............................................   4,293,831      3,966,867      2,755,433
                                                         ----------     ----------     ----------
Earnings per common share assuming full dilution.......  $      .46     $      .02     $      .34
                                                         ==========     ==========     ==========
</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                      2216400
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                          0
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                          476400
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                        277700
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                  441900
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 3412400
<COMMON>                                           400
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                       788200
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                             484400
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 1273000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      22900
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                            885600
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                               82200
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                   99000
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                      400
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                 1049300
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                  3412400
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      1284200
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                            113000
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                      929400
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     1042400
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                         241800
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                               16300
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                  258100
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         88600
<NET-INCOME>                                    169500
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        900
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                   168600
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        238800
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                        86000
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                          294200
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     4.10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     4.10
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2981 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2981

 To prohibit discrimination by the Armed Forces on the basis of sexual 
                              orientation.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             August 6, 1993

  Mr. Nadler introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To prohibit discrimination by the Armed Forces on the basis of sexual 
                              orientation.

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

SECTION 1. PROHIBITION ON DISCRIMINATION IN THE MILITARY ON THE BASIS 
              OF SEXUAL ORIENTATION.

    (a) In General.--No member of the Armed Forces, or person seeking 
to become a member of the Armed Forces, may be discriminated against by 
the Armed Forces on the basis of sexual orientation.
    (b) Preservation of Rules and Policies Regarding Sexual 
Misconduct.--Nothing in subsection (a) may be construed as requiring 
the Armed Forces to modify any rule or policy regarding sexual 
misconduct or otherwise to sanction or condone sexual misconduct, but 
such rules and policies may not be applied in a manner that 
discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation.

                                 <all>
```
#### John H. STRIGGLES and Haywood Oliver, Appellants, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Appellee.

No. 72-151.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Sept. 27, 1972.

Appeal from Court of Record, Broward County; Robert W. Tyson, Jr., Judge.

Appeal dismissed.'
#### Jacob D. Feldman, an Infant, by His Father and Natural Guardian, Peter A. Feldman, et al., Respondents, v South Huntington Union Free School District, Appellant.

[736 NYS2d 607]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Catterson, J.), dated March 9, 2001, which granted the plaintiffs’ motion pursuant to CPLR 4404 to set aside a jury verdict in its favor as against the weight of the evidence, and for a new trial.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is denied, the verdict is reinstated, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for the entry of an appropriate judgment.

“The law is settled that a verdict in favor of a defendant should not be set aside unless the evidence preponderates so heavily in the plaintiff’s favor that the verdict could not have been reached on any fair interpretation of the evidence” *(Ramirez v City of Yonkers,*272 AD2d 598; *see also, Cohen v Hallmark Cards,*45 NY2d 493; *Nicastro v Park,*113 AD2d *530129). Here, the plaintiffs did not meet this standard. The teachers, who were supervising the infant plaintiff and approximately 19 other seven-year-old children while they played at a playground, testified that they told the children every day to stay away from the bushes. The infant plaintiff failed to heed those warnings and was injured by a piece of glass when he hid behind a bush during a game of hide and seek. While the infant plaintiff denied ever being told to stay away from the bushes, this merely created a factual dispute for the jury to resolve. Altman, J.P., Feuerstein, O’Brien and H. Miller, JJ., concur.
#### Irvin POLLAK, Appellant, v. Grace MEYER, Executrix of the Estate of Jerome Meyer, Deceased, Appellee.

No. 70-428.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Jan. 5, 1971.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 29, 1971.

George Schwartz, Miami Beach, for appellant.

Kastenbaum, Mamber, Gopman, Epstein & Miles, Miami Beach, for appellee.

Before PEARSON, C. J., and CHARLES CARROLL and HENDRY, JJ-

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a final judgment entered pursuant to a directed verdict at the close of all evidence in favor of defendant-appellee Meyer, an executrix, in a jury trial. Plaintiff filed a complaint alleging a loan by him of $1,000.00 in cash to defendant’s decedent on August 24, 1968, which was still due and owing; defendant answered by a general denial, and did not raise the affirmative defense of payment; see Rule 1.110(d), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, 30 F.S.A.

A disinterested witness to the transaction testified that defendant’s decedent asked for and received $1,000.00 in cash from the plaintiff, that this was a loan, and that the decedent died four days later. Plaintiff testified that he was present at that time and place, but shortly after the loan he entered the hospital. The plaintiff rested, and the defendant offered no evidence.

The issues on appeal are: Did plaintiff present a prima facie case? Did the court err in deciding that a presumption of payment arose? We hold that the plaintiff did present a prima facie case and that *797the lower court erred in deciding that a presumption of payment arose. Accordingly, we reverse.

Reversed.
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1766 

To provide for the equitable distribution of Universal Service funds to rural 

States. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 21, 2013 

Ms. AYOTTE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

A BILL 

To provide for the equitable distribution of Universal Service 

funds to rural States. 

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 ‘‘USF Equitable Dis5 tribution Act of 2013’’. 

6 SEC. 2. DISTRIBUTION OF UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUNDS. 

7 Section 254 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 

8 U.S.C. 254) is amended by adding at the end the fol9 lowing: 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1766 IS

1 ‘‘(m) DISTRIBUTION OF UNIVERSAL SERVICE

2 FUNDS.— 

3 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Not less than 75 percent of 

4 all amounts collected by providers of interstate tele5 communications from consumers in a rural State for 

6 the purpose of making contributions under sub7 section (d) shall be allocated to the provision of uni8 versal service to consumers in that rural State. 

9 ‘‘(2) RURAL STATE.—In this subsection, the 

10 term ‘rural State’ means a State in which the total 

11 population density is not more than 200 people per 

12 square mile, as determined by the latest available 

13 decennial census conducted under section 141(a) of 

14 title 13, United States Code. 

15 ‘‘(3) AMOUNTS COLLECTED.—Nothing in this 

16 subsection shall be construed as requiring an in17 crease in amounts collected by providers of inter18 state telecommunications from consumers for the 

19 purpose of making contributions under subsection 

20 (d).’’. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
261 La. 536

#### George GULOTTA et al. v. Lelia O. CUTSHAW.

No. 52364.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 18, 1972.

In re: George Gulotta et al. applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of Iberville. 258 So.2d 555.

It is ordered that the writ of review issue; that the Court of Appeal send up the record in duplicate of the case; and that counsel for plaintiff and defendant be notified.