alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2018408EN.01003601.xml

| 12.11.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 408/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.11.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 408/36

---

Appeal brought on 21 June 2018 by Romantik Hotels & Restaurants AG against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) delivered on 25 April 2018 in Case T-213/17, Romantik Hotels & Restaurants AG v European Union Intellectual Property Office

(Case C-411/18 P)

(2018/C 408/47)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Appellant: Romantik Hotels & Restaurants AG (represented by: S. Hofmann, W. Göpfert, lawyers)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office, Hotel Preidlhof GmbH

By order of 3 October 2018, the Court of Justice of the European Union (Tenth Chamber) dismissed the appeal as being in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded and ordered the appellant to bear its own costs.

---
**Exhibit 23**

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm 

We herby consent to the incorporation by reference in theRegistration Statement of Ameriana Bancorp on Form S-8 (File Nos. 33-31034, 333-04013, 333-56111 and 333-139711) of our report, dated , March 28, 2007 on our audits of the consolidated financial statements of Ameriana Bancorp as ofDecember 31, 2006 and 2005 and for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2006, which report is included in Ameriana Bancorp’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006.

/s/ BKD, LLP 

Indianapolis, Indiana 

March 28, 2007
#### State v. Brooks

22567

04/12/2001

Vacated & Remanded
# C_2019328EN.01005202.xml

| 30.9.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 328/52 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.9.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 328/52

---

Order of the General Court of 9 July 2019 — Scaloni and Figini v Commission

(Case T-158/18) (1)

(Action for damages - Resolution of credit institutions and investment firms - Directive 2014/59/EU and Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 - State Aid - Disregard of the procedural requirements - Article 76(d) of the Rules of Procedure - Manifest inadmissibility)

(2019/C 328/59)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicants: Mario Scaloni (Ancona, Italy) and Ennio Figini (Chiaravalle, Italy) (represented by: P. Putti, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Recchia, A. Steiblytė and K.-P. Wojcik, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: European Parliament (represented by: L. Visaggio and M. Sammut, acting as Agents), Council of the European Union (represented by: E. Rebasti and J. Bauerschmidt, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for material loss alleged to have been suffered as a result of the Commission’s refusal to allow the Italian state to establish a state aid in favour of the Banca delle Marche.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed.

| 2. | Mario Scaloni and Ennio Figini shall bear their own costs and the costs incurred by the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mario Scaloni and Ennio Figini shall bear their own costs and the costs incurred by the Commission.

| 3. | The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union shall bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union shall bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 152, 30.4.2018.

---
#### Ramos v. Lattimer

22402

10/24/2000

Affirmed
Revised 6/30/05

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

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

	On [DATE] and [DATE], we notified appellant, in accordance with rule of appellate procedure 42.3(c), that we would dismiss this appeal unless the $125 filing fee was paid.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c).  Appellant has not paid the $125 filing fee.  See Tex. R. App. P. 5, 12.1(b).

	Because appellant has failed to comply with a requirement of the rules of appellate procedure and the Texas Supreme Court’s order of July 21, 1998,2 we dismiss the appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c), 43.2(f).

	Appellant shall pay all costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue.  See Tex. R. App. P. 43.4.

								PER CURIAM

PANEL D:

DELIVERED:

	COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

	NO. 02-07-0121121-cvCV

WeEsSlLeEyY SuUgGgG	APPELLANT

	V.

CACH, LLP	APPELLEE

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

	FROM COUNTY THE COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF  TARRANT  COUNTY

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

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

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

	On apeaApril 11, 2007 7 ___________ and April 25, 2007 __________, we notified appellant, in accordance with rule of appellate procedure 42.3(c), that we would dismiss this appeal unless the $125 filing fee was paid.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c).  Appellant has not paid the $125 filing fee.  See Tex. R. App. P. 5, 12.1(b).

	Because appellant has failed to comply with a requirement of the rules of appellate procedure and the Texas Supreme Court'’s order of July 21, 1998,2 we dismiss the appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c), 43.2(f).

	Appellant shall pay all costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(d)43.4..

								PER CURIAM

PANEL D:    CACYEYCE, C.J.:; LIVINSGSTONG and DAUPHINOT, JJ.

