alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2004094EN.01006604.xml

| 17.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 94/66 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 94/66

---

Removal from the register of Case T-296/99 (1)

1

(2004/C 94/166)

(Language of the Case: Dutch)

(Language of the Case: Dutch)

By order of 22 January 2004 the President of the Second Chamber (Extended Composition) of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities ordered the removal from the register of Case T-296/99: Driessen Oosterbeek B.V. v Commission of the European Communities.

---

(1)  OJ C 63 of 04.03.2000.

1

---
NO. 03-12-00247-CV 

ROLAND OIL COMPANY § IN THE THIRD 

Appellant, § 

VS. § COURT OF APPEALS 

§ 

RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS § 

Appellee. § SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE AS COUNSEL FOR ROLAND OIL COMPANY 

Notice is hereby respectfully given to this Court 

that Jeffrey R. Akins, Attorney at Law, is appearing as 

counsel of record for Appellant, Roland Oil Company. 

Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ Jeffrey R. Akins 

JEFFREY R. AKINS 

State Bar No. 00962425 

14350 Northbrook Drive 

Suite 150 

San Antonio, Texas 78232 

Telephone: (210) 599-4905 

Facsimile: (210) 490-2776 

jrakins@sbcglobal.net 

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT 

ACCEPTED

03-12-00247-CV

4908016

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

4/15/2015 8:11:11 PM

JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 4/15/2015 8:11:11 PM JEFFREY D. KYLE Clerk
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 15th day of April, 

2015, after 6:00 p.m., I served the foregoing document 

upon the following counsel in accordance with the Texas 

Rules of Appellate Procedure: 

Anthony W. Benedict VIA FAX NO. (512) 320-0911 

Dario Bargas VIA FAX NO. (866) 415-0828 

/s/ Jeffrey R. Akins 

Jeffrey R. Akins
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

**COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,**

**Respondent**

**v.**

**JUSTIN NICHOLSON,**

**Petitioner :** 

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**: No. 136 WAL 2016** 

**Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court** 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW **, this 19th day of September, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of** 

**Appeal is** DENIED

**.**
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 73 (Monday, April 16, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 22558]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-9024]

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

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS

Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Arkansas Advisory 
Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission), and 
the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), that a planning meeting of 
the Arkansas Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene on 
Wednesday, May 30, 2012 at 2 p.m. and adjourn at approximately 5 p.m. 
(CST). The meeting will convene at Mitchell & Williams Law Firm, 425 
West Capitol Avenue, Suite 1800, Little Rock, Arkansas 72201. The 
purpose of this meeting is to collect preliminary background 
information and continue planning civil rights project.
    This meeting is available to the public or through the following 
toll-free call-in number: (866) 364-7584, conference call access code 
number 70873279. Any interested member of the public may call this 
number and listen to the meeting. Callers can expect to incur charges 
for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will 
not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls 
they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone 
number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the 
proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-977-
8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and 
contact name Farella E. Robinson.
    To ensure that the Commission secures an appropriate number of 
lines for the public, persons are asked to register by contacting 
Corrine Sanders of the Central Regional Office and TTY/TDD telephone 
number, by 4 p.m. on May 24, 2012.
    Members of the public are entitled to submit written comments. The 
comments must be received in the regional office by July 01, 2012. The 
address is U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 400 State Avenue, Suite 
908, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. Comments may be emailed to 
[email protected]. Records generated by this meeting may be inspected 
and reproduced at the Central Regional Office, as they become 
available, both before and after the meeting. Persons interested in the 
work of this advisory committee are advised to go to the Commission's 
Web site, www.usccr.gov, or to contact the Central Regional Office at 
the above email or street address.
    The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the 
rules and regulations of the Commission and FACA.

