alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Emil Vesselinov KOUNIN, Petitioner, v. BUREAU OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, Respondent.

No. 03-40287 NAC.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Oct. 11, 2005.

Edward J. Cuccia, New York, NY, for Petitioner.

Robert C. Grisham, Assistant United States Attorney for the District of Idaho, Boise, ID, for Respondent.

PRESENT: WINTER, CALABRESI, and POOLER, Circuit Judges.

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, of this petition for review of the order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”), it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review is DENIED.

Petitioner Emil Vesselinov Kounin (“Kounin”) petitions for review of a June 25, 2003 order of the BIA denying his motion to reopen. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the facts and procedural history of the case. In this appeal, Kounin challenges the BIA’s determination that he failed to exercise due diligence in providing the BIA with evidence of changed circumstances, namely, his wife’s *3882001 attainment of permanent resident status in Canada.

We review the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen for abuse of discretion. *See Iavorski v. U.S. INS,*232 F.3d 124, 128 (2d Cir.2000). Abuse of discretion may be found where the Board’s decision “provides no rational explanation, inexplicably departs from established policies, is devoid of any reasoning, or contains only summary or conclusory statements; that is to say, where the Board has acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner.” *Zhao v. U.S. DOJ,*265 F.3d 83, 93 (2d Cir.2001) (internal citations omitted).

A motion to reopen must be filed within ninety days of the date on which the final administrative decision was rendered in the proceeding sought to be reopened. *See 8*C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2). However, even if the ninety-day statute of limitations has passed, the BIA may entertain a motion to reopen in the interest of justice, and, for example, for “asylum claims which arise due to a change in circumstances in the country of the alien’s nationality after the initiation of the deportation proceedings.” *Iavorski,*232 F.3d at 131. The BIA will not grant a motion to reopen “unless it appears to the Board that evidence sought to be offered is material and was not available and could not have been discovered or presented at the former hearing.” *Kaur v. BIA,*413 F.3d 232, 234 (2d Cir.2005) (citing 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(1) (formerly 8 C.F.R. § 3.2(c)(1))). In this case, the evidence provided with Kounin’s motion in the BIA indicated that Kounin’s wife had fled from Bulgaria and relocated in Canada in November 2001, while Kounin’s appeal to the BIA was pending. However, as the BIA properly concluded, Kounin failed to demonstrate why he had not presented the evidence of her relocation before April 2003, when he filed his motion to reopen. Thus, the BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion.

To the extent Kounin attempts to appeal the BIA’s prior order affirming an immigration judge’s denial of relief to Kounin, we lack jurisdiction to review. *See Malvoisin v. INS,*268 F.3d 74, 74 (2d Cir.2001).
# C_2020378EN.01002702.xml

| 9.11.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 378/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.11.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 378/27

---

Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2020 — BNP Paribas v ECB

(Cases T-150/18 and T-345/18) (1)

(Economic and monetary policy - Prudential supervision of credit institutions - Contribution to the deposit guarantee scheme or to the single resolution fund by way of irrevocable payment commitments - Tasks conferred on the ECB - ECB’s specific supervision powers - Article 4(1)(f), Article 16(1)(c) and Article 16(2)(d) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 - Measure imposing the deduction of the cumulative sum of outstanding irrevocable payment commitments from Common Equity Tier 1 - Absence of individual examination)

(2020/C 378/32)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: BNP Paribas (Paris, France) (represented by: A. Gosset-Grainville, M. Trabucchi and M. Dalon, lawyers)