DELIVERED:    May 107, 2007
#### State v. Bolo

24945

05/30/2003

Affirmed
#### State v. Ortiz

20559

11/9/98

Denied

89 Hawai'i 232, 971 P.2d 321
OKLAHOMA DEPARTMfNT Of ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY BRAD HENRY STEVEN A. THOMPSON 

### OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENTOF ENVIRONMENTALQUALITY Governor Executive Director
April 9, 2008 Georgia Pacific Corporation Attn: Mr. Steve Landers 490I ChandlerRoad Muskogee, OK 74403-4909 Subject: Best Avail&ble Retrofit Technology(BART) Waiver Muskogee Mill'
.. Dear Mr. Landers:.

. . . The Oklahoma Departmen(ofEnvironmental Quality (ODEQ) received a BART waiver request for thereferenced site on March 30, 2007. After the technical review, the ODEQ is approving a waiver for the Muskogee Mill. This waiver is based 01l faGility BARTsources which are not expected to c;ause or contribute to visibility impaqts'at Class lareas based on submitted inodeling and

### ,~rop9sed changes as detailed 

### in the**applic~tion.** . The active Title V perinit will now be modified to include requirements that the facility comply With the**propos~d** changes/limits.in the;**~pplication** within five years of the Regional Haze SIP approval by EPA.·AlsC) tobeinclllded, will he a requirement that the facility modify the operating penhit to incorporate the proposed method ofcompliance with Appendix Y to' Part 51,'**V~** .Enforceable Limits. The operating permit shall be modified no laterthan 6 months prior to the SIP approval. While ODEQ has approved the waiver, the waiver is subject to EPA and public comment during the Regional Haze**Sta~e** ImplementationProgram (SIP) approval process. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Ifwe may be offurther service, please \ '-.
. .-'
.....

### _, . contactPhillip Fielder (405) 702-4100.



### -------

# --- --, ---'

707 NORTH ROBINSON, P.O. BOX 1677, OKLAHOMA CITY, OKlAHOMA 73101-1677 printed on recycled paper with soy ink 

# o
EXHIBIT 32

                CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Municipal Securities Purchase, Inc.
(the "registrant") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2006, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"report"), we, LeAnn Rogers and Peter Graham, Chairman and Vice President and
Treasurer, respectively, of the registrant, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, that to our 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 registrant.




October 30, 2006


/s/ LeAnn Rogers
----------------
LeAnn Rogers
Chairman
(Principal Executive Officer)



/s/ Peter Graham
----------------
Peter Graham
Vice President and Treasurer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
#### Ellis THOMAS, Appellant, v. STATE of Alaska, Appellee.

No. 1889.

Supreme Court of Alaska.

July 19, 1974.

*665Ben Esch, Asst. Public Defender, Herbert D. Soil, Public Defender, Anchorage, for appellant.

Stephen G. Dunning, Asst. Dist. Atty., Joseph D. Balfe, Dist. Atty., Anchorage, Norman C. Gorsuch, Atty. Gen., Juneau, for appellee.

Before RABINOWITZ, C. J., and CONNOR, ERWIN, BOOCHEVER and FITZGERALD, JJ.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted upon a jury verdict of the offense of assault with a dangerous weapon, in violation of AS 11.-15.220.1

He appeals both from the conviction and from the ten-year sentence imposed by the trial court.

The first question on appeal is whether a telephone, when used as a club to inflict injury upon the victim, can be considered a dangerous weapon. Our answer is in the affirmative. Berfield v. State, 458 P.2d 1008 (Alaska 1969), is dis-positive. Appellant’s counsel recognize this, and pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), have merely presented the question as being possibly arguable on appellant’s behalf. We affirm the conviction.

The second question on appeal is whether the maximum sentence of ten years is excessive. The sentence was imposed concurrently with sentences in another case in which appellant was found guilty on three counts of selling the narcotic drug heroin in violation of AS 17.10.010. In the heroin case the sentence was for two consecutive terms of ten years on each of two counts, and ten years on a third count, to be served concurrently with the other sentences. The sentence of ten years for assault with a dangerous weapon was to be served concurrently with the sentences for the sale of heroin. The court fixed eligibility for parole at one-third of the consecutive sentences, totaling 20 years, for selling heroin. No minimum term for parole eligibility was fixed as to the assault with a dangerous weapon conviction. Under the latter sentence, taken by itself, appellant may be considered for parole at any time. It is only the latter sentence which has been put in issue in this appeal.

In Thomas v. State, 522 P.2d 528, Opinion No. 1040 (1974), we affirmed appellant’s conviction for the sales of heroin mentioned above. Because the sentence to be served for those offenses is twice as long as the sentence to be served for the assault with a dangerous weapon offense, and because it seems unlikely that his service of the latter sentence will have any appreciable effect upon his parole eligibility, we have concluded that a detailed review of the latter sentence has been rendered superfluous. We affirm the sentence.