    Dated in Washington, DC, April 11, 2012.
Peter Minarik,
Acting Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.
[FR Doc. 2012-9024 Filed 4-13-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
```
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

Exhibit 10(b)  


  
 

  Consent of Independent Accountants    
  


We hereby consent to the use, in this Registration Statement on Form N-4 (File No. 333-81553) of our report dated March 1, 2002, relating to
the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedules of Protective Life Insurance Company and Subsidiaries, which appears in such Registration Statement. We also consent to the use
in this Registration Statement of our report dated April 2, 2002, on our audits of the financial statements of The Protective Variable Annuity Separate Account, which appears in such
Registration Statement. We also consent to the reference to us under the heading "Independent Accountants" in such Registration Statement. 


PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Birmingham, Alabama

April 25, 2002 









QuickLinks


Consent of Independent Accountants
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY

STATE OF DELAWARE )

 )

V. ) ID# 0608007491

 )

ELWOOD M. HUNTER, )

 )

Defendant. )

ORDER

AND NOW TO WIT, this 13th day of April, 2015, upon consideration of 

the Defendant’s Motion for New Trial Pursuant to Superior Court Criminal Rule 

33, IT APPEARS THAT:

1. On January 7, 2007, a jury convicted Defendant of Possession With 

Intent to Deliver Heroin and Use of a Vehicle for Keeping Controlled Substance. 

On May 11, 2007, Defendant was sentenced as a Habitual Offender under 11 Del. 

C. 4214(b) to Life Imprisonment and an additional 18 months at Level 5. The 

Delaware Supreme Court affirmed the Superior Court’s judgment on March 10, 

2008.1

2. On January 12, 2015, Defendant filed a Motion for New Trial Pursuant to 

Superior Court Criminal Rule 33.2

 1 Hunter v. State, 945 A.2d 594 (Del. 2008) (TABLE).

2 Docket ID 80.
2

3. Defendant contends that he is entitled to a new trial based on newly 

discovered evidence of misconduct at the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner 

(“OCME”) relating to the Laboratory Manager Farnam Daneshgar. At Defendant’s 

trial in 2007, Daneshgar testified that he conducted a chemical analysis of the 

substance found in Defendant’s possession and that the substance was heroin. 

Defendant asserts that he should be granted a new trial because Daneshgar is the 

subject of a criminal prosecution related, in part, to his position as Laboratory

Manager at the OCME.

4. Defendant filed his motion for new trial pursuant to Superior Court 

Criminal Rule 33. Under Rule 33, a motion for new trial based on the ground of 

newly discovered evidence may be made only before or within two years after final 

judgment.3

 Defendant’s motion is timed barred under to Rule 33 because it was 

filed more than two years after final judgment. 

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant’s 

Motion for New Trial Pursuant to Superior Court Criminal Rule 33 is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Jan R. Jurden, President Judge

cc: Prothonotary – Original

Defendant

 3 Del. Super. Ct. Crim. R. 33.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1171 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1171

    To amend title 49, United States Code, to ensure that revenues 
 collected from passengers as aviation security fees are used to help 
    finance the costs of aviation security screening by repealing a 
   requirement that a portion of such fees be credited as offsetting 
      receipts and deposited in the general fund of the Treasury.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 13, 2019

Mr. DeFazio (for himself, Mr. Thompson of Mississippi, Mr. Katko, Miss 
  Rice of New York, Mr. Langevin, Mrs. Watson Coleman, Ms. Titus, Mr. 
 Lawson of Florida, Mrs. Demings, Mr. Johnson of Georgia, Ms. Brownley 
  of California, Mr. Pappas, Ms. Eshoo, Mr. Sires, Mr. Carbajal, Mr. 
Lowenthal, Ms. Stefanik, Mr. Heck, Ms. Norton, Mr. Welch, Ms. Wilson of 
 Florida, Mrs. Napolitano, Mr. Huffman, Ms. Pingree, Mr. Soto, and Mr. 
  McEachin) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Homeland Security

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend title 49, United States Code, to ensure that revenues 
 collected from passengers as aviation security fees are used to help 
    finance the costs of aviation security screening by repealing a 
   requirement that a portion of such fees be credited as offsetting 
      receipts and deposited in the general fund of the Treasury.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Funding for Aviation Screeners and 
Threat Elimination Restoration Act'' or the ``FASTER Act''.

SEC. 2. REPEAL OF REQUIREMENT REGARDING CREDITING AND DEPOSIT OF A 
              PORTION OF AVIATION SECURITY FEES.

    (a) Repeal.--Section 44940 of title 49, United States Code, is 
amended--
            (1) in subsection (c), by striking paragraph (3);
            (2) in subsection (f)--
                    (A) by striking the heading and inserting ``Deposit 
                and Availability of Fee.--'';
                    (B) by striking paragraph (1);
                    (C) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as 
                paragraphs (1) and (2), respectively; and
                    (D) by amending paragraph (1), as so redesignated, 
                to read as follows:
            ``(1) shall be deposited into a separate account in the 
