alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Small Business Administration

# AGENCY:

Small Business Administration.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This is a notice for the Military Reservist Economic Injury Disaster Loans interest rate for loans approved on or after October 31, 2023.

# DATES:

Issued on November 30, 2023.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Robert Blocker, Office of Financial Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, at                         *robert.blocker@sba.gov;*                         or (202) 619-0477.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Small Business Administration publishes an interest rate for Military Reservist Economic Injury Disaster Loans (13 CFR 123.512) on a quarterly basis. The interest rate will be 4.000 for loans approved on or after October 31, 2023.

Robert Blocker,

Chief, Disaster Loan Policy Division, Office of Financial Assistance.

[FR Doc. 2023-26397 Filed 12-5-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8026-09-P
May, 12, 1999

21763

#### State v. Mills

Affirmed
# C_2021028EN.01004802.xml

| 25.1.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 28/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.1.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 28/48

---

Order of the General Court of 1 December 2020 — Danske Slagtermestre v Commission

(Case T-486/18) (1)

(Action for annulment - State aid - Contributions scheme for the collection of waste water - Preliminary examination stage - Decision finding that there is no State aid - Trade association - Locus standi - Status as an interested party - Objective of protecting the procedural rights guaranteed by Article 108(2) TFEU - Lack of individual concern - No substantial effect on the competitive position - Regulatory act - Lack of direct concern - Inadmissibility)

(2021/C 28/74)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Danske Slagtermestre (Odense, Denmark) (represented by: H. Sønderby Christensen, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Němečková, acting as Agent)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Kingdom of Denmark (represented by: J. Nymann-Lindegren and M. Wolff, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2018) 2259 final of 19 April 2018 relating to State aid SA.37433 (2017/FC) –Denmark, declaring, after the preliminary examination stage, that the contribution introduced by the lov nr. 902/2013 om ændring af lov om betalingsregler for spildevandsforsyningsselskaber m.v. (Betalingsstruktur for vandafledningsbidrag, bemyndigelse til opgørelse af særbidrag for behandling af særlig forurenet spildevand m.v.) (Law No 902/2013, amending the law establishing the rules relating to contributions owed to waste water treatment operators (structure of the contributions for the drainage of waste water, authorising special contributions for the treatment of particularly polluted waste water)) does not confer an advantage on specific undertakings and does not therefore constitute State Aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.

Operative part of the order

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

1.

The action is dismissed.

| 2. | Danske Slagtermestre shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Danske Slagtermestre shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.

| 3. | The Kingdom of Denmark shall bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The Kingdom of Denmark shall bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 381, 22.10.2018.

---
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MICHAEL A. CONZELMAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

and

RHOSAN K. CONZELMAN,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant

- Appellee. No. 19

- 55190

D.C. No. 8:18

- cv

- 00431

- DOC

- DFM

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

David O. Carter, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 4, 2020 * *

Before: FERNANDEZ, SILVERMAN, and TALLMAN , Circuit Judges.

Michael A. Conzelman appeal s pro se from the district court’s judgment

* 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

FEB 10 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 19

- 55190

dismissing his action related to his income tax liability for tax year 2012. We have

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Dexter v. Colvin , 731

F.3d 977, 980 (9th Cir. 2013) ( dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction) ;

Hebbe v. Pliler , 627 F.3d 338, 341 (9th Cir. 2010) (dismissal under F ed

. R. C iv

. P.

12( b)(6))

. We affirm.

The district court pro perly dismissed Conzelman ’ s claim for a tax refund

under 26 U.S.C § 7422 because Conzelman failed to file his claim within three

years of filing his 2012 return

. See 26 U.S.C. § 6511(a) (setting forth limitation s

period for refund claim); United States v. Brockamp , 519 U.S. 347, 353 (1997)

(equitable tolling does not apply to § 6511’s time limitations for refund claims).

The district court properly dismissed Conzelman’s claim s for damages under

26 U.S.C. § 7433 because Conzelman failed to allege facts sufficient to show any

unauthorized collection activity

. See Hebbe , 627 F.3d at 341

- 42 (although pro se

pleadings are construed liberally, plaintiff must present factual allegati ons

sufficient to state a plausible claim for relief); Miller v. United States , 66 F.3d 220,

223 (9th Cir. 1995) ( the assessment or tax determination process does not

constitute an act of collection and is therefore, not actionable under § 7433).

A FFIRME D

.
# C_2019044EN.01000901.xml

| 4.2.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 44/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.2.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 44/9

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Okręgowy w Warszawie (Poland) lodged on 5 September 2018 — Criminal proceedings against VX, WW and XV

(Case C-563/18)

(2019/C 44/12)

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Okręgowy w Warszawie

Parties to the main proceedings

VX, WW and XV

Question referred

On a proper construction of the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) of the Treaty on European Union, does the resulting obligation for Member States to provide remedies sufficient to ensure effective legal protection in the fields covered by EU law preclude provisions which remove the guarantee of independent disciplinary proceedings against judges in Poland by permitting disciplinary proceedings to be conducted under political influence, giving rise to a risk that the system of disciplinary measures will be used to politically control the content of judicial decisions?

---
#### State v. Perez

17756

4/24/95

Affirmed
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

DARIEN GRADY,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 374 EAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 30th day of January, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
IV 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 730 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the important 

role of the health care industry in identifying victims of sex trafficking. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 13, 2016 

Mrs. BLACK (for herself, Ms. SEWELL of Alabama, Mr. PETERS, Mr. HASTINGS, Mrs. NAPOLITANO, Mr. BYRNE, Mr. FLEISCHMANN, Mr. WEBER

of Texas, Ms. HAHN, Mr. CICILLINE, Mr. ADERHOLT, Mr. ROE of Tennessee, and Ms. CLARK of Massachusetts) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the important role of the health care industry in 

identifying victims of sex trafficking. 

