alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2016202EN.01001801.xml

| 7.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 202/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 202/18

---

Article 5

(ex Article 5 TEC)

(ex Article 5 TEC)

1.   The limits of Union competences are governed by the principle of conferral. The use of Union competences is governed by the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality.

2.   Under the principle of conferral, the Union shall act only within the limits of the competences conferred upon it by the Member States in the Treaties to attain the objectives set out therein. Competences not conferred upon the Union in the Treaties remain with the Member States.

3.   Under the principle of subsidiarity, in areas which do not fall within its exclusive competence, the Union shall act only if and in so far as the objectives of the proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States, either at central level or at regional and local level, but can rather, by reason of the scale or effects of the proposed action, be better achieved at Union level.

The institutions of the Union shall apply the principle of subsidiarity as laid down in the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality. National Parliaments ensure compliance with the principle of subsidiarity in accordance with the procedure set out in that Protocol.

4.   Under the principle of proportionality, the content and form of Union action shall not exceed what is necessary to achieve the objectives of the Treaties.

The institutions of the Union shall apply the principle of proportionality as laid down in the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality.

---
# EUR-Lex - 22004D0013 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 22004D0013

**Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 13/2004 of 6 February 2004 amending Annex XXI (Statistics) to the EEA Agreement **

*
Official Journal L 116 , 22/04/2004 P. 0065 - 0065 *

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee

No 13/2004

of 6 February 2004

amending Annex XXI (Statistics) to the EEA Agreement

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 Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

(1) Annex XXI to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 161/2003 of 7 November 2003(1).

(2) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1192/2003 of 3 July 2003 amending Regulation (EC) No 91/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on rail transport statistics(2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement.

(3) This Decision is not to apply to Iceland,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The following shall be added in point 7 (Regulation (EC) No 91/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council) of Annex XXI to the Agreement:

", as amended by:

- 32003 R 1192: Commission Regulation (EC) No 1192/2003 of 3 July 2003 (OJ L 167, 4.7.2003, p. 13)."

Article 2

The text of Regulation (EC) No 1192/2003 in the Norwegian language, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 7 February 2004, provided that all the notifications pursuant to Article 103(1) of the Agreement have been made to the EEA Joint Committee(3).

Article 4

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 February 2004.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

P. Westerlund

(1) OJ L 41, 12.2.2004, p. 60.

(2) OJ L 167, 4.7.2003, p. 13.

(3) Constitutional requirements indicated.
EXHIBIT 31.2IEA Income Fund XII, L.P.Rule 13a-14 CERTIFICATION     I, John Kallas, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of IEA Income Fund XII, L.P. (the“Partnership”);     2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this quarterly report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, resultsof operations and cash flows of the Partnership as of, and for, the periods presented in thisquarterly report;     4. The other certifying officer of Cronos Capital Corp. (“CCC”), the General Partner of thePartnership, and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Partnership and wehave:          (a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe Partnership, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;and          (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the Partnership’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, based on our evaluation; and          (c) disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the Partnership’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the Partnership’s most recent fiscal quarter (thePartnership’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected,or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Partnership’s internal control over financialreporting.     5. CCC’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluationof internal control over financial reporting, to the Partnership’s auditors and the Audit Committeeof Partnership’s Board of Directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):          (a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect thePartnership’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and          (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who havea significant role in the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: May 15, 2006   /s/ JOHN KALLAS   John Kallas  Vice President and  Chief Financial Officer of CCC
<TABLE> <S> <C>

 <ARTICLE>                          5
 <LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
COMPANY'S  FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS  CONTAINED IN THE COMPANY'S 10-Q FOR THE PERIOD
ENDED  DECEMBER  31, 1999 AND IS  QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
 </LEGEND>

    <S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                  OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                    DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                             998
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,285
<ALLOWANCES>                                       880
<INVENTORY>                                        866
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                10,311
<PP&E>                                          12,308
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,583
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  21,084
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,245
<BONDS>                                          3,185
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,302
<OTHER-SE>                                       3,291
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    21,084
<SALES>                                         10,108
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                10,129
<CGS>                                            7,951
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    9,857
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   120
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 151
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    113
<INCOME-TAX>                                        36
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 77
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        77
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.03


</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                    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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of American HomePatient, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Marilyn O'Hara, Chief Financial Officer 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 the best of 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.

This Certification is executed as of November 14, 2003.

                                            /s/ Marilyn O'Hara
                                            ----------------------------
                                            Marilyn O'Hara
                                            Chief Financial Officer

A signed original 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.
#### The STATE of Utah, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Robert Charles DAVIS, Defendant and Appellant.

No. 14313.

Supreme Court of Utah.

Aug. 24, 1976.

Larry R. Keller, of Salt Lake Legal Defender Assn., Salt lake City, for defendant and appellant.

Vernon B. Romney, Atty. Gen., Earl F. Dorius, Asst. Atty. Gen., Salt Lake City, for plaintiff and respondent.

HENRIOD, Chief Justice:

Appeal from two convictions, — one burglary, the other theft.1 Affirmed.