Affirmed.

1

. *“Assault with dangerous weapon.*A person armed with a dangerous weapon, who assaults another with the weapon, is punishable by imprisonment in the penitentiary for not more than 10 years nor less than six months, or by imprisonment in jail for not more than one year nor less than one month, or by a fine of not more than $1,000 nor less than $100.”
20965

#### State v. Malm

Affirmed
Opinion issued November 20, 2018

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01
- 1 8
- 0 0 4 26
- CV

——————————— P A UL SANTIAGO MOODY , Appellant

V. HOWARD M. REINER, AD MINISTRATOR OF ESTAT E OF VICTORIANO G. SANTIA GO JR., DECEASED , Appellee

O n Appeal from the County Civil Court at Law No. 2

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 110 6298

MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant, Paul Santiago Moody , proceeding pro se, has failed to timely file
his appella n t ’s brief. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.6( a )(1), (d) , 38.8(a)(1). On October 31 , 2018 , the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that h is deadline to file h is appellant’s brief had expired and that h is appeal was subject to dismissal for want of prosecution2

if he faile d to timely file h is appella n t ’s brief or an extension within 10 days of the
date of that notice. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.6(d), 38.8(a)(1), 42.3 (b). A ppellant failed to timely file a brief or request an extension

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(c). Accordingly, w e dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution for failure to timely file an appellant’s brief

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b), (c).
PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Higl ey , Lloyd , and Caughey

.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-7162

WAYNE A. SOUSER,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District

Judge. (CA-02-116, CA-02-117)

Submitted: September 30, 2003 Decided: October 8, 2003

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Wayne A. Souser, Appellant Pro Se. Leah Ann Darron, Assistant

Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Wayne A. Souser seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000).

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge

issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)

(2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his

constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive

procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or

wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, , 123 S. Ct.

1029, 1040 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000);

Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 534 U.S.

941 (2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude

that Souser has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. See 28

U.S.C. § 2253(c) (2000). We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

DISMISSED
USDA APHIS

2150 Centre Ave

Fort Collins, Co 80526

Data Source:

USDA APHIS PPQ

ESRI Basemap

These data, and all the information contained herein, have been collected by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Marketing

and Regulatory Programs Business Services’ (MRPBS) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and/or Agriculture

Marketing Service (AMS), or by its cooperators on APHIS’ and/or AMS’ behalf, for restricted government purposes only. This

information is the sole property of MRPBS. See full disclaimer at: https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/banner/help/disclaimers/

Alabama

Arkansas

Colorado

Connecticut

District of Delaware

Columbia

Florida

Georgia

Illinois Indiana

Iowa

Kansas Kentucky

Louisiana

Maine

Maryland

Michigan

Minnesota

Mississippi

Missouri

Montana

Nebraska

New Hampshire

New Jersey

New

Mexico

New York

North

Carolina

North Dakota

Ohio

Oklahoma

Pennsylvania

Rhode Island

South

Carolina

South Dakota

Tennessee

Texas

Vermont

Virginia

West Virginia

Wisconsin Wyoming

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

ASIAN LONGHORNED BEETLE (ALB) ERADICATION PROGRAM

ALB National Overview 2024

Asian Longhorned Beetle Federal Quarantine Boundary

Active Federal Quarantine

Rescinded Federal Quarantine

State Boundary - ALB Eradication Declared

State Boundary - ALB Quarantine Active

State Boundary 0 150 300

Miles

0 150 300

Kilometers

Date Created:

3/26/2024

[

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Hollywood, SC

Last Detection:

March 2024

Illinois Eradication:

Addison & Summit: 2004

Ravenswood, Kilbourn Park,

O'Hare, & Park Ridge: 2005

Chicago: 2008

Tate Twp/East Fork Rec Area, OH

Last Detection:

March 2024

Ohio Eradication:

Portion of East Fork State Park, OH: April 2022

Monroe Twp, OH: September 2018

Batavia/Stonelick Twps, OH: March 2018

Central Long Island, NY

Last Detection:

March 2024

Boston, MA

Eradication: May 2014

New Jersey Eradication:

Hudson: April 2008

Union/Middlesex: March 2013

Worcester, MA

Last Detection:

July 2021

New York Eradication

Islip, NY: August 2011

Manhattan, NY: May 2013

Staten Island, NY: May 2013

Eastern Queens, NY: May 2017

Western Queens/

Brooklyn, NY: September 2019
# C_2018427EN.01000501.xml

| 26.11.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 427/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.11.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 427/5

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Cassatie (Belgium) lodged on 19 July 2018 — JM v Belgische Staat

(Case C-470/18)

(2018/C 427/08)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hof van Cassatie

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: JM

Defendant: Belgische Staat

Question referred

Should Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Human Rights of the European Union, in cases of value added tax, be interpreted as precluding in all circumstances the use of evidence obtained in violation of the right to respect for private life as guaranteed by Article 7 of the Charter, or does it leave room for a national regulation under which the court which has to decide whether such a piece of evidence can be used as the basis for a VAT assessment has to make an evaluation such as the one set out above under paragraph 4 of this judgment.

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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from InfoNow's
Quarterly report to stockholders for the quarter ended June 30, 1997, and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-1-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                             629
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      259
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   963
<PP&E>                                           1,280
<DEPRECIATION>                                     441
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   2,966
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              932
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             5
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,958
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     2,966
<SALES>                                            962
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   962
<CGS>                                            1,011
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,775
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (17)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (800)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (800)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (800)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.15)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.15)
        

</TABLE>
H. Res. 6 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

January 6, 2015. 

Resolved, That the following named Members be, and are 

hereby, elected to the following standing committees of the 

House of Representatives: 

COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE: Mr. Conaway, Chair. 

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS: Mr. Rogers of Kentucky, Chair. 

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES: Mr. Thornberry, 

Chair. 

COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET: Mr. Tom Price of Georgia, Chair. 

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE: Mr. 

Kline, Chair. 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE: Mr. Upton, 

Chair. 

COMMITTEE ON ETHICS: Mr. Dent, Chair; Mr. Meehan; 

Mr. Gowdy; Mrs. Brooks of Indiana; and Mr. Marchant. 

COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES: Mr. Hensarling, 

Chair. 
2 

•HRES 6 EH 

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS: Mr. Royce, Chair. 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY: Mr. McCaul, 

Chair. 

COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION: Mrs. Miller of 

Michigan, Chair; Mr. Harper; Mr. Schock; Mr. Nugent; Mr. 

Rodney Davis of Illinois; and Mrs. Comstock. 

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY: Mr. Goodlatte, Chair. 

COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES: Mr. Bishop of 

Utah, Chair. 

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM: Mr. Chaffetz, Chair. 

COMMITTEE ON RULES: Mr. Sessions, Chair; Ms. Foxx; 

Mr. Cole; Mr. Woodall; Mr. Burgess; Mr. Stivers; and Mr. 

Collins of Georgia. 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY: 

Mr. Smith of Texas, Chair. 

COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS: Mr. Chabot, Chair. 

COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE: Mr. Shuster, Chair. 

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS: Mr. Miller of 

Florida, Chair. 
3 

•HRES 6 EH 

COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS: Mr. Ryan of Wisconsin, Chair. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
27227

#### Jess v. State

Affirmed
1

Cole, Jeffrey D.

From: Hill, Kenneth A. [K.Hill@WestonSolutions.com]

Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2011 10:56 AM

To: 'Maxwell.Bill@epamail.epa.gov'

Cc: Cole, Jeffrey D.; 'John.Tissue@exeloncorp.com'; Allan, Brian

Subject: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234

Importance: High

Bill, this time without the Weston Confidentiality Statement.

The Hg concentrations and emission factors shown in the spread sheet for Docket ID No. EPA‐HQ‐OAR‐2009‐0234

(Document ID No.2080) from the Regulations.Gov web site are incorrect. The values summarized in the table below are

correct. The corresponding Excel column and row numbers from the spread sheet are shown for your reference.

Thank You,

  EIA Facility Code: 3159 

Facility Name: Cromby Generating Station 

Boiler ID: 2 

Excel Row 

Excel Column 

F K 

Total Vapor Phase Mercury 

Emission Test Results 

Measured Value 

(μg/dscm) (lb/mmBtu) 

7 0.074 1.34E-07 

8 0.053 9.20E-08 

9 0.039 7.08E-08 

Ken Hill

Project Manager

Weston Solutions, Inc.

Integrated Air Services  

1400 Weston Way

West Chester, PA 19380

Office: 610‐701‐3043

Cell: 610‐721‐6521

Fax: 610‐721‐3161

www.westonsolutions.com