alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2015392EN.01000801.xml

| 25.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 392/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.11.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 392/8

---

Notice to importers

Imports of tuna products from Thailand into the European Union

(2015/C 392/07)

By a notice to importers published in the Official Journal C 220 of 1 August 2013, p. 7, the Commission advised EU operators presenting documentary evidence of origin (Form A — Generalised System of Preferences) in order to benefit from preferential treatment for canned tuna and frozen tuna loins of HS subheading 1604 14 imported from Thailand to take all necessary precautions, as there were reasonable doubts concerning the proper application of the preferential tariff treatment and the applicability of proofs of origin presented in the Union for those goods. The release of the goods in question for free circulation could thus give rise to a customs debt, lead to fraud and consequently, negatively affect the EU’s financial interests.

In accordance with Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1421/2013 (1), amending Annexes I, II and IV to Regulation (EU) No 978/2012, Thailand was removed from the list of the Union’s GSP beneficiary countries with effect as of 1 January 2015.

1

The notice to importers published in the Official Journal C 220 of 1 August 2013 has therefore become devoid of purpose as regards consignments of the products concerned declared for release for free circulation on or after 1 January 2015 and is hereby withdrawn.

---

(1)  Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1421/2013 of 30 October 2013 amending Annexes I, II and IV to Regulation (EU) No 978/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council applying a scheme of generalised tariff preferences (OJ L 355, 31.12.2013, p. 1).

1

---
257 La. 986

#### Shirley M. FARRIS v. NEW ORLEANS PUBLIC SERVICE, INC.

No. 51181.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 10, 1971.

In re: Shirley M. Farris applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Orleans. 242 So.2d 335.

Writs denied. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal, we cannot say that the result reached is incorrect.

BARHAM and TATE, JJ.,

are of the opinion the writ should be granted. The Court of Appeal has failed to set forth a satisfactory factual basis for finding abuse of discretion with the lower court award of damages. See C.C. Art 1934(3). The appellate award appears to be violative of the principles enunciated in Gaspard v. Le-Maire, 245 La. 239, 158 So.2d 149.
ENTREPRENEUER GROWTH CAPITAL
	 
	
        505 PARK AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10022

         

         








 








 


 


January 29, 2014


 


 


 


Jacqueline M. Lemke


Vice President Finance


Chief Financial Officer


Bioanalytical Systems lnc.


Purdue Research Park


2701 Kent A venue


West Lafayette, IN 47906


 


 


 


Re:      Waiver- Net Worth Covenant


 


Dear Ms. Lemke:


 


We
refer you to that certain Loan and Security Agreement between Bioanalytical Systems, Inc. ("Borrower") and Entrepreneur
Growth Capital, LLC ("Lender") dated on or about January 11, 2010 (the "Agreement").
All capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined shall have the meaning ascribed to them in the Agreement.


 


This letter shall serve
to confirm that Lender hereby waives Borrower's compliance with the tangible net worth covenant set forth in Section 4.15
of the Loan Agreement for the period ending December 31, 2013. Borrower understands that the
waiver set forth herein shall apply only for the stated period.


 


Borrower
agrees to pay Lender a fee in the amount of $500.00 as consideration for the aforesaid waiver
and documentation of this letter agreement, which fee will be
automatically charged to Borrower's revolving loan account.


 


Except
as hereby or heretofore amended or supplemented, the Agreement shall remain in full force
and effect in accordance with its original terms and conditions.


 


If
the foregoing correctly sets forth you and our understanding, please execute the enclosed
copy of this letter in the spaces provided below and return such fully executed copy to the
undersigned as soon as possible.


 




    	Page 1 of 2



    	 



    

 


 


This
Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which when so executed shall be deemed to be an original, but all
of which when taken together shall constitute one and the same instrument. An executed facsimile of this Amendment shall be deemed
to be a valid and binding agreement between the parties hereto.


 


Very tru1y yours,


 


ENTREPRENEUR GROWTH


CAPITALLLC


as Lender


 


 


By: _____________________________


Name:Charles L. Bert


Title:  Vice President


 


 


 


 





	   BJOANALYTICAL SYSTEMS, INC.
	   as Borrower
	 	 
	 	 
	By:  _____________________________
	Name:	Jacqueline M. Lemke
	Title:	Vice President - Finance
	        	Chief Financial Officer










 






    	Page 2 of 2
#### Charles BREAZEALE, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 44894.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 27, 1974.

Certiorari denied. 287 So.2d 430.

ADKINS, C. J., and ROBERTS, ERVIN, BOYD and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3641 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3641

   To make minor adjustments of maps relating to the Coastal Barrier 
                           Resources System.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 22, 1993

 Mrs. Fowler (for herself, Mr. Young of Florida, Mr. Lewis of Florida, 
  Mr. Bacchus of Florida, Mr. Goss, Mr. Peterson of Florida, and Mrs. 
   Thurman) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
               Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To make minor adjustments of maps relating to the Coastal Barrier 
                           Resources System.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
    Section 1. 16 U.S.C. 3503(a)(1) is amended by making the minor 
adjustments as follows: Units P10, P11A, P17, P18, P18P, P19, P24, P25, 
FL-05P and FL-90 are amended as identified and generally depicted on 
designated maps dated November 15, 1993.

