alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2013330EN.01000901.xml

| 14.11.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 330/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.11.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 330/9

---

Call for proposals under the work programme ‘Capacities’ of the seventh EC framework programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities

2013/C 330/08

Notice is hereby given of the launch of a call for proposals under the work programme ‘Capacities’ of the seventh framework programme of the European Community for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007 to 2013).

Proposals are invited for the following call concerning trans-national collaboration on career pathway development for researchers.

The call deadline and budget are given in the call text, which is published on the CORDIS website.

‘Capacities’ specific programme:

‘Capacities’ specific programme:

| Call identifier: | FP7-CDRP-2013-EUR-CD |
| --- | --- |

Call identifier:

FP7-CDRP-2013-EUR-CD

This call for proposals relates to the work programme adopted by Commission Decision C(2013) 5571 of 2 September 2013.

Information on the modalities of the call, the work programme, and the guidance for applicants on how to submit proposals is available through the CORDIS website: http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/calls/

---
Exhibit 32(b)

**THE DAYTON POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned officers of The Dayton Power and Light Company  (the“Issuer”) hereby certify that the Issuer’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2003, whichthis certificate accompanies, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934 and that the information contained therein fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Issuer.

A signed original of this writtenstatement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating,acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed formwithin the electronic version of this statement required by Section 906, hasbeen provided to the Issuer and will be retained by the Issuer and furnished tothe SEC or its staff upon request.

Signed:

| /s/ PAMELA HOLDREN                            |   |
|-----------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                               |   |
| Pamela Holdren                                |
| Treasurer and Interim Chief Financial Officer |

Date:  November 5, 2004
# C_2012192EN.01000401.xml

| 30.6.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 192/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.6.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 192/4

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

29 June 2012

2012/C 192/03

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2590 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 100,13 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4334 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,80680 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 8,7728 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2030 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,5330 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,640 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 287,77 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,6967 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,2488 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,4513 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,2834 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,2339 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,2871 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,7658 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,5746 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5974 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 441,00 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 10,3669 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,0011 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5178 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 11 878,51 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 3,9960 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 53,055 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 41,3700 |
| THB | Thai baht | 39,873 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,5788 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 16,8755 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 70,1200 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2590

JPY

Japanese yen

100,13

DKK

Danish krone

7,4334

GBP

Pound sterling

0,80680

SEK

Swedish krona

8,7728

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2030

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,5330

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,640

HUF

Hungarian forint

287,77

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,6967

PLN

Polish zloty

4,2488

RON

Romanian leu

4,4513

TRY

Turkish lira

2,2834

AUD

Australian dollar

1,2339

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,2871

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,7658

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,5746

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5974

KRW

South Korean won

1 441,00

ZAR

South African rand

10,3669

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,0011

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5178

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

11 878,51

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

3,9960

PHP

Philippine peso

53,055

RUB

Russian rouble

41,3700

THB

Thai baht

39,873

BRL

Brazilian real

2,5788

MXN

Mexican peso

16,8755

INR

Indian rupee

70,1200

---

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

1

Source

---
# C_2013289EN.01000801.xml

| 4.10.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 289/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.10.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 289/8

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

3 October 2013

2013/C 289/02

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,3594 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 132,81 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4597 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,83940 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 8,6214 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2276 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,1090 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,558 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 295,92 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7026 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,2053 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,4371 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,7241 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4500 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4053 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,5415 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6412 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,6975 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 455,90 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 13,7250 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,3205 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,6250 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 362,70 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,3437 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 58,570 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 43,6915 |
| THB | Thai baht | 42,522 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,9973 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 17,9098 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 83,9290 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,3594

JPY

Japanese yen

132,81

DKK

Danish krone

7,4597

GBP

Pound sterling

0,83940

SEK

Swedish krona

8,6214

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2276

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,1090

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,558

HUF

Hungarian forint

295,92

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7026

PLN

Polish zloty

4,2053

RON

Romanian leu

4,4371

TRY

Turkish lira

2,7241

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4500

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4053

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,5415

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6412

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,6975

KRW

South Korean won

1 455,90

ZAR

South African rand

13,7250

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,3205

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,6250

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 362,70

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,3437

PHP

Philippine peso

58,570

RUB

Russian rouble

43,6915

THB

Thai baht

42,522

BRL

Brazilian real

2,9973

MXN

Mexican peso

17,9098

INR

Indian rupee

83,9290

---

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

1

Source

---
#### Tillie Booke, Plaintiff, *v.*Dime Savings Bank, Defendant.