Defendant: European Central Bank (ECB) (represented by: E. Koupepidou, R. Bax and F. Bonnard, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for partial annulment of Decision ECB/SSM/2017-R0MUWSFPU8MPRO8K5P83/248 of the ECB of 19 December 2017, Decision ECB-SSM-2018-FRBNP-17 of the ECB of 26 April 2018, and Decision ECB-SSM-2019-FRBNP-12 of the ECB of 14 February 2019.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Joins Cases T-150/18 and T-345/18 for the purposes of the present judgment; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Joins Cases T-150/18 and T-345/18 for the purposes of the present judgment;

| 2. | Annuls paragraphs 9.1 to 9.3 of Decision ECB/SSM/2017-R0MUWSFPU8MPRO8K5P83/248 of the European Central Bank (ECB) of 19 December 2017, paragraphs 9.1 to 9.3 of Decision ECB-SSM-2018-FRBNP-17 of the ECB of 26 April 2018, and paragraphs 8.1 to 8.4 of Decision ECB-SSM-2019-FRBNP-12 of the ECB of 14 February 2019; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Annuls paragraphs 9.1 to 9.3 of Decision ECB/SSM/2017-R0MUWSFPU8MPRO8K5P83/248 of the European Central Bank (ECB) of 19 December 2017, paragraphs 9.1 to 9.3 of Decision ECB-SSM-2018-FRBNP-17 of the ECB of 26 April 2018, and paragraphs 8.1 to 8.4 of Decision ECB-SSM-2019-FRBNP-12 of the ECB of 14 February 2019;

| 3. | Orders the ECB to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the ECB to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 161, 7.5.2018.

---
**Exhibit32.1**

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVEOFFICER AND**

**CHIEFFINANCIAL OFFICER**

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and in connection with the accompanyingreport on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2006 that is being filedconcurrently with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), each of the undersigned officers of Clayton Williams Energy,Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certifies that:

1.               The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

2.               The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
|   | /s/ Clayton W. Williams, Jr. |
|--------|------------------------------|
|   | Clayton W. Williams          |
|   | Chief Executive Officer      |
|   | August 8, 2006               |
|   |                         |
|   |                         |
|   | /s/ Mel G. Riggs             |
|   | Mel G. Riggs                 |
|   | Chief Financial Officer      |
|   | August 8, 2006               |

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF AND FOR THE THIRTEEN WEEKS ENDED
SEPTEMBER 28, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-28-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-28-1996
<CASH>                                         266,126
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  155,277
<ALLOWANCES>                                    (1,591)
<INVENTORY>                                    564,289
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,003,066
<PP&E>                                         216,103
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (74,833)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,152,665
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          692,363
<BONDS>                                        110,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           454
<OTHER-SE>                                     341,542
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,152,665
<SALES>                                        990,530
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               990,530
<CGS>                                          853,610
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  853,610
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               112,476
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,045
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 23,652
<INCOME-TAX>                                     9,106
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             14,546
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    14,546
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.31
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.31
        

</TABLE>
# C_2020054EN.01004901.xml

| 17.2.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 54/49 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.2.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 54/49

---

Judgment of the General Court of 19 December 2019 — Sta*Ware EDV Beratung v EUIPO — Accelerate IT Consulting (businessNavi)

(Case T-383/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU figurative mark businessNavi - Genuine use of the mark - Partial revocation - Article 51(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 58(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2020/C 54/54)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Sta*Ware EDV Beratung GmbH (Starnberg, Germany) (represented by: M. Bölling and M. Graf, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Hanne, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Accelerate IT Consulting GmbH (Ahlen, Germany) (represented by: H. Hofmann, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 May 2018 (Case R 434/2017-5), relating to revocation proceedings between Sta*Ware EDV Beratung and Accelerate IT Consulting.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Sta*Ware EDV Beratung GmbH to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Sta*Ware EDV Beratung GmbH to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 294, 20.8.2018.

---
Draft new Chapter 4.Z. Control of pathogenic agents in traded milt and fertilised eggs of fish

September 2023 meeting

The Aquatic Animals Commission reviewed the draft new Chapter 4.Z. Control of pathogenic agents in traded milt and fertilised eggs of fish, which had been developed in collaboration with industry. The Commission reminded Members that the purpose of this chapter is to provide recommendations for safe trade in milt and fertilised eggs of fish from areas which have not been declared free from infection with a listed disease.  