Whereas sex trafficking is a form of modern slavery that exploits some of the most vulnerable members of society; 

Whereas sex trafficking victims face serious health risks including physical injury, drug and alcohol addiction, traumatic brain injury, sexually transmitted diseases, sterility, Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, and forced or coerced abortions; 

Whereas studies show that up to 88 percent of sex trafficking 

victims end up in the emergency setting, health clinic, or 

doctor’s office at some point during their captivity; 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 730 IH 

Whereas health care providers, especially in the emergency 

setting, are sometimes the only outsiders that sex trafficking victims come into contact with during their involuntary confinement; 

Whereas health care providers in the emergency setting have 

limited training in recognizing this at-risk patient population; and 

Whereas the United States has and must continue to show 

strong international leadership when it comes to recognizing, treating, and combating sex trafficking: Now, 

therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) strongly condemns any acts of sex traf3 ficking both in the United States and across the 

4 world; 

5 (2) recognizes that health care providers are 

6 uniquely positioned to intervene on behalf of victims; 

7 (3) calls on the health care industry to stay in8 formed on the latest technologies and trends that 

9 occur within the sex trafficking trade, including the 

10 possibility of implantable devices; and 

11 (4) urges the front line of health care providers 

12 in the emergency setting to understand the preva13 lence, characteristics, and indicators of sex traf14 ficking and the important role they can and should 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HRES 730 IH 

1 play in recognizing, helping, and rescuing victims of 

2 this horrendous crime. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATIONS BY THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Education Management Corporation
(the Company) on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert T. McDowell, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
hereby certify in such capacity, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | 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 for the periods reflected
therein.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: May 10, 2005



By:

/s/    ROBERT T.
MCDOWELLRobert T. McDowell Chief Financial Officer
**EXHIBIT 31.2**— Certification of Chief Financial Officer
**CERTIFICATION**
I, James E. Dixon, certify that:
 1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of SBS Technologies,Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessaryto make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under whichsuch statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows ofthe registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand have:
 (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known tous by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, asof the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
 (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.
February 9, 2005    /S/ James E. DixonJames E. Dixon*Executive Vice President,Chief Financial Officerand Treasurer*
#### Poe v. Hawai'i Labor Relations Bd.

24313

08/01/2002

Denied

98 Hawai'i 416, 49 P.3d 382
#### Smith v. Prest

16107

12/02/94

Vacated and Remanded
<TABLE> <S> <C>


        

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF HEALTH  PROFESSIONALS,  INC., FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED
DECEMBER  31,  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>                      SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                         OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                           DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          48       
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                5,284
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,709
<INVENTORY>                                    108
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,874
<PP&E>                                       3,083 
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,826
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              12,312
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,573
<BONDS>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<COMMON>                                        94
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,536
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                12,312
<SALES>                                      1,920 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,929
<CGS>                                            0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,865
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              91
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (936)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (936)
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (936)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 (.20)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 (.20)

        

</TABLE>
# C_2018112EN.01004702.xml

| 26.3.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 112/47 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.3.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 112/47

---

Action brought on 6 February 2018 — MPM-Quality v EUIPO — Elton Hodinářská (MANUFACTURE PRIM 1949)

(Case T-75/18)

(2018/C 112/60)

Language in which the application was lodged: Czech

Parties

Parties

Applicant: MPM-Quality v.o.s (Frýdek-Místek, Czech Republic) (represented by: M. Kyjovský, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Elton Hodinářská a.s. (Nové Město nad Metují, Czech Republic)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark containing the word elements ‘MANUFACTURE PRIM 1949’ — European Union trade mark No 3 531 662

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before EUIPO: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Procedure before EUIPO

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 December 2017 in Case R 556/2017-4

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Articles 18 and 58 of Regulation No 1001/2017; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Articles 18 and 58 of Regulation No 1001/2017;

| — | Infringement of Article 10(3) et seq. and of Article 19(1) of Regulation No 1430/2017. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 10(3) et seq. and of Article 19(1) of Regulation No 1430/2017.

---
#### Kirk LASSEND, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent.

Criminal No. 10-40019-FDS

United States District Court, D. Massachusetts.

Signed 09/11/2017

Cory S. Flashner, Karin Michelle Bell, United .States Attorney’s Office, Worcester, MA, for Respondent.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON MOTION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

SAYLOR, J.

On October 14, 2014, Kirk Lassend filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Court denied that petition on July 11, 2017, Las-send now seeks a certificate of appealability (“COA”) in order to appeal the denial of his habeas petition. For the reasons that follow, that motion will be granted.

. To appeal the final order in a proceeding instituted under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, the petitioner. must first obtain a COA from a circuit justice or a district court. *See*28 U.S.C. § 2253(c). A COA will issue only-if the petitioner “has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” § 2253(c)(2). This standard is satisfied by “demonstrating that jurists of reason could disagree with the district court’s resolution of [petitioner’s] constitutional claims or that jurists could conclude the issues presented are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.” *Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 327, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003) (citing *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000)).

Petitioner contends that his sentence under the Armed Career Criminar Act, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e), which was based on a finding that he had three.prior convictions for “violent felonies” under the force clause of the ACCA, violates the constitution in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in *Johnson v. United States,*— U.S. —, 135 S.Ct. 2551, 192 L.Ed.2d 569 (2015). Petitioner’s contention, while ultimately rejected by this Court, represents a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Further, a reasonable jurist could disagree with the Court’s conclusions.

Accordingly, a certificate of appealability is GRANTED as to petitioner’s claim that his sentence under the ACCA was imposed in violation of the Constitution.

So Ordered.