alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2005064EN.01000101.xml

| 10.3.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 64/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.3.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 64/1

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 115/2004

of 6 August 2004

amending Protocol 31 to the EEA Agreement, on cooperation in specific fields outside the four freedoms

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, as amended by the Protocol adjusting the Agreement on the European Economic Area, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’, and in particular Articles 86 and 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Protocol 31 to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 90/2004 of 8 June 2004 (1). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Protocol 31 to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 90/2004 of 8 June 2004 (1).

| (2) | It is appropriate to extend the cooperation of the Contracting Parties to the Agreement to include the pilot projects for participation of young people. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

It is appropriate to extend the cooperation of the Contracting Parties to the Agreement to include the pilot projects for participation of young people.

| (3) | Protocol 31 to the Agreement should therefore be amended in order to allow for this cooperation to take place with effect from 1 January 2004, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Protocol 31 to the Agreement should therefore be amended in order to allow for this cooperation to take place with effect from 1 January 2004,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

Article 4 of Protocol 31 to the Agreement shall be amended as follows:

| 1. | the following paragraph shall be inserted after paragraph 2i:






  ‘2j. | The EFTA States shall, as from 1 January 2004, participate in the Community actions related to the following budget heading, entered in the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2004:






  — | budget heading 15 07 03:
  “Pilot projects for participation of young people”.’; |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.

the following paragraph shall be inserted after paragraph 2i:

‘2j.

—

budget heading 15 07 03:
  “Pilot projects for participation of young people”.’;

| 2. | the text of paragraph 3 shall be replaced with the following:






  ‘3. | The EFTA States shall contribute financially in accordance with Article 82(1)(a) of the Agreement to the programmes and actions referred to in paragraphs 1, 2, 2a, 2b, 2c, 2d, 2e, 2f, 2g, 2h, 2i and 2j.’ |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

the text of paragraph 3 shall be replaced with the following:

‘3.

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the day following the last notification to the EEA Joint Committee under Article 103(1) of the Agreement (*1).

Article 3

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 6 August 2004.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Kjartan JÓHANNSSON

---

(1)  
  OJ L 349, 25.11.2004, p. 52.

1

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

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



In connection
with the accompanying Quarterly Report of Equus Total Return, Inc. (the “Fund”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31,
2023 (the “Report”), I, L’Sheryl D. Hudson, Chief Financial Officer of 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:



| | (1) | To my knowledge, the Report 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
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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







Dated: May 10, 2023





|EQUUS TOTAL RETURN, INC.   
|---------------------------
|                           
|/s/
    L’Sheryl D. Hudson 
|L’Sheryl D. Hudson         
|Chief Financial
    Officer
Exhibit 11

<TABLE>                        
			      
			    Shiva Corporation
	    Computation of Net Income (Loss) Per Share (1)

<CAPTION>
					   Three months ended        
				      ---------------------------   
					March 29,     March 30,
					 1997          1996 (2)                
				      ------------- -------------  
<S>                                   <C>           <C>             
Weighted Average
Common and Common
Equivalent Shares:

Weighted Average
Common Shares 
Outstanding During
the Period                            28,971,621    27,830,865      

Weighted Average 
Common Equivalent
Shares                                         -     2,694,207      
				      ----------    ----------     
				      28,971,621    30,525,072     
				      ==========    ==========     
 
Net Income (Loss)                    ($8,370,000)   $4,339,000   

Primary Net Income
 (Loss) Per Share                         ($0.29)        $0.14        


<FN>
(1) Fully diluted net income per share has not been separately presented, as 
    the amounts would not be materially different from primary net income per
    share.  Net loss per share excludes common equivalent shares because their
    effect is antidilutive.

<FN>
(2) Retroactively adjusted to reflect the one-for-one stock dividend on all
    shares of the Company's common stock declared by the Company's Board of 
    Directors on April 2, 1996.  The stock dividend was paid on April 22,
    1996, to all stockholders of record on April 12, 1996.