Supreme Court, Special Term, Kings County,

November 19, 1953.

*Hutton & Holahan*for defendant.

*James E. Bennett*for plaintiff.

Arkwright, J.

This is an application by the defendant, the Dime Savings Bank of Brooklyn, under paragraph (a) of subdivision 6 of section 239 of the Banking Law, for an order *841amending the proceeding in this action by making Morris Booke a party to this action and interpleading him as a defendant herein.

The plaintiff, Tillie Booke, the wife of Morris Booke, alleges in her complaint that on July 1, 1953, she had on deposit with the defendant bank the sum of $4,000; that her passbook was either lost or stolen and came into the possession of her husband; that defendant bank was notified of such fact, which it acknowledged in a letter to plaintiff; that after such notice and on the said day the defendant erroneously and as a result of a forgery by the husband paid the $4,000 to plaintiff’s husband; and that such payment was made solely through the negligence and carelessness of defendant. The plaintiff demands judgment for the sum of $4,000 with interest, and costs.

It appears that Morris Booke then deposited the $4,000 in the defendant bank in his own name in trust for Dorothy Booke, the daughter of plaintiff and said Morris Booke.

Paragraph (a) of subdivision 6 of section 239 of the Banking Law provides: “In all actions against any savings bank to recover moneys on deposit therewith, if there be any person or persons, not parties to the action, *who claim the same fund,*the court * * * may, on the petition of such savings bank, * * * make an order amending the proceedings in the action by making such claimants parties defendant thereto;”. (Emphasis supplied.)

The above-quoted provision is inapplicable since the action is not one where the two parties claim the same fund. The forgery is conceded. The plaintiff seeks judgment against defendant for negligence, and not to compel defendant to pay over the $4,000 on deposit in the name of the husband. The fact that the husband drew out the money and redeposited it in defendant’s bank, and that it happens still to be there, is merely coincidental. Had plaintiff’s husband not redeposited the $4,000, it is clear that the section of the Banking Law on which this motion is predicated would not be applicable.

Defendant’s remedy is under section 193-a of the Civil Practice Act. Such section can only be availed of after an answer has been interposed by defendant.

The motion is denied, without prejudice.
#### OUTRIGGER INN and Maryland Casualty Company, Petitioners, v. Don J. RESER and Florida Industrial Commission, Respondents.

No. 36102.

Supreme Court of Florida.

April 28, 1967.

*29Joe C. Carey, of Mann, Harrison, Mann & Rowe, St. Petersburg, for petitioners.

Glenn M. Woodworth, of the Law Offices of Robert L. Williams, St. Peters-burg, Patrick H. Mears, Tallahassee, and J. Franklin Garner, Lakeland, for respondents.

DREW, Justice.

The petitioner, against whom a compensation award for 40% permanent partial disability compensation has been entered, contended before the commission and in the petition here that the deputy commissioner erroneously combined ratings for loss of wage earning capacity and functional disability contrary to the prescription of the statute governing permanent partial disability compensation, Sec. 440.15 (3) (u) :

> “ * * * provided, however, that for the purpose o.f this paragraph ‘disability’ means either physical impairment or diminution of wage earning capacity, whichever is greater.”

The deputy found that claimant suffered a lumbosacral sprain, stating “that the Claimant has suffered an injury affecting his ability to compete on the open labor market, resulting in a diminution of his wage earning capacity and resulting in a 25% disability to the body as a whole over and above the 15% permanent partial rating attributed to the injury by Dr. Yarborough and heretofore accepted by the Employer/Carrier making the Claimant’s total disability 40% permanent partial disability to the body as a- whole.” The finding is not, in our opinion, sufficiently clear to comply with the statutory mandate. We conclude from our consideration of the record, however, that the evidence would sustain a compensation award for permanent partial disability between the minimum and maximum limits of 25 to 40%.

The order of affirmance by the commission is accordingly quashed and the cause remanded with directions that the deputy be required to determine the compensation anew upon the existing record in accordance with the opinion above.

It is so ordered.