To take into account the provisions in the draft new Chapter 4.Z., the Commission agreed to revise model Article 10.X.10. for infection with SAV, infection with IHNV and infection with VHSV and Article 10.4.15. for infection with ISAV, and to add an option in both points 1 and 2 to follow the requirements described in Chapter 4.Z. 

The Commission revised model Articles 10.X.15. for infection with SAV, infection with IHNV and infection with VHSV, and Article 10.4.20. for infection with ISAV to align with the recommendations of the new Chapter 4.Z. 

The Commission agreed to add a new definition for ‘collection and incubation centre’ to the Glossary of the *Aquatic Code* to ensure a common understanding of this term given the importance of its use in the draft new Chapter 4.Z. 

The Commission agreed that it would further discuss any suitable article changes for fish disease chapters other than infection with SAV, infection with IHNV, infection with VHSV and infection with ISAV at its February 2024 meeting.

The new Chapter 4.Z. Control of pathogenic agents in traded milt and fertilised eggs of fish, is presented as Annex 12 for comments.

The revised model Article 10.X.10. for Chapter 10.5. Infection with SAV, Chapter 10.6. Infection with IHNV and Chapter 10.10. Infection with VHSV, and Article 10.4.15. for Chapter 10.4. Infection with ISAV, is presented as Annex 13 for comments. 

The revised model Article 10.X.15. for Chapter 10.5. Infection with SAV, Chapter 10.6. Infection with IHNV and Chapter 10.10. Infection with VHSV, and Article 10.4.20. for Chapter 10.4. Infection with ISAV, is presented as Annex 14 for comments.

The new glossary term is presented as Annex 15 for comments.

Annex 15. Items 6.7. & 6.8. – Glossary

GLOSSARY

[...]

*COLLECTION AND INCUBATION CENTRE*

	means a facility for the collection of eggs, fertilisation and incubation, and the collection, processing, and storage of milt approved by the *Competent Authority* in conformity with the provisions of Chapter 4.Z.

[...]

*ORNAMENTAL AQUATIC ANIMAL*

	means an *aquatic animal* that is intended for display, exhibition, competition, or to be kept as a pet.

[...]

____________
EXHIBIT 31.2

                                 CERTIFICATIONS

I,  Richard  Zaremba,  certify  that:

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of MISONIX, INC.;

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

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

The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) [*** Omitted pursuant to extended
compliance period] for the registrant and have:

(a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
     controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure
     that material information relating to the registrant, including its
     consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
     entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
     prepared;

(b)  [*** Omitted pursuant to extended compliance period];

(c)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
     procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
     effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of
     the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(d)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control
     over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent
     fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
     annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
     materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial
     reporting; and

The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

     (a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
          operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
          reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant'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 have a significant role in the registrant's internal
          control over financial reporting.

Date:  May 6, 2004

/s/  Richard Zaremba
--------------------
Richard Zaremba
Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary


                                       29
<PAGE>
# C_2018436EN.01002701.xml

| 3.12.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 436/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.12.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 436/27

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the College van Beroep voor het Bedrijfsleven (Netherlands) lodged on 21 September 2018 — Darie B.V. v Staatssecretaris van Infrastructuur en Milieu

(Case C-592/18)

(2018/C 436/37)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

College van Beroep voor het Bedrijfsleven

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Darie B.V.

Defendant: Staatssecretaris van Infrastructuur en Milieu

Questions referred

| 1. | Should the term ‘biocidal products’ in Article 3 of Regulation 528/2012 (1) be interpreted as also referring to substances which consist of one or more types of bacteria, enzymes or other constituents, given that, due to the specific way in which they act, they have no direct effect on the harmful organism for which they are intended, but on the creation or maintenance of the potential habitat of that harmful organism, and what requirements must then, where appropriate, be imposed on such an effect? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Should the term ‘biocidal products’ in Article 3 of Regulation 528/2012 (1) be interpreted as also referring to substances which consist of one or more types of bacteria, enzymes or other constituents, given that, due to the specific way in which they act, they have no direct effect on the harmful organism for which they are intended, but on the creation or maintenance of the potential habitat of that harmful organism, and what requirements must then, where appropriate, be imposed on such an effect?

| 2. | In answering question 1, is it relevant whether the situation in which such a product is used is free of the harmful organism, and, if so, what criterion should be used to assess whether the latter is present? |
| --- | --- |

2.