Davis urges 1) an unconstitutional seizure under the state and federal constitutions relating thereto, 2) without probable cause. Both phases may be treated together. We think neither contention is meritorious.

Officer Hanks, with ten years’ experience as a peace officer, on a certain after*225noon was holding under surveillance, one Walker, co-accused, whom he knew to have been arrested in Price, Utah (which arrest Walker at first denied), and defendant Davis, whom he knew previously had been convicted of burglary. He saw Walker and Davis leave an apartment, temporarily lost sight of them, and about 10 to 12 minutes later saw them in a Volks-wagon van, driven by Walker, sitting in the driveway of another apartment, and as he passed, waved to Davis, whom he knew, —who waved back. The officer pulled up to let the van pass, but Walker voluntarily stopped behind the patrol car. Davis jumped out of the van and quickly walked toward the patrol car, when the officer, Hanks, got out. A brief conversation ensued, Davis volunteered he had been visiting a friend in the apartment. Walker showed Hanks his driver’s license at the latter’s request, which proved authentic. Hanks noticed a stereo in the van, and without solicitation, Davis stated he knew nothing about the stereo. Hanks radioed for another officer, and told one that appeared to watch the two while he checked the apartment from which the two had come. He found a jimmied open door, with wood splinters lying around and observed pictures and lamps lying about as if the room had been ransacked. He returned to the van and arrested the pair, obtained a search warrant for the van, confiscated the stereo, a piggy bank, and other items, and later, with another warrant to search Davis, found two Eisenhower silver dollars taken from the apartment in the latter’s personal effects.

Counsel for Davis relies on *State v. Bradshaw,*541 P.2d 800 (Utah 1975), which quotes from *Terry v. Ohio,*392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968), almost entirely as to the unconstitutional seizure contention. We think Bradshaw is not apropos or close to being dispositive and that Terry’s language more nearly supports our affirmance. Under the facts of this case, we consider the following cases as being pertinent and dispositive: *Terry v. Ohio*(supra) apparently, and *Carroll v. U. S.,*267 U.S. 132, 45 S.Ct. 280, 69 L.Ed. 543 (1925); *Brinegar v. U. S.,*338 U.S. 160, 69 S.Ct. 1302, 93 L.Ed. 1879 (1949); *State v. Torres,*29 Utah 2d 269, 508 P.2d 534 (1973); *State v. Criscola,*21 Utah 2d 272, 444 P.2d 517 (1968).

ELLETT, CROCKETT, TUCKETT, and MAUGHAN, JJ., concur.

1

. Title 76-6-202, and 76-6-404, respectively, Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended.
* 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 forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED August 17, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk 05IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-40883 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ELMER IVAN GARTH DAVINSON-CANALES, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 1:04-CR-207-ALL

-------------------- Before BENAVIDES, CLEMENT, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Elmer Ivan Davinson-Canales appeals his sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry following deportation. He argues that, if Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224 (1998) is overruled, his sentence imposed under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) would be unconstitutional and he would be entitled to be resentenced to the penalty for a lesser included offense. Davinson correctly acknowledges that Almendarez-Torres has not been overruled and that this argumentNo. 04-40883 -2- is foreclosed, but he seeks to preserve the issue for possible Supreme Court review. See Almendarez-Torres , 523 U.S. at 247 (1998); Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 489-90 (2000) ; United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000). Davinson next asserts that he should be resentenced in light of United States v. Booker , 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005) because he was sentenced under the mandatory guideline system. He concedes that his argument is subject to plain error review, but contends that he is not required to show prejudice because the error was structural and insusceptible of harmless error analysis. This court has rejected Davinson’s argument that a Booker error or the application of the then mandatory guidelines is a structural error or is presumptively prejudicial. See United
States v. Mares , 402 F.3d 511, 520 (5th Cir. 2005), petition for cert. filed (Mar. 31, 2005) (No. 04-9517); see also United States v. Malveaux , 411 F.3d 560-61 n.9 (5th Cir. 2005), petition for cert. filed (July 11, 2005) (No. 05-5297). We review for plain

error. United States v. Valenzuela-Quevedo , 407 F.3d 728, 732-33 (5th Cir. 2005), petition for cert. filed (July 25, 2005) (No. 05-5556). The “application of the Guidelines in their mandatory form constitutes error that is plain.” Id. at 733. To demonstrate an effect on his substantial rights, Davinson bears the burden of showing that the plain error he has identified “‘affected the outcome of the district court proceedings.’” Id. (quoting United States v. Olano , 507 U.S. 724, 734 (1993)).No. 04-40883 -3- Davinson has not pointed to anything in the record indicating that the district court would have imposed a lesser sentence under an advisory scheme. See Mares , 402 F.3d at 521. He has thus failed to demonstrate that his substantial rights were affected, and his sentence is AFFIRMED.
Vote

threshold Romero‐Brione De Lima Bradman MossoEla MortensenBuie Swaffar ChapmanSeitz

NOSB Spring Proposals and Discussion Documents 

Subcommittee

Substance NL Section Doc type Motion by: Seconded

by:

HS Motion to classify Short DNA Tracers as petitioned as

nonagricultural, synthetic

205.605(b) Proposal Lisa de Lima Scott Rice 2/3 YY YY YY YY YY 

HS Motion to add short DNA tracers as petitioned at

205.605(b)