THORNAL, C. J., and THOMAS, ROBERTS and O’CONNELL, JJ., concur.
#### Robert A. DEAN and Louise Dean, his wife, Appellants, v. Stanley BRODIE, Appellee.

No. 72-618.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Oct. 2, 1972.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Palm Beach County; Robert S. Hewitt, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
#### Baron De Hirsch MEYER, Milton Weiss and Leo Rose, Jr., as partners d/b/a Meyer, Weiss, Rosen & Rose, f/u/b/o Pacific National Insurance Company, Petitioners, v. Burnett ROTH, Respondent.

No. 35850.

Supreme Court of Florida.

April 26, 1967.

Blackwell, Walker & Gray and James E. Tribble, Miami, for petitioners.

Sherouse & Corlett, Miami, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari reflected probable jurisdiction in this Court. After argument and upon further consideration, we have determined the writ was *30improvidently issued. The writ must be and is discharged and the petition is dismissed.

It is so ordered.

THORNAL, C. J., and THOMAS, ROBERTS, DREW, O’CONNELL, CALDWELL and ERVIN, JJ., concur.
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk January 29, 2010

y0125 

# Order

January 29, 2010

139185(42)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 139185 COA: 283241 St. Clair CC: 07-000818-FC DONALD JAMES AIELLO, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion for r econsideration of this Court’s October 26, 2009 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was entered erroneously.
U.S. flag
              An official website of the United States government Skip to main content   end of header Census.gov Newsroom Releases 2010 Census Census in Schools
 Newsroom Archive
 Skip left menu navigation
 About the Newsroom
 				Facts for Features
 				**News Releases**
 				Press Kits
 				Tip Sheets
 Release Information CB09-CN.29 **Revised** **Contact:**  Jennifer Smits
Public Information Office
(301) 763-3030 (phone)
(301) 763-3762 (fax)
(301) 457-1037 (TDD)PIO@census.gov
 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:  Thursday, October 29, 2009 Media Advisory — Census Bureau to Launch 2010 Census in Schools Program Nationwide Commerce Secretary Locke and Census Bureau Director Groves Visit Baltimore High School The program, "2010 Census: It's About Us," gives schools a wide range of free, optional, standards-based lesson plans on subjects related to the census, ranging from math to social studies. The program is designed for students in kindergarten through 12th grade and will reach all 118,000 schools and 56 million students nationwide.
  11:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.
  
  
 Please RSVP by 5 p.m., Friday, Oct. 30 to the Public Information Office at 301-763-3466.
  CONNECT WITH US

Information Quality
                    Data Linkage Infrastructure
                    Data Protection and Privacy Policy
                    Accessibility      
                    FOIA
                    Inspector General
                    No FEAR Act
                    U.S. Department of Commerce
                    USA.gov
                   Measuring America's People, Places, and Economy
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 09-1022

In Re: SHERROD V. BRIGHT, 

 Petitioner. 

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. 

(4:08-cv-00029-TLW-TER) 

Submitted: April 16, 2009 Decided: April 27, 2009 

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. 

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Sherrod V. Bright, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

Sherrod V. Bright petitions for a writ of mandamus 

seeking an order compelling the district court to rule on his 

forfeiture action. We conclude that Bright is not entitled to 

mandamus relief. 

Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner 

has a clear right to the relief sought. In re First Fed. Sav. & 

Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). Further, 

mandamus is a drastic remedy and should only be used in 

extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 

426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th 

Cir. 1987). Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for 

appeal. In re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir. 

1979). The relief sought by Bright is not available by way of 

mandamus. 

Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in 

forma pauperis, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the 

court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

PETITION DENIED
U.S. flag
              An official website of the United States government