        Treasury, which shall be available to the Administrator for 
        expenditure only to pay the costs of activities and services 
        for which the fee is imposed; and''; and
            (3) by striking subsection (i).
    (b) Conforming Amendment.--Subsection (d)(4) of such section is 
amended by striking ``, other than subsection (i),''.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 10.12

                     GTECH CORPORATION EXECUTIVE PERQUISITES
                              PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS*

Howard Cohen
David Calabro
Jaymin Patel
Kathleen Mc Keough
Larry Smith
Marc Crisafulli
Antonio Carlos Rocha
Robert Plourde
William Pieri
William Middlebrook
Donald Stanford  * (retired December 19, 2001)
Jean Pierre Desbiens (through Dec. 31, 2002)
W. Bruce Turner
Jean Marc Lafaille * (employment ceased September 1, 2001)

*Participants for calendar years 2001 and 2002 unless otherwise noted.
Exhibit 32.2





Certification required by Rule 13a-14(b) or


Rule 15d-14(b) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code





In connection with the Quarterly Report of OHA Investment Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2015, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Cory E. Gilbert, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer 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 my knowledge:





|    |                                                                                                                                  
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|(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 Company.

Date:August 5, 2015/s/ Cory E. GilbertCory E. GilbertChief Financial Officer and Treasurer
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. PD-1038-14

RYAN WALLACE, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

ORDER PURSUANT TO TEXAS RULES OF 

APPELLATE PROCEDURE RULE 9.10

Per curiam.

ORDER

This cause is before this Court on Appellant’s Petition for Discretionary Review from

trial court case number F10-7311-R in the 265th District Court of Dallas County.

The Clerk of this Court has discovered sensitive data in the record, namely: the name

of the complainant who was a minor at the time the offense was committed and an

individual’s personal identification number. TEX.R.APP. P. 9.10(a). Pursuant to Texas Rule

of Appellate Procedure 9.10, the Clerk sought a ruling from the Court and thereafter notified

the parties. The Court now orders the Clerk of this Court to redact or seal the discovered
Rule 9.10 Order - 2

sensitive data from the records identified and listed below. The Court further orders the trial

court clerk, the clerk of the court of appeals, or any entity or individual possessing the

following documents to redact or seal the documents pursuant to this order:

1. Clerk’s Record

2. Reporter’s Record

3. Appellant’s Brief on Appeal

4. Appellant’s Pro Se Petition for Discretionary Review

Filed: April 6, 2015

Do not publish
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>  5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY>  U.S. DOLLARS
<EXCHANGE-RATE>  1

<S>                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                         Year
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               JUN-27-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                    JUN-27-1999
<CASH>                                                1,557
<SECURITIES>                                          9,507
<RECEIVABLES>                                             0
<ALLOWANCES>                                              0
<INVENTORY>                                             619
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     10,453
<PP&E>                                               44,612
<DEPRECIATION>                                       23,703
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       41,748
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                 2,065
<BONDS>                                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                                525
<OTHER-SE>                                           34,952
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         41,748
<SALES>                                               7,851
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     27,547
<CGS>                                                 2,415
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        20,580
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                          0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                        0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                       5,237
<INCOME-TAX>                                          1,902
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                   3,335
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                          3,335
<EPS-BASIC>                                           .61
<EPS-DILUTED>                                           .61
IA 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 85 

Relating to a national emergency declared by the President on February 

15, 2019. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 14, 2020 

Mr. CASTRO of Texas submitted the following joint resolution; which was 

referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Relating to a national emergency declared by the President 