                                 <all>
```
# C_2012096EN.01000401.xml

| 31.3.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 96/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.3.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 96/4

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

30 March 2012

2012/C 96/05

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,3356 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 109,56 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4399 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,83390 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 8,8455 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2045 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,6040 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 24,730 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 294,92 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7003 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,1522 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,3820 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,3774 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,2836 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3311 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,3705 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6254 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,6775 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 512,98 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 10,2322 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,4089 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5125 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 12 245,24 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,0916 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 57,281 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 39,2950 |
| THB | Thai baht | 41,177 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,4323 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 17,0222 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 68,0420 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,3356

JPY

Japanese yen

109,56

DKK

Danish krone

7,4399

GBP

Pound sterling

0,83390

SEK

Swedish krona

8,8455

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2045

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,6040

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

24,730

HUF

Hungarian forint

294,92

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7003

PLN

Polish zloty

4,1522

RON

Romanian leu

4,3820

TRY

Turkish lira

2,3774

AUD

Australian dollar

1,2836

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3311

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,3705

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6254

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,6775

KRW

South Korean won

1 512,98

ZAR

South African rand

10,2322

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,4089

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5125

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

12 245,24

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,0916

PHP

Philippine peso

57,281

RUB

Russian rouble

39,2950

THB

Thai baht

41,177

BRL

Brazilian real

2,4323

MXN

Mexican peso

17,0222

INR

Indian rupee

68,0420

---

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

1

Source

---
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Claude WOODS.

No. 59516.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 19, 1977.

Wilson R. Ramshur, Willis & Ramshur, St. Francisville, for defendant-appellant.

William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., Leon A. Picou, Jr., Dist. Atty., William E. Woodward, Asst. Dist. Atty., A. Z. Butterworth, Sp. Asst. Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002







I, Peter Reichard, President and Director of Europa Acquisition VIII, Inc., (the "Company"), hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:




(1) The Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended April 30, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




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




By:
/s/ Peter ReichardPeter ReichardPresident and Director


Date: June 14, 2011











This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and  shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
  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 Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-2261

RONDELL TONEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS; COMMANDANT OF THE UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (CA-03-126) Submitted: February 18, 2005 Decided: March 2, 2005 Before TRAXLER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rondell Toney, Appellant Pro Se. James Michael Sullivan, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Rondell Toney appeals the district court’s order granting the Government’s motion to dismiss Toney’s civil action under the Federal Tort Claims Act as barred by the two-year statute of limitations of 28 U.S.C. § 2401(b) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Toney v. United States , No. CA-03-126 (W.D.N.C. Aug. 6, 2004). 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.

AFFIRMED
EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER





PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)





In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2016 (the “Report”) of New Mountain Finance Corporation (the “Registrant”), as filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Shiraz Y. Kajee, the Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that:





|    |                                                                                                                                  
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 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 Registrant.




/s/ SHIRAZ Y. KAJEEName:Shiraz Y. KajeeDate:May 4, 2016
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3839 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3839

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              June 7, 1994

  Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental 
                                Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  To designate the United States Post Office building located at 220 
 South 40th Avenue in Hattiesburg, Mississippi, as the ``Roy M. Wheat 
                             Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The United States Post Office building located at 220 South 40th 
Avenue in Hattiesburg, Mississippi, shall be known and designated as 
the ``Roy M. Wheat Post Office''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the building referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the Roy M. Wheat Post Office.

            Passed the House of Representatives May 23, 1994.

            Attest:

                                           DONNALD K. ANDERSON,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 23-0410

_________________

IN THE MATTER OF:

P.P.

 A Youth in Need of Care.

O R D E R

_________________

Hertha L. Lund, counsel for Appellant Mother, has moved the Court to withdraw as 

counsel and for appointment of counsel from the Appellate Defender Division. Counsel 