In answering question 1, is it relevant whether the situation in which such a product is used is free of the harmful organism, and, if so, what criterion should be used to assess whether the latter is present?

| 3. | In answering question 1, does the period within which the effect takes place have any relevance? |
| --- | --- |

3.

In answering question 1, does the period within which the effect takes place have any relevance?

---

(1)  Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 concerning the making available on the market and use of biocidal products Text with EEA relevance (OJ 2012 L 167, p. 1).

---
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellant, 

v.

ERICK MORALES-GUERRERO,

Appellee.

§

§

§

§

No. 08-19-00185-CR

Appeal from the

394th District Court 

of Jeff Davis County, Texas

(TC# CR1700847)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was error in the trial 

court’s order granting Defendant’s motion to suppress. We therefore reverse the trial court’s 

“Order on Motion to Suppress” and remand the cause to the trial court for further proceedings, in 

accordance with the opinion of the Court. This decision shall be certified below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 7TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2020.

GINA M. PALAFOX, Justice

Before Alley, C.J., Rodriguez, and Palafox, JJ.
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) ORRULE 15d-14(b)**

**OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934**

**AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

I, Christopher Anzalone, Chief Executive Officer of Arrowhead Research Corporation (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to Rule 13(a)-14(b) or Rule 15(d)-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934 and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that (i) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2011, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934, and (ii) the information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

Date: May 12, 2011 

 

A signed original of these written statements required by 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 has been provided to Arrowhead Research Corporation and will be retained by Arrowhead Research Corporation andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
IV 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 565 

Supporting the peace process in Colombia. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 15, 2015 

Mr. GALLEGO (for himself, Mr. BYRNE, Mr. LEWIS, Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia, 

Mr. FARR, and Mr. MCGOVERN) submitted the following resolution; 

which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

RESOLUTION 

Supporting the peace process in Colombia. 

Whereas the Republic of Colombia is one of the United 

States strongest allies in the Western Hemisphere; 

Whereas the peoples of the United States and Colombia share 

a history of friendship and a common commitment to 

peace and democratic values; 

Whereas peace negotiations between the Colombian Government and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia 

(FARC) are advancing, affording an opportunity to end 

the most enduring conflict in our hemisphere; 

Whereas according to Colombia’s National Center of Historical Memory, over 6,000,000 people have been internally 

displaced and more than 220,000 killed over the course 

of the conflict, 80 percent of them civilians; 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 565 IH 

Whereas Colombians of all walks of life have suffered as a 

result of the violence, which has included massacres, 

kidnappings, assassinations, sexual violence, extrajudicial 

executions, use of landmines, recruitment of child soldiers, forced disappearances, and forced displacement; 

Whereas minority groups, including the Afro-Colombian, indigenous and rural communities, as well as women, have 

been disproportionately harmed by the conflict; and 

Whereas successfully negotiating an end to the Colombian 

conflict will positively contribute to regional stability and 

promote United States policy goals in the Western Hemisphere by strengthening the rule of law, democracy, and 

human rights in Colombia: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) recognizes the importance of the ongoing 

3 negotiations between the Colombian government and 

4 the FARC; 

5 (2) commends Colombian President Juan 

6 Manuel Santos, who has demonstrated vision and 

7 leadership in effectively seeking a negotiated settle8 ment to end the conflict and lay the foundations for 

9 a sustainable peace; 

10 (3) calls on the negotiating parties to fully ad11 dress the just demands of victims of violence for 

12 truth, justice, meaningful reparations and guaran13 tees that the violence of the past will not be re14 peated; and 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HRES 565 IH 

1 (4) urges President Barack Obama and his Ad2 ministration to continue to vigorously support these 

3 negotiations and to develop plans to support the Co4 lombian people in building a just and lasting peace. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS