alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2008142EN.01001602.xml

| 7.6.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 142/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 142/16

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Cassatie van België, lodged on 25 March 2008 — G.C. Deschaumes v Belgian State

(Case C-125/08)

(2008/C 142/24)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hof van Cassatie van België

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: G. Deschaumes

Appellant:

Respondent: Belgian State

Respondent:

Question referred

Should Article 221(1) of the Community Customs Code (CCC) (1) be construed as meaning that the prescribed communication of a customs debt to the person liable for payment can lawfully be effected only after the customs debt has been entered in the accounts or, in other words, that the communication of a customs debt to the person liable for payment, as prescribed in Article 221(1) of the CCC, must always be preceded by its entry in the accounts if it is to be lawful and to comply with Article 221(1)of the CCC?

1

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ 1992 L 302, p. 1).

1

---
EXHIBIT-10.7


 


WAREHOUSE LEASE EXTENSION


 


THIS LEASE EXTENSION
AGREEMENT (hereinafter referred to as the “Lease Extension”) is made and entered into this 1st day of September
2016, by and between William Shrewsbury & Peggy Shrewsbury
(hereinafter referred to as “Lessor”) and TX Holdings, lnc.(hereinafter referred to as
“Lessee,” whether one or more, and each
agreeing to be bound by and held jointly and severally liable under the terms and conditions of this Lease
Extension).


 


In consideration of the covenants and obligations
contained herein and of other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the
parties agree as follows:


 


PRIOR
LEASE: The parties executed a Lease Agreement dated November 19,
2012 (hereinafter “Lease Agreement”) with a term of lease commencing on the 1st day of October,
2012, and which expires on the 31st day of
August 2014. All terms, conditions, and
provisions of said Lease Agreement are hereby incorporated by reference or by attachment.


 


EXTENSION OF PRIOR
LEASE TERM: The parties hereby agree to extend and continue the aforementioned Lease Agreement for an additional term, commencing
on the 1st day of September, 2016 and expiring on the 31st day of August, 2018 .


 


RENT PAYMENTS: The rent shall be payable in
equal monthly installments of $2
000.00
payable by the 5th day of each month of the term. The
first full rent payment under this Lease Extension is due by the pt day of September,2016 .


 


PRORATED
RENT. [choose one:] X                      Not
applicable, or     Tenant agrees to pay a
prorated sum in the amount of $                         as
rent to cover the period from the commencement of this Lease Extension until the_day of the following month. This prorated
rent shall be due at the execution of this Lease Extension. Payment
of rent, non-payment of rent, and default for late payment of rent shall be governed in accordance with the terms
and conditions of the previous LeaseAgreement, as incorporated above by reference or attachment.


 


LESSOR (“LESSOR”):


 


	Sign: 	/s/ William Shrewsbury	Print: 	William Shrewsbury	Date: 	9-1-16
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Sign:	/s/ Peggy Shrewsbury	Print:	Peggy Shrewsbury	Date:	9-01-16


 


LESSEE (“LESSEE”):


 


	Sign: 		Print: 		Date: 	9-1-16
Agreement





Exhibit 10(A)(2)

Servotronics, Inc. and Subsidiaries










August 3, 2004




Dr. Nicholas D. Trbovich

1110 Maple Street

Elma, NY 14059




Dear Dr. Trbovich:




You and Servotronics, Inc. (the “Company”) are parties to an employment agreement, as amended and restated on August 8, 1986 and as subsequently amended as of October 1, 1986, October 1, 1987, July 20, 1988, October 1, 1988, October 1, 1989, May 1, 1990, May 1, 1991, May 1, 1992, May 1, 1993, March 28, 1994, May 1, 1994, May 1, 1995, May 1, 1996, May 1, 1997, March 9, 1998, May 1, 1998, October 6, 1998, April 28, 1999, May 1, 1999, May 1, 2000, May 1, 2001, July 3, 2001, May 1, 2002, July 3, 2002, May 1, 2003, July 3, 2003 and May 1, 2004 (the “Agreement”), pursuant to which you are employed by the Company.




This will confirm your agreement and that of the Company (pursuant to a resolution of the Board of Directors passed at a meeting held on July 2, 2004) to amend Paragraph 1 of the Agreement to delete “September 30, 2008” and insert in its place “September 30, 2009”.




Except as specifically provided herein, all of the other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.




If the foregoing meets with your approval and you are willing to become bound hereby, will you please sign and return to the undersigned the enclosed copy of this letter.




Very truly yours,




SERVOTRONICS, INC.




 

/S/  Lee D. Burns                             

Lee D. Burns,

Treasurer/Secretary.







ACCEPTED AND AGREED




 

/S/  Dr. Nicholas D. Trbovich          

Dr. Nicholas D. Trbovich
<PAGE>

Exhibit 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C SS. 1350 ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form, 10-Q (the "Report") of Amaru,
Inc. (the "Company"), for the period ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Chua Leong Hin,
President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

         1.       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



/s/ Chua Leong Hin
----------------------------------
President, Chief Executive Officer
May 17, 2010
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 27, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 89450]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-28471]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION


Notice of Meeting Held With Less Than Seven Days Advance Notice

TIME AND DATE: 2:00 p.m. on December 20, 2023.

PLACE: The meeting was held in the FDIC Board Room, 550 17th Street NW, 
Washington, DC, and was webcast to the public.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Pursuant to the provisions of the 
``Government in the Sunshine Act'' (5 U.S.C. 552b), notice is hereby 
given that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation's Board of 
Directors met in open session at 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday, December 20, 
2023 to consider the following matters:

Summary Agenda

    Disposition of Minutes of a Board of Directors' Meeting Previously 
Distributed.
    Summary report of actions taken pursuant to authority delegated by 
the Board of Directors.

Discussion Agenda

    Memorandum and resolution re: Proposed 2024 FDIC Operating Budget.
    Memorandum and resolution re: Final Rule on FDIC Official Signs and 
Advertising Requirements, False Advertising, Misrepresentation of 
Insured Status, and Misuse of the FDIC's Name or Logo.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Requests for further information 
concerning the meeting may be directed to Debra A. Decker, Executive 
Secretary of the Corporation, at 202-898-8748.

    Dated at Washington, DC, on December 20, 2023.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
James P. Sheesley,
Assistant Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-28471 Filed 12-26-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
**Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 12 November 2009 – Le Carbone-Lorraine v Commission**

**(Case C-554/08 P)**

Appeal – Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices − Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement – Market for electrical and mechanical carbon and graphite products − Article 15(2) of Regulation No 17 – Setting the amount of the fine – Gravity of the infringement – Cooperation during the administrative procedure – Principle of the individual nature of penalties – Equal treatment – Principle of proportionality

1.                     *Competition – Fines – Amount – Determination – Criteria – Gravity of the infringement – Account to be taken of the effects
of the whole of the infringement (Council Regulation 17, Art. 15; Commission notice 98/C 9/03, Section 1A) (see paras 21,
24)*

2.                     *Appeals – Grounds – Plea submitted for the first time in the context of the appeal – Inadmissibility – Claim or argument raised
for the first time in the appeal proceedings – Inadmissibility (see para. 32)*

3.                     *Competition – Fines – Amount – Determination – Criteria – Effect of an anti-competitive practice – Criterion not conclusive
(Council Regulation No 17, Art. 15; Commission notice 98/C 9/03, Section 1A) (see paras 43-44)*

4.                     *Appeals – Jurisdiction of the Court – Challenge on grounds of fairness to the General Court’s assessment concerning the amount
of a fine imposed on an undertaking – Excluded (Council Regulation No 17, Art. 15) (see para. 72)*

**Re:**

| | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) of 8 October 2008 in Case T-73/04 | Carbone-Lorraine | v | Commission | , in which the Court dismissed the application brought by the appellant for the annulment of Commission Decision 2004/420/EC of 3 December 2003 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement concerning an agreement in the market for electrical and mechanical carbon and graphite products or, in the alternative, annulment or reduction of the fine imposed on the appellant – Breach of the principle of the individual nature of penalties – Method for setting the amount of the fine imposed – Constant and close cooperation during the administrative procedure – Principles of proportionality and of equal treatment. |

**Operative part**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | Dismisses the appeal; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Orders Le Carbone-Lorraine SA to pay the costs. |
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 115 (Tuesday, July 31, 2012)]
[House]
[Pages H5336-H5337]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                               TAX RATES

  (Mr. COURTNEY asked and was given permission to address the House for 
1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, in exactly 5-months' time, the tax rates 
for every tax filer in this country will go up in the event of the so-
called ``fiscal cliff,'' which most mainstream economists believe would 
push our country back into a double-dip recession.
  There is hope, however.
  Last week, the U.S. Senate passed a measure which protects the 
incomes of every tax filer up to $250,000 and allows rates for incomes 
above that point to

[[Page H5337]]

return to the Clinton-era rates. This is a plan which will protect 98 
percent of the tax filers in this country from any tax increase. It 
will help balance the budget and will give confidence to the financial 
markets, which are terrified of the inability of this town to get its 
business done.
  We should act on the Senate's plan. The House Republican leadership 
has a choice: let's compromise; let's get something done; let's help 
the economy--or let's push this country into brinksmanship, which for 
the last year and a half has been the trademark of the 112th Congress.
  We can do better as the House of Representatives. Let's pass the 
Senate measure. Let's provide some confidence for the American people 
and for the U.S. economy to grow.

                          ____________________
```
#### Application of Jerry Clyde BEELER for Writ of Habeas Corpus.

No. A-12829.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma.

Nov. 3, 1959.

Jerry Clyde Beeler, petitioner, pro se.

Mac Q. Williamson, Atty. Gen., Sam H.. Lattimore, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent..

*733BRETT, Judge.

This is an original proceeding for writ of habeas corpus brought by Jerry Clyde Beeler, an inmate of the Oklahoma State Penitentiary. In his unverified petition he alleges he is confined in the State Penitentiary by virtue of a void judgment and sentence of the District Court of Oklahoma County, Oklahoma, upon his conviction on a charge of assault with intent to kill and an assessment of punishment thereon at ten years confinement. He alleges the judgment and sentence to be void for the reasons: (1) the evidence does not disclose on his part any “intent to kill” and the information is therefore insufficient; (2) his defense counsel was incompetent; (3) sentence of ten years is excessive; and (4) failure of the trial court to properly instruct on what constitutes a “deadly weapon” and what constitutes “intent to kill.”

After the complained of judgment and sentence was entered, an appeal on behalf of this petitioner was duly perfected and prosecuted, Beeler v. State, Okl.Cr., 334 P.2d 799, and the judgment and sentence affirmed. All the matters set forth in the petition herein, if true, existed at the time of the appeal. This Court will not permit an accused to appeal his judgment of conviction and speculate upon his chances of securing a reversal and then, after the judgment of conviction is affirmed, come into court in a habeas corpus proceeding and raise the same or other grounds which might entitle the petitioner to a new trial or his release from custody. To do so would not be conducive to the-efficient administration of our criminal laws and a criminal case would never end until decided to the satisfaction of the accused. Ex parte Herren, 74 Okl.Cr. 154, 124 P.2d 276; In re Sullivan, 82 Okl.Cr. 364, 170 P.2d 260; In re York, Okl.Cr., 283 P.2d 567.

The petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied.

POWELL, P. J., and NIX, J., concur.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 119 (Tuesday, August 7, 2012)]
[Daily Digest]
[Page D827]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

Committee Meetings
  No hearings were held.

Joint Meetings
  No joint committee meetings were held.
```
# C_2008272EN.01000903.xml

| 25.10.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 272/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.10.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 272/9

---

Action brought on 18 July 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v French Republic

(Case C-332/08)

(2008/C 272/14)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: G. Rozet and A. Alcover San Pedro, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: French Republic

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | Declare that, by failing to adopt all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2004/107/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 2004 relating to arsenic, cadmium, mercury, nickel and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in ambient air (1), the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 10 of that directive; |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare that, by failing to adopt all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2004/107/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 2004 relating to arsenic, cadmium, mercury, nickel and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in ambient air (1), the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 10 of that directive;

1

| — | order the French Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the French Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period prescribed for transposition of Directive 2004/107/EC expired on 15 February 2007. At the date on which the present action was brought, that directive still had not been fully transposed into national law.

---

(1)  OJ 2005 L 23, p. 3.

1

---
Order filed August 7, 2018.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 18

- 00246

- CV

____________ LINDA ALAN , Appellant

V. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, Appellee

On Appeal from the 125th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cau se No. 2016

- 09047



### O R D E R Appellant’ s brief was due July 26, 2018

. No brief or motion for extension of
time has been filed.
Unless appellant files a brief with this court on or before August 22, 2018
, the court will dismiss the appeal for want of pro secution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b).

PER CURIAM
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 900 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 900

    Providing for the consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 769) 
terminating a Select Investigative Panel of the Committee on Energy and 
                               Commerce.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 28, 2016

 Ms. Schakowsky submitted the following resolution; which was referred 
                       to the Committee on Rules

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
    Providing for the consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 769) 
terminating a Select Investigative Panel of the Committee on Energy and 
                               Commerce.

    Resolved, That immediately upon adoption of this resolution the 
House shall consider without intervention of any point of order the 
resolution (H. Res. 769) terminating a Select Investigative Panel of 
the Committee on Energy and Commerce. The resolution shall be 
considered as read. The previous question shall be considered as 
ordered on the resolution to adoption without intervening motion or 
demand for division of the question except one hour of debate equally 
divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the 
Committee on Rules.
    Sec. 2.  Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the 
consideration of H. Res. 769.
                                 <all>
```
f

·(.[' .•· c·1··" ... 1 ,, ' '··1· J T ,'_,0 \• ~. 

Op o-1·· l"'Cil(' ! ,;l' L• 

20151\f\f{ 27 ~~till: 07 

March 19, 2015 

Director, Chemical Control Division 

US Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics 

EPA East 

Room4146 

1201 Constitution Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20004 

Re: EPA- HQ- OPPT- 2003 · 0012 

CBIC Control Number 

364445 

DuPont Chemicals and Fluoroproducts 

Chambers Works 

Deepwater, NJ 08023 

DuPont Chambers Works NJPDES Permit No. NJ0005100 

PFOA Data Submittal- Outfall DSN662 Weekly Grab Samples 

February 2015 Sample Data 

Dear Chemical Control Division: 

Attached please find summaries ofPFOA analytical results for the DuPont Chambers Works 

weekly grab samples taken at internal outfall DSN662A in February 2015. Due to a sampling 

problem, a 24-hour composite sample that completed on February 17, 2015 was submitted for 

analysis in lieu of that week's normal grab sample. The composite sample was within hold time 

and previous internal.studies supported good agreement between grab and composite samples. 

In accordance with the current site NJPDES permit (NJ0005100, effective September 2011), 

these results are provided to NJDEP on a monthly basis via electronic discharge monitoring 

reports. The enclosures include two paper and two electronic copies of the analytical results 

from this monitoring period. 

Sin~erely················· .-~ r·----- \..,/-...~.J ~I / J ·11'115 

Amutlia Jeyarajasingam 

Area Manager-Secure Environmental Treatment 

DuPont Chambers Works 

AJ/clc 

Enclosures 
Copy to: 

/ Document Control Office 

US Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of Pollution Prevention and Taxies 

EPA East 

Room 6428 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20460 

Ms. Heather Genievich (cover letter only) 

NJDEP Division of Water Quality 

Bureau of Surface Water Permitting 

Mail Code 40 1-02B 

401 E. State Street 

P.O. Box420 

Trenton, NJ 08625-0420 
SampleiD 

Date 

Top (ft) 

Total (T)/ Bottom (ft) 

Analyte units Diss. (D) Duplicate# 

PFOA ug/L T 

- -· 

< and ND = Non detect at stated reporting limit 

Summary of Analytical Results 

662 - February 2015 

662-GRAB 662-GRAB 662-COMP 

2/2/15 2/9/15 2/17/15 

0 0 0 

0 0 0 

1 1 1 

4.19 2.75 2.32 

PFOA = Perfluorooctanoic Acid 

ug/L - micrograms per Liter 

662-GRAB 

2/23/15 

0 

0 

1 

3.45 

ug/L- micrograms per liter or parts per billion (ppb) 

LOQ limit of quantification 0.100 ug/L 

I 

Samples were analyzed by Critical Path Services LLC. Reported results 

represent a single analysis. except for the samples collected on 2/17/15 

and 2/23/15. Acceptable precision was obtained and the reported result for 

the samples collected on 2/17/15 and 2/23/15 represent the average of lab 

duplicate results. 

I 

The NJDEP lab certification number for Critical Path Services LLC is PA072. 

I 

I 

Page 1 of 1 

Copy of cwk 662 results_feb15.xls:Sheet1 

3/19/2015 4:10 PM
African Swine Fever 

Don’t Spread This Deadly Disease

It’s easy to spread African swine fever—without 

even knowing it. The virus can stay on clothing and 

equipment and survive for months in pork products. 

Be aware of these potential pathways and consider 

them when creating or updating biosecurity plans. 

Contaminated Vehicles 

Garbage Feeding and Equipment 

Contaminated 

Clothing and Shoes Feral Swine 

International Travelers Contaminated Feed 

African swine fever is a virus 

that afects both domestic 

and wild pigs. It spreads 

very quickly and kills most 

pigs that get it. This disease 

has never been found in 

the United States. It is not a 

threat to human health. It is 

not a food safety issue. 

People cannot get African 

swine fever, but they can 

carry it on clothing, shoes, 

and equipment. An outbreak 

in the United States would 

have devastating economic 

efects on the swine industry. 

Help keep U.S. pigs free 

of this deadly disease! 

Understand how the 

virus spreads, and do 

your part to protect 

against it. 

More info: 

www.aphis.usda.gov Program Aid No. 2237-1 | Revised July 2021 

AFRICAN 

SWINE 

FEVER 

REPORT SICK PIGS 

866-536-7593 

The U.S. Department of Agriculture is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.