states that Appellate Mother has been sentenced to twenty years in prison and is indigent.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the motion to withdraw as counsel is 

GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for appointment of counsel is 

GRANTED. The Appellate Defender Division shall have thirty (30) days from the date of 

this Order within which to file either a Notice of Appearance or a motion to rescind this 

Order appointing counsel. In the event Appellant qualifies for appointed counsel, the 

Appellate Defender Division shall immediately order any additional transcripts if they have 

not been already ordered. 

The Clerk is directed to provide a copy of this Order to counsel of record, to the 

Appellate Defender Division, and to Appellate Mother personally. 

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

July 31 2023

07/31/2023

Case Number: DA 23-0410
#### James R. DOZIER, Appellant, v. Carolyn Jean DOZIER, Appellee.

No. 1066.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

April 25, 1967.

Appeal dismissed.
#### Maurice S. ATWATER and Betty Jean Atwater, trading and doing business as Atwater Realty, Petitioners, v. Raymond W. HEALY and Mary C. Healy, his wife, Respondents.

No. 43282.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Feb. 28, 1973.

Rehearing Denied April 17, 1973.

Certiorari denied. 269 So.2d 753.

CARLTON, C. J., and ADKINS, Mc-CAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.

BOYD, J., dissents.
Exhibit 32.1


                          CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
                          CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                          PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

      In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
      of Big Time Acquisition,Inc. for the quarter ended May 29,
      2011, I, Scot A. Scheer, Chief Executive Officer(Principal
      Executive Officer)and Principal Financial and Accounting Officer
      of Big Time Acquisition,Inc. hereby certify as of the date hereof
      pursuant to Title 18 U.S.C., Chapter 63, Section 1350, as adopted
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to
      the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

           1.  Such quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending
               May 29, 2011 fully complies with the requirements
               of section 13(a) or 15(d)as applicable of the Securities
               Exchange Act of 1934; and

           2.  The information contained in such quarterly Report on Form
               10-Q for the quarter ended May 29, 2011 fairly represents
               in all material respects, the financial condition and results
               of operations of Big Time Acquisition, Inc.

     Dated:  July 11, 2011



     Big Time Acquisition, Inc.

     By: /s/ Scot A. Scheer
        ----------------------------
        Chief Executive Officer
       (Principal Executive Officer
        and Principal Financial and
        Accounting Officer)
#### Charles Wesley O’BERRY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-461.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Aug. 20, 1970.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Broward County; James F. Minnet, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 97-2613

___________ Herbert R. Hawn, Jr., * * Plaintiff - Appellee, * * v. * * B. Alan Sugg, in his official capacity as * President; Dr. Charles Hathway, in his * official capacity as Chancellor; Bart R. * Lindsey, James B. Blair, William E. * Clark, Frances A. Cranford, Joe L. * Hargrove, M.D., H. L. Hembree, III, * Appeal from the United States J. Thomas May, Frank W. Oldham, Jr., * District Court for the Carl S. Whillock, in their official * Eastern District of Arkansas. capacity as members of the Board of * Trustees of the University of Arkansas; * [UNPUBLISHED] University of Arkansas at Little Rock, * * Defendants - Appellants. * * Lewis E. Epley, Jr., in his official * capacity as a member of the Board of * Trustees of the University of Arkansas, * * Defendant, *

___________ Submitted: March 9, 1998 Filed: November 20, 1998

___________The HONORABLE JOSEPH F. BATAILLON, United States Dis trict Judge for * the District of Nebraska, sitting by designation. -2- Before WOLLMAN and LOKEN, Circuit Judges, and BATAILLON, District Judge. *

___________ PER CURIAM. The order of the district court denying defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the grounds of Eleventh Amendment immunity is reversed, and the c ase is remanded forf urther proceedings not inconsistent with this court’s opinion in Humenansky v

. Reg ents of the University of Minnesota , 152 F.3d 822 (8th Cir. 1998), rehearin g denied , No. 97-2302 (8th Cir. Nov. 3, 1998). BATAILLON, District Judge, concurring. I adhere to the views expresse d in my dissent in Humenanskybut agree that we are bound to follow that decision in this case. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
#### Melton Dadjad BLACKMAN, Petitioner, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director, Division of Corrections, Respondent.

No. 73-206.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 13, 1973.

Habeas corpus denied.
**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**

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Azaz Capital Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, Robert Weber, herebycertify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:

 

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

 

|   | (2) | The information contained  in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial  condition and results of operations of the Company as of the date and for the  periods expressed in the Report. |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| /s/ Robert Weber        |
|-------------------------|
| Robert Weber            |
| Chief Financial Officer |
|                    |
| May 27, 2011            |

 

 

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solelypursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Reportor as a separate disclosure document.

 

                                                                        

----
#### J. D. HEMBREE et al., Appellants, v. David REAVES, Appellee.

No. R-192.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Sept. 14, 1972.

Stephen B. Lewallen of Andrews & Le-wallen, Robert P. Cates, and Herbert J. Jones of Jones & Bates, Gainesville, for appellants.

Barry D. Graves of Jones & Ritch, Gainesville, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

 Defendants seek review by interlocutory appeal of 'the trial court’s order denying their motion to dismiss the complaint filed herein for failure to state a cause of action. In testing the sufficiency of such a motion, the material allegations of the complaint are taken as true.1 Some of the grounds urged by defendants in support of their motion are improperly based upon facts not alleged in the complaint and, therefore, may not be considered. We have carefully examined the complaint, the sufficiency of which is challenged by defendants’ motion, and conclude that it states a cause of action as a matter of law. Appellants’ motion to dismiss was properly denied, and the order appealed is affirmed.

SPECTOR, C. J., and WIGGINTON, and JOHNSON, JJ., concur.

1

. Fletcher v. Williams (Fla.App.1963) 163 So.2d 759; Connolly v. Sebeco, Inc. (Fla.1956) 89 So.2d 482.