---

close


Portugal
 Basic Facts Population
 People per sq. km
 Males per 100 females
 Children per woman
 Goods exported from U.S.
 Goods imported to U.S.
 Change in exports from U.S. for 2013 to 2022
 A Closer Look Source
 Comparisons
 Compared to the U.S.
 Compared to the World
 K = Thousands
				M = Millions
				B = Billions
  Merchandise Trade U.S. Trade in Manufactured Goods
 Top Exported Goods by U.S. State or Territory
 Population Current and Projected Population
 Population by Age and Sex
 Source and Notes Source: U.S. Census Bureau, International Database (demographic data) and USA Trade Online (trade data); Central Intelligence Agency, The World Fact Book (country reference maps). This application presents data for 228 countries and areas of the world with a 2024 population of 5,000 or more. For eleven of those countries and areas, only demographic data are presented. "Data not available" indicates that data are not available from this application.  In such instances, data may be available elsewhere at the census.gov website. Trade figures presented for France do not include data for overseas departments French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Martinique, Mayotte, and Reunion but do include data for dependencies Saint Barthelemy and Saint Martin.  Trade figures for the United Kingdom include data for crown dependencies Guernsey, Isle of Man, and Jersey. To learn more about world population projections, go to Notes on the World Population Clock. To learn more about international trade data, go to Guide to Foreign Trade Statistics. All trade figures are in U.S. dollars on a nominal basis.


CONNECT WITH US
 Information Quality
                    Data Linkage Infrastructure
                    Data Protection and Privacy Policy
                    Accessibility      
                    FOIA
                    Inspector General
                    No FEAR Act
                    U.S. Department of Commerce
                    USA.gov
  Measuring America's People, Places, and Economy
ex10a.htm
















Exhibit (10)(a)

















Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm












We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Post-Effective Amendment No. 28 to the 1933 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 333-141759) and Amendment No. 369 to the 1940 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 811-09763), and to the use therein of our reports dated (a) March 31, 2016, with respect to the financial statements of Lincoln Life & Annuity Company of New York and (b) April 12, 2016, with respect to the financial statements of Lincoln New York Account N for Variable Annuities for the interests in a separate account under individual flexible payment deferred variable annuity contracts.







/s/ Ernst & Young LLP




 












Philadelphia, Pennsylvania


November 16, 2016
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 99-51122

Summary Calendar

__________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JORGE CARRERA-CARRILLO,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

(EP-99-CR-769-ALL-DB)

_________________________________________________________________

July 5, 2000

Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jorge Carrera-Carrillo appeals his conviction under 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326 for attempted illegal reentry into the United States

following removal. Carrera-Carrillo claims the district court

erred in denying his motion to dismiss, in which he asserted that

his prior removal proceedings violated his right to due process. 

He concedes that the only issue raised in this appeal is

foreclosed by our decision in United States v. Benitez-Villafuerte,

186 F.3d 651, 656-60 (5th Cir. 1999), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___,

120 S. Ct. 838 (2000); and notes the issue is presented in order to

preserve it for possible review by the Supreme Court.
- 2 -

AFFIRMED
EXHIBIT 11S

                           DECORATOR INDUSTRIES, INC.
            COMPUTATION OF DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE OF COMMON STOCK
                FOR THE FIVE FISCAL YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 29, 2007


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                       2007           2006          2005          2004          2003
                                   -----------    -----------   -----------   -----------   -----------
<S>                                <C>            <C>           <C>           <C>           <C>
Net (loss)/income                  $  (807,509)   $   405,393   $ 1,364,814   $ 1,394,698   $ 1,561,778
                                   ===========    ===========   ===========   ===========   ===========

Average number of common
  shares outstanding                 3,005,988      2,982,735     2,882,196     2,816,661     2,794,286

Dilutive effect of stock options
  on net income                              0         53,753       116,402       150,126        33,316
                                   -----------    -----------   -----------   -----------   -----------

Diluted weighted average shares
  used in the calculation of
  diluted earnings per share         3,005,988      3,036,488     2,998,598     2,966,787     2,827,602
                                   ===========    ===========   ===========   ===========   ===========



Diluted earnings per share         $     (0.27)   $      0.13   $      0.46   $      0.47   $      0.55
                                   ===========    ===========   ===========   ===========   ===========
</TABLE>
#### Dr. Robert HANDTE, Dr. Martin Hoehn, Dr. William P. Hoffman, and Dr. Duard Lawrence, as partners, Appellants, v. Frank KAYE, as father of Wayne Kaye, a minor, deceased, and as husband of Rose Kaye, Appellee. Dr. Robert HANDTE, Dr. Martin Hoehn, Dr. William P. Hoffman, and Dr. Duard Lawrence, as partners, Appellants, v. Frank KAYE, as Administrator of the Estate of Wayne Kaye, deceased, Appellee.

Nos. 71-548, 71-549.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

June 9, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Appeals dismissed.