</TABLE>
 
<PAGE>
Navigate to Homepage
Search
Main navigation
  

        
              Explore the Capitol Campus
                          Art
                            Buildings & Grounds
                            Capitol Hill Facts
                            Visitor Resources
                            Our Blog
                            What We Do
                          Areas of Expertise
                            Programs & Ceremonies
                            Projects
                            Publications
                            Strategic Objectives
                            About Us
                          Who We Are
                            History of the AOC
                            News & Notices
                            Organizational Structure
                            Partnerships & Recognition
                            Work With UsSearch Breadcrumb
    HomeExplore the Capitol CampusThe Art Collection
Boston Tea Party, 1773
        
                  The Basics
      
Artist
      
Allyn Cox

EverGreene Painting Studios

Materials
    Oil on Canvas

Year
    1994

Location
      
U.S. Capitol Building
          Cox Corridors

Boston Harbor appears in a moonlit scene, with people dressed as Native Americans throwing crates of tea from a boat; this famous event led to the Revolutionary War.About the Cox Corridors MuralsThe first floor of the U.S. Capitol's House wing is elaborately decorated with wall and ceiling murals by artist Allyn Cox. The western north-south corridor, called the Westward Expansion corridor, includes maps and scenes showing the growth of the United States from early exploration through the acquisition of Alaska and Hawaii. Serve. Preserve. Inspire.

              Contact Us
                            Accountability
                            Hill Staff Resources
                            AOC Staff Resources
Utility
  

        
              Privacy Policy
                            Image Terms of Use
                            Inspector General
                            U.S. Botanic Garden
                            U.S. Capitol Visitor CenterFacebook
	Twitter
	Flickr
	YouTube
	Instagram
	Subscribe
':FPARTWE!MTO[ - 

### :nAMSP0RTA110 N ;OCKE T 0PERAT10M 3 Februar y 10,201 2 ?;!i / FE B i 5 P 3

- ! 5 Departmen t

o f Transportatio n Re : Su n Countr y slo t exemptio n Docke t

No . FAA-2012-008 9

To Who mThi s Ma

y Concern : I a mwritin g i

n support o f SU N COUNTR Y AIRLINES . I t ha s been jus t

wonderfu l havin g thi s airlin e fl y fro mLansin g Michigan t o Washingto n D.C . Wheneve r I take th e fligh

t i t i s alway s afille dplane . Thi s airlin e ha s provide dsaf e servic e sinc e las t

April . 1 a

masenio r

citize n wh o reall y appreciate s no t havin g to chang e plane s i n Detroit ! Pleas e authoriz e a

n additiona l slo t

fo r Su n Countr y Airline s i

n Washingto n D.C . under th e exemptio n rule . I n additio n t o m

y persona l reasons , i

t i s ver y importan t

to th e Greate r

Lansing' s economica l developmen t

efforts . Becaus e thi s i s th e stat e capita l an dauniversity town , w e hav e many professional s needin g t o mak e thi s tri p t o th e nation' s capita l o n aregular basis . Havin g adirec t

fight ha s bee n ver

y beneficial t o th e community . I n addition , I gre w u p i

n Minnesot aan dreturn wheneve r possibl e t o visi t

relative s an dfriends . I a m ver y grateful fo

r th e Lansin g to Minneapoli s fight, also . Sincerely , Mar y An n Sullivan Dun n 384 3 Sandlewoo dDriv e Okemos , M

I 4886 4
----

| 1.  | I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of ARI Network Services, Inc. (the “Company”); |
|----------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 3. | Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | /s/ Roy W. Olivier                    |
|--------|---------------------------------------|
|   | Roy W. Olivier                        |
|   | President and Chief Executive Officer |

----
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 20 22

- 3024

_____________________________ O SCAR C ASTANEDA

- L OPEZ , Appellant,

v.

S TATE O F F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Okaloosa County

. John T. Brown , Judge

. January 30, 2024

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
B ILBREY , W INOKUR , and T ANENBAUM , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Oscar Castaneda

- Lopez, pro se
, Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JEAN CRUMP, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; et al., 

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 18-55950 

D.C. No. 2:18-cv-04760-RGK-PLA 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

R. Gary Klausner, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 12, 2019**

Before: LEAVY, BEA, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Jean Crump appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing her 

42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging federal and state law claims. We have 

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under 28 

U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for failure to state a claim. Barren v. Harrington, 152 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

MAR 19 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 18-55950 

F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (order). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Crump’s action because Crump failed 

to allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim. See Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 

338, 341-42 (9th Cir. 2010) (although pro se pleadings are construed liberally, 

plaintiff must present factual allegations sufficient to state a plausible claim for 

relief); see also FDIC v. Meyer, 510 U.S. 471, 476-78, 484-86 (1994) (the United 

States has not waived its sovereign immunity for constitutional torts; a Bivens

cause of action may not be brought against a government agency); West v. Atkins, 

487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988) (elements of a § 1983 claim); Garmon v. County of Los 

Angeles, 828 F.3d 837, 842-43 (9th Cir. 2016) (application of absolute 

prosecutorial immunity); Duvall v. County of Kitsap, 260 F.3d 1124, 1133 (9th Cir. 

2001) (application of judicial immunity).

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued 

in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009). 

AFFIRMED.
M A N D A T E

THE STATE OF TEXAS

TO THE 225TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF BEXAR COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before our Court of Appeals for the Fourth District of Texas on January 28, 2015, the cause upon appeal to

revise or reverse your judgment between

Michael Thomas Paul, Appellant

V.

Greg Abbot Attorney General for the State of Texas, Appellee

No. 04-14-00791-CV and Tr. Ct. No. 2001-CI-16843

was determined, and therein our said Court of Appeals made its order in these words:

In accordance with this court’s memorandum opinion of this date, this

appeal is DISMISSED. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b); see also TEX. R. APP. P.

42.3(c). Appellant’s motion requesting an extension of time to file his brief and

a waiver of all costs of appeal, which was filed on January 9, 2015, is DENIED.

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals for the Fourth

District of Texas, in this behalf and in all things have the order duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS the Hon. Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice of the Court of Appeals for the Fourth District of

Texas, with the seal of the Court affixed and the City of San Antonio on April 15, 2015.

KEITH E. HOTTLE, CLERK

Cynthia A. Martinez

Deputy Clerk, Ext. 53853
BILL OF COSTS

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, FOURTH DISTRICT, AT SAN ANTONIO

No. 04-14-00791-CV

Michael Thomas Paul

v.

Greg Abbot Attorney General for the State of Texas

(NO. 2001-CI-16843 IN 225TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF BEXAR COUNTY)

TYPE OF FEE CHARGES PAID BY

MOTION FEE

REPORTER'S RECORD

$10.00

$54.75

E-PAID

EXEMPT

MICHAEL PAUL

BEXAR COUNTY

Balance of costs owing to the Fourth Court of Appeals, San Antonio, Texas: 0.00

Court costs in this cause shall be paid as per the Judgment issued by this Court.

I, KEITH E. HOTTLE, CLERK OF THE FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF

TEXAS, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and correct copy of the cost bill of

THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS, showing the charges and

payments, in the above numbered and styled cause, as the same appears of record in this office.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, witness my hand and the Seal of the COURT OF APPEALS for

the Fourth District of Texas, this April 15, 2015.

KEITH E. HOTTLE, CLERK

Cynthia A. Martinez

Deputy Clerk, Ext. 53853
1

Troutman, Jake (FAA)

From: Troutman, Jake (FAA)

Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 10:06 AM

To: 'Blakecoppinger@hotmail.com'

Cc: May, Rick (FAA)

Subject: Request for Additional Information - Blake Coppinger

Dear Mr. Coppinger:

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket No. FAA‐2015‐

2232).  This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to process your petition.

•             Provide a copy of the Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual (MPTOM) which is required by Order

8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 8, Section 1.  If you wish for us to proceed without this manual and remove closed set filming

from your proposed operation please inform of us of your intention by the requested response date listed below.

Please submit the additional information (non proprietary) to your docket at www.regulations.gov and submit any

proprietary information to the FAA Headquarters or electronically via email to 333exemptions@faa.gov.  If you want us

to process your request any further, we must receive the information described above by 9/1/15.  If we do not receive

the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267‐9521.

Sincerely,

Jake J Troutman

Program Analyst | Rulemaking

FAA Office of Aviation Safety

Airmen and Airspace Rules Division

202‐267‐9521
# Bid Offer

# Secondary

# Table 5

# Figure 5

Average premium/discount to tariff 

($/car)

# Figure 6

Average premium/discount to tariff 

($/car)

# Figure 7

Average premium/discount to tariff 

($/car)
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 12

- 00199

- CR

Jeffery Wayne Jones

v.

The State of Texas §

§

§

§

§ From Criminal District Court No. 1

o f T arrant County (1039752D )

October 17, 2013

Opinion by Justice Dauphinot

(nfp)



### JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of

the trial court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By

_________________________________ Justice Lee Ann Dauphinot
Mr. Dan Ngo

Office of Rulemaking Aircraft and Airport Rules Division Federal Aviation Administration Re: Address change notice to Exemption No. 11581 for Mountain High Aviation, LLC (Regulatory

Docket No. FAA
-2014
- 0874) Dear Mr. Ngo: This is a notice that Mountain High Avi ation is changing the address of its UAV/UAS operations division to : PO Box 4725 Medford, OR 97501
. If necessary

Mountain High Aviation, LLC requests amendment to the existing Section 333 Exemption No. 11581 which was granted on May 1 4, 2015 to reflect thi s change to its authorized commercial operations. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. P lease do not hesitate to contact me if you should have any

questions. Sincerely, Joseph Hovelman President 541
-261
- 1299 

### joseph.hovelman@mthighaviation. com
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18

- 60085 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

− Appellee ,

v ersus RICKEY ROBERTSON , A lso K nown as Slick Rick , Defendant

− Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi No. 3:17

- CR

- 16

- 1

Before SMITH, WIENER, and WILLETT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
Rickey Robertson pleaded guilty of conspiracy to commit sex trafficking. He appeals his within

- guidelines sentence of 188 months, asserting that it is

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set f orth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED December 3, 2018 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 18-60085 Document: 00514745966 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/03/2018No. 18

- 60085

2 substantively unreasonable because it fails to account for the need to avoid

un warranted disparities be tween his sentence and his co

- defendant ’s

. Robert

son properly preserved his objection , so we review for abuse of discre tion. Gall v. United States , 552 U.S. 38, 46, 49

- 51 (2007); see also United States v. Peltier , 505 F.3d 389, 391

− 92 (5th Cir. 2015). Sentences within the properly calculated guidelines are presumed to be substantively reasonable. United States v. Cooks , 589 F.3d 173, 186 (5th Cir. 2009). Moreover, the court infer s from such a sentence “that the district court has considered all the factors for a fair sentence set forth in the Guidelines.” United States v. Mares , 402 F.3d 511, 519 (5th Cir. 2005). The presumption of reasonableness is rebutted only on a showing that the sentence does not account for a factor that should receive signi ficant weight, it gives significant weight to an irrelevant or improper factor, or it represents a clear error in judg

ment in balancing sentencing factors. Cooks , 589 F.3d at 186. The district court considered the facts and circumstances, the arguments

o f counsel for a below

- guidelines sentence, and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors

— including specific consideration of the need to avoid unwarranted sen

tencing disparities

— in finding that a within

- guidelines sentence was appropri

ate. See Mares , 402 F.3d at 519

. Robertson’s contentions amount to no more than a mere disagreement with the court’s weighing of the § 3553(a) factors, which is insufficient to rebut the presumption of reasonableness. See Cooks , 589 F.3d at 186. Moreover, this court will not rewei gh the § 3553(a) factors because “the sentencing judge is in a superior position to find facts and judge their import under § 3553(a) with respect to a particular defendant.” United States v. Campos

- Maldonado , 53 1 F.3d 337, 339 (5th Cir. 2008); see also United States v. Guillermo Balleza , 613 F.3d 432, 435 (5th Cir. 2010)

. The judgment is AFFIRMED. Case: 18-60085 Document: 00514745966 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/03/2018
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 20-10404

Conference Calendar

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Shawn Anton Lambert-Duck, 

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:19-CR-104-1

Before Graves, Willett, and Duncan, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

The attorney representing Shawn Anton Lambert-Duck has moved 

for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders 

v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 

(5th Cir. 2011). Lambert-Duck has not filed a response but has moved for the 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

May 5, 2021

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 20-10404 Document: 00515849396 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/05/2021
No. 20-10404

2

appointment of substitute counsel. That motion is DENIED. See United 

States v. Wagner, 158 F.3d 901, 902-03 (5th Cir. 1998).

We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the 

record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the 

appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, 

counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused 

from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 

See 5th Cir. R. 42. 

Case: 20-10404 Document: 00515849396 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/05/2021