205.605(b) Proposal Lisa de Lima Asa

Bradman

2/3

NNNNNNNNNN

HS Motion to classify L‐methionine as petitioned as non‐

agricultural, synthetic

205.605(b) Proposal Tracy Favre Harold

Austin

2/3

YY YY YY YY YY 

HS Motion to add L‐methionine as petitioned at

205.605(b)

205.605(b) Proposal Tracy Favre Jean

Richardson

2/3 YY YY YY YY YY 

HSHS Motion to change the annotation for tocopherols at

205.605(b) to the following: Derived from plant oils.Non‐synthetic or organic tocopherols are to be usedwhen commercially available.”

205.605(b) Proposal Tracy Favre Jean

Richardson

2/3

HS Motion to refer the Tocopherol Proposal back to

handling subcommittee

AshleySwaffar

AsaBradman

1/2 YY YY YY YY YY 

HS Marine algae listings on National List: Motion to

annotate the marine algae listings, and Motion torecommend that the NOP develop Guidance to clarify

205.605(a)and (b),205.606

Proposal Jean

Richardson

HaroldAustin

2/3

HS Motion to refer the Marine Algae listing back to the

handling subcommittee

AshleySwaffar

Emily Oakley 1/2

YY YY YY YY YY 

HS Ancillary substances used in cellulose. Motion to

support, or to restrict the use of, the following ancillarysubstances or categories of substances in cellulose, as

205.605(b) Proposal Harold

Austin

AshleySwaffar

2/3

HS Motion to refer Proposal on Ancillary substances used

in cellulose back to the handling subcommittee

AshleySwaffar

AsaBradman

1/2

YY YY YY YY YY 

CACS Personnel Performance Evaluations of Inspectors (NOP

2027). Motion to approve that NOP 2027 be revised toincorporate the recommendations 1‐5

NOP 2027 Proposal Jean

Richardson

Emily Oakley 2/3

CACS Motion to refer the Proposal on Personnel

Performance Evaliationations of Insepctors back to the

CACS.

Harriet Behar Ashley

Swaffar

1/2

YY YY YY YY YY 

CS Motion to accept all additions as described in the

proposal section above, to both the National OrganicProgram Regulation and the National Organic Program5029 Guidance.

NOP 2019 Proposal Francis

Thicke

Jesse Buie 2/3

CS Motion to Refer the Proposal on Strengthening the

organic seed guidance back to the Crops

Subcommittee

Harriet Behar Francis

Thicke

1/2

YY YY YY YY YY 

CS Motion to annotate the marine algae listings at

205.601

205.601 Proposal Emily Oakley Jesse Buie 2/3

CS Motion to refer the Proposal on Crops Marine Algae

back to the Crops subcommittee

Emily Oakley Harriet

Behar

1/2 YY YY YY YY YY 

OLPP Resolution Ashley

Swaffar

HarrietBehar

1/2 YY YY YY YY YY 

Printed 5/3/2017
# WeeklyTruckAvailabilitybyOrigin
Exhibit 32.2



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


I, Simon K. Gill , Chief Executive Officer of Chaparral Resources, Inc. (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 the best of my
knowledge:

     1.   The company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December
          31, 2004 ("Annual Report") fully complies with the requirements of
          Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;

and

     2.   All of the information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents,
          in all material respects, the financial condition and result of
          operations of the company.



Date: March 25, 2005                        /s/  Simon K. Gill
                                            ------------------------------------
                                                 Simon K. Gill
                                                 Chief Executive Officer
# EUR-Lex - 22003D0020 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 22003D0020

**Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 20/2003 of 31 January 2003 amending Annex XVII (Intellectual property) to the EEA Agreement **

*
Official Journal L 094 , 10/04/2003 P. 0082 - 0083 *

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee

No 20/2003

of 31 January 2003

amending Annex XVII (Intellectual property) to the EEA Agreement

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 Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

(1) Annex XVII to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 171/2002 of 6 December 2002(1).

(2) Directive 98/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 1998 on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions(2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement.

(3) Directive 98/44/EC relies on a definition in and a reference to Council Regulation (EC) No 2100/94(3), which is not incorporated into the Agreement,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The following point shall be inserted after point 9c (Directive 2001/84/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council) in Annex XVII to the Agreement:

"9d. 398 L 0044: Directive 98/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 1998 on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions (OJ L 213, 30.7.1998, p. 13).

The provisions of the Directive shall, for the purposes of the present Agreement, be read with the following adaptation:

In view of the patent union between Liechtenstein and Switzerland, Liechtenstein shall not deliver any patent as laid down in this Directive."

Article 2

The texts of Directive 98/44/EC in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 1 February 2003, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the Agreement have been made to the EEA Joint Committee(4).

Article 4

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, 31 January 2003.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

P. Westerlund

(1) OJ L 38, 13.2.2003, p. 36.

(2) OJ L 213, 30.7.1998, p. 13.

(3) OJ L 227, 1.9.1994, p. 1.

(4) Constitutional requirements indicated.