on February 15, 2019. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 That, pursuant to section 202 of the National Emer4 gencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622), the national emergency de5 clared by the finding of the President on February 15, 

6 2019, in Proclamation 9844 (84 Fed. Reg. 4949) is here7 by terminated. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
Agricultural Marketing Service, Specialty Crops Program, Specialty Crops Inspection Division

Downloading New Versions of the Fresh Electronic 

Inspection Reporting/Resource System (FEIRS) (December 2016)

SCI Division Inspection Series

Page 1 of 2

DOWNLOADING NEW VERSIONS OF THE FRESH ELECTRONIC INSPECTION 

REPORTING/RESOURCE SYSTEM (FEIRS)

FEIRS Program Updates

There are two types of updates that will be available within the FEIRS program. The first are 

updates to the databases such as the applicant, shipper, or inspector database. These updates will 

be available from the server periodically and will automatically download when the FEIRS 

program is instructed to transmit.

The second type of update is a program upgrade that changes the version of FEIRS (i.e. version 

1.0 to version 1.1). When these types of updates become available, written notification will be 

sent out to all SCI employees and Federal-State offices that are using FEIRS prior to making the 

update available on the server. Before the effective date of the new version, all inspectors must 

complete all open certificates (FV-187, 205, 207, 300 and 301’s) and work logs from their 

current forms folder and transmit all completed forms to the server. 

Procedure

A. Updating New Software Versions

On the effective date of the new version, all Agricultural Commodity Graders 

(ACG) must:

Verify that the current and completed forms folders are empty (no forms or work 

logs).

1. Connect to the network or VPN.

2. Click on the “Transmit” icon on the home page.

3. Click on the “Begin Transfer” button and the new version of FEIRS with 

automatically download.

4. Follow the on screen directions for installing the download. For the new 

version to be installed properly you must exit FEIRS; the next time you 

open FEIRS, the new version should be installed.
SCI Division Inspection Series Downloading New Versions of the Fresh Electronic 

Inspection Reporting/Resource System (FEIRS)

Effective Date: December 2016 Page 2 of 2

If an ACG is going to be on extended leave, upon returning from leave the 

ACG will immediately transmit to download any updates which may have 

been issued during the leave period.

B. FEIRS Transmitting Policy 

Each ACG must transmit electronic certificates at a minimum of two (2) times 

weekly (due to a recent policy change, all Section 8e FEIRS certificates must be 

transmitted within 48 hours of completion). If an ACG is going on leave, the ACG 

must ensure that all forms have been completed and transmitted before taking 

such leave. As a reminder, certificates cannot be made available to financially 

interested parties or to USDA personnel from the server until they have been 

transmitted from the laptop. If a large number of certificates accumulate in the 

completed forms folder between transmissions, it is the inspector’s responsibility 

to transmit more frequently.
* 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

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 7, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-61051

Summary Calendar

DANIEL GHEBREMARIAM WOLDU,

Petitioner,

versus

ALBERTO R. GONZALES, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent.

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

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

BIA No. A78 881 271

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

Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Daniel Ghebremariam Woldu, a native and citizen of Eritrea,

petitions this court for review of the Board of Immigration

Appeals’ (BIA) decision affirming the Immigration Judge’s (IJ)

denial of his application for asylum. Woldu contends that the

BIA’s decision is not supported by substantial evidence because

he established past persecution and a well-founded fear of future

persecution.
No. 05-61051

-2-

Woldu does not challenge the denial of his application for

withholding of removal or relief under the Convention Against

Torture. Therefore, these issues are waived. See Thuri v.

Ashcroft, 380 F.3d 788, 793 (5th Cir. 2004). Further, the BIA’s

determination that Woldu failed to establish past persecution is

supported by substantial evidence, and the record does not compel

a contrary conclusion. See Mikhael v. INS, 115 F.3d 299, 304

(5th Cir. 1997). 

However, in considering Woldu’s well-founded fear of

persecution claim, the IJ relied on Woldu’s past treatment in

Eritrea to support his determination that there was no basis for

Woldu’s alleged fear of future persecution. Further, the IJ and

BIA failed to address relevant evidence presented by Woldu to

support this claim. Therefore, the BIA’s decision fails to

reflect meaningful consideration of all the relevant and

substantial evidence supporting Woldu’s fear of future

persecution claim. See Abdel-Masieh v. INS, 73 F.3d 579, 584-85

(5th Cir. 1996). Accordingly, the petition for review is

GRANTED, the BIA’s removal order is VACATED, and the case is

REMANDED to the BIA for further proceedings consistent with this

opinion. This court does not, however, intimate what conclusion

the BIA should reach on remand. 

In light of the foregoing, Woldu’s motion for a stay of

removal is DENIED AS MOOT.