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

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1105 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to authorize per diem payments 

under comprehensive service programs for homeless veterans to furnish 

care to dependents of homeless veterans, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 28, 2015 

Mr. HELLER (for himself and Mrs. MURRAY) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to authorize per 

diem payments under comprehensive service programs 

for homeless veterans to furnish care to dependents of 

homeless veterans, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF PER DIEM PAYMENTS FOR 

4 FURNISHING CARE TO DEPENDENTS OF CER5 TAIN HOMELESS VETERANS. 

6 Section 2012(a) of title 38, United States Code, is 

7 amended by adding at the end the following new para8 graph: 


Emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1105 IS

1 ‘‘(4) Services for which a recipient of a grant under 

2 section 2011 of this title (or an entity described in para3 graph (1)) may receive per diem payments under this sub4 section may include furnishing care for a dependent of a 

5 homeless veteran who is under the care of such homeless 

6 veteran while such homeless veteran receives services from 

7 the grant recipient (or entity).’’. 

Æ 


Emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
Materials Not Included in

Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket

 Docket Number: FAA-2015-0249

 Directorate Identifier: 2014NM174AD

MD80-28-228 --- 9/27/13

MD90-28-013 --- 9/27/13

MD80 28-53 --- 4/8/91

MD80 28-63 --- 6/14/91

MD80 28-63, R1 --- 7/19/91

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the 

Supplemental AD Docket

MAY BE VIEWED AT: Federal Aviation Administration

Transport Airplane Directorate

Rules Docket

1601 Lind Ave. SW.,

Renton, WA 98057

425.227.1221

DURING THE HOURS OF: 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,

except Federal holidays.

Form Date: 03/05/2008
**Order of the Court of First Instance (Seventh Chamber) of 2 September 2009 – E.ON Ruhrgas and E.ON Földgáz Trade v Commission**

**(Case T-57/07)**

Action for annulment – Competition – Concentrations – Decision declaring the concentration compatible with the common market – Commitments – Commission letters regarding the commitments – Non-actionable measures – Inadmissibility

Actions for annulment – Actionable measures – Concept – Measures producing binding legal effects – Letter from an institution – Letter limited to providing an interpretation of a legislative text – Not included (Art. 230 EC) (see paras 30-51)

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | APPLICATION for annulment of the decisions allegedly contained in the Commission’s letters of 19 December 2006 and 16 January 2007 concerning the commitments entered into by E.ON Ruhrgas International AG referred to in Article 3 of the Commission Decision of 21 December 2005 declaring a concentration to be compatible with the common market and the EEA Agreement (Case No COMP/M.3696 – E.ON/MOL). |

**Operative part**

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | The action as dismissed as inadmissible. |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | E.ON Ruhrgas International AG and E.ON Földgáz Trade Zrt are ordered to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the Commission of the European Communities. |
#### Beulah SMALLWOOD, Plaintiff in Error, v. Floyd HOLDER, Defendant in Error.

No. 38543.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma.

Jan. 19, 1960.

*850Donald B. Darrah, Durant, Meacham, Meacham & Meacham, Clinton, for plaintiff in error.

Arney, Barker *&*Donley, Clinton, for defendant in error.

BERRY, Justice.

The only material difference in the issues presented by this appeal and those presented in Appeal No. 38,547, Lewter v. Holder, Okl.Sup., 348 P.2d 845 is this: The validity of the deed from Ed Holder, deceased, to plaintiff in error, covering the 80-acre tract referred to in No. 38,547 is in controversy in this case but was not in controversy in No. 38,547, and the plaintiff in error asserts that she had no notice of the claim asserted under the lease in controversy at the time the 80-acre tract was conveyed to her.

The trial court found and held that the deed was valid and defendant in error did not appeal. In view of the fact that defendant in error was in possession of the 80, she is charged with notice of the rights that he asserts under the lease in controversy. See cases cited under West’s Okla. Dig., Vol. 14, Part I, Vendor and Purchaser,

*851W. A. Lewter, executor of the estate of Ed Holder, deceased, is not a party to this action.

The parties stipulated in the lower court that the evidence introduced in No. 38,547 (No. 11,238 in the lower court) should be considered, insofar as applicable, as having been introduced in this case.

With the exceptions above noted, our opinion in No. 38,547 is determinative of the issues presented by this appeal and is, therefore, adopted where applicable as our opinion herein.

Affirmed.
#### Yousef Sefaradi, Respondent, v Aghajan Assil, Appellant.

— In an action, *inter alia,*for specific performance of a contract for the sale of a cooperative apartment, the defendant appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Queens County (LeVine, J.), dated September 13, 1989, which, after a nonjury trial, awarded the plaintiff specific performance.

Ordered that the order and judgment is reversed, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, and a new trial is granted, before a different Justice, with costs to abide the event.

Although the defendant’s claim that he was denied a fair trial was not preserved for appellate review as a matter of law, we address it in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. The plaintiff and the defendant each took the stand. However, the court assumed the conduct of the trial, engaged in extensive colloquy with the attorneys, and permitted but three questions of the plaintiff and two of the defendant. Of the total of five questions asked, the court propounded three. Numerous other witnesses were present and prepared to testify, yet their testimony was precluded by the court. As a result, insufficient evidence was adduced on which to determine whether it was the plaintiff or the defendant who refused to consummate the transaction, or why *(see, e.g., Wong v Weissman,*133 AD2d 821; *Giribaldi Realty & Constr. Co. v Santangelo,*164 App Div 513, *affd*221 NY 673), and, if it was the defendant who caused the breach, whether the plaintiff was nevertheless ready, willing, and able to perform his obligations under the contract *(Jewell v Rowe,*119 AD2d 634; *Stawski v Epstein,*67 AD2d 681). Under these circumstances a reasoned decision as to whether the plaintiff was entitled to specific performance could not be made. Therefore a new trial is granted. Sullivan, J. P., Eiber, Miller and Ritter, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.14


                 CHANGE IN CONTROL OR TERMINATION WITHOUT CAUSE

         In the event that there is a change in control of ANTEC or termination
without cause, Michael Graziano will be entitled to termination benefits, which
include one year's annual salary and bonus at the time of the event,
continuation of benefits for a period of one year and immediate vesting of 100%
of any remaining unvested stock options granted. In addition, any benefits
determined based on length of service will be based on his original hire date of
September 26, 1989. This agreement will be effective beginning October 20, 1997.

Agreed this 20th day of October 1997

    /s/ MICHAEL GRAZIANO                               /s/ MARK J. SCAGLIUSO
-----------------------------                      -----------------------------
      Michael Graziano                                   Mark J. Scagliuso
                                                            VP and CFO
                                                     ANTEC Network Technologies
# C_2008223EN.01006203.xml

| 30.8.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 223/62 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 223/62

---

Action brought on 30 June 2008 — Klug v European Medicines Agency

(Case F-59/08)

(2008/C 223/119)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Bettina Klug (Wiesbaden, Germany) (represented by: S. Zickgraf, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Medicines Agency

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the performance evaluation report drawn up by the defendant in respect of the applicant for the period from 31 December 2004 to 31 December 2006, and order for payment by the defendant of compensation for material and non-material damage.

Form of order sought

| — | Declare the performance evaluation report drawn up by the defendant in respect of the applicant for the period from 31 December 2004 to 31 December 2006 void; |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare the performance evaluation report drawn up by the defendant in respect of the applicant for the period from 31 December 2004 to 31 December 2006 void;

| — | declare the non-renewal of the applicant's employment contract unlawful; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare the non-renewal of the applicant's employment contract unlawful;

| — | order the defendant to pay to the applicant compensation for material damage in the sum of EUR 200 000; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay to the applicant compensation for material damage in the sum of EUR 200 000;

| — | order the defendant to pay to the applicant compensation for non-material damage in the sum of EUR 35 000. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay to the applicant compensation for non-material damage in the sum of EUR 35 000.

---
# C_2008272EN.01001201.xml

| 25.10.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 272/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.10.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 272/12

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht München (Germany) lodged on 11 August 2008 — Zentrale zur Bekämpfung unlauteren Wettbewerbs eV v Adolf Darbo AG

(Case C-366/08)

(2008/C 272/21)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberlandesgericht München

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Zentrale zur Bekämpfung unlauteren Wettbewerbs eV

Applicant:

Defendant: Adolf Darbo AG

Defendant:

Questions referred

| 1. | Is the term low-sugar jams in Part A of Annex III to European Parliament and Council Directive 95/2/EC of 20 February 1995 on food additives other than colours and sweeteners (1) to be interpreted as also covering jams named extra jam? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is the term low-sugar jams in Part A of Annex III to European Parliament and Council Directive 95/2/EC of 20 February 1995 on food additives other than colours and sweeteners (1) to be interpreted as also covering jams named extra jam?

low-sugar jams

1

extra jam

| 2. | If the answer to Question 1 is affirmative:






  a) | How is the term low-sugar jams in Part A of Annex III to Directive 95/2/EC to be interpreted otherwise? |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

If the answer to Question 1 is affirmative:

a)

How is the term low-sugar jams in Part A of Annex III to Directive 95/2/EC to be interpreted otherwise?

low-sugar jams

| b) | In particular is it to be interpreted as also covering jams named extra jam with a soluble dry matter content of 58 %? |
| --- | --- |

b)

In particular is it to be interpreted as also covering jams named extra jam with a soluble dry matter content of 58 %?

extra jam

| 3. | If the answers to Questions 1 and 2(b) are affirmative:
  Is the second paragraph of Part II of Annex I to Council Directive 2001/113/EC of 20 December 2001 relating to fruit jams, jellies and marmalades and sweetened chestnut purée intended for human consumption (2) to be interpreted as meaning that the name extra jam can be authorised also in respect of jams which have a soluble dry matter content of less than 60 % where in the case of such jams no less strict requirements are imposed on the name jam? |
| --- | --- |

3.

If the answers to Questions 1 and 2(b) are affirmative:

Is the second paragraph of Part II of Annex I to Council Directive 2001/113/EC of 20 December 2001 relating to fruit jams, jellies and marmalades and sweetened chestnut purée intended for human consumption (2) to be interpreted as meaning that the name extra jam can be authorised also in respect of jams which have a soluble dry matter content of less than 60 % where in the case of such jams no less strict requirements are imposed on the name jam?

2

extra jam

jam

---

(1)  OJ 1995 L 61, p. 1.

1

(2)  OJ 2002 L 10, p. 67.

2

---
# C_2011355EN.01001401.xml

| 3.12.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 355/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.12.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 355/14

---

Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 25 October 2011 — CHEMK and KF v Council

(Case T-190/08) (1)

1

(Dumping - Imports of ferro-silicon originating in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, China, Egypt, Kazakhstan and Russia - Calculation of the export price - Profit margin - Price undertaking - Injury - Causal link - Complaint - Rights of the defence - Obligation to state reasons)

2011/C 355/21

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Chelyabinsk Electrometallurgical Integrated Plant OAO (CHEMK) (Chelyabinsk, Russia); and Kuzneckie Ferrosplavy OAO (KF) (Novokuznetsk, Russia) (represented by P. Vander Schueren, lawyer)

Applicants:

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented initially by J. P. Hix, and subsequently by J.-P. Hix and B. Driessen, Agents, assisted initially by G. Berrisch and G. Wolf, and subsequently by G. Berrisch, lawyers)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented initially by H. van Vliet and K. Talabér-Ritz, and subsequently by H. van Vliet and M. França, Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant

Re:

Re:

Application for partial annulment of Council Regulation (EC) No 172/2008 of 25 February 2008 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of ferro-silicon originating in the People’s Republic of China, Egypt, Kazakhstan, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Russia (OJ 2008 L 55, p. 6), in so far as it affects the applicants.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action.

| 2. | Orders Chelyabinsk Electrometallurgical Integrated Plant OAO (CHEMK) and Kuzneckie Ferrosplavy OAO (KF) to bear their own costs as well as those incurred by the Council of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Chelyabinsk Electrometallurgical Integrated Plant OAO (CHEMK) and Kuzneckie Ferrosplavy OAO (KF) to bear their own costs as well as those incurred by the Council of the European Union.

| 3. | Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 197, 2.8.2008.

1

---
Exhibit 13.1

906 CERTIFICATION

Securities and Exchange Commission

100 F Street, N.E.

Washington, D.C. 20549

Ladies and Gentlemen:

In connection with the Annual Report of Sinopec Shanghai Petrochemical Company Limited (the Company) on Form 20-F (as amended by this Amendment No. 1) for the year ended December 31,
2013, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Wang Zhiqing, the President of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United
States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:



| | 1. | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) , as applicable, 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 at the dates and for
the periods indicated.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.

Date: September 17, 2014



By:

/s/ Wang ZhiqingName:

Wang ZhiqingTitle:

President
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32


                            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 Seamless Wi-Fi, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending December 31, 2007 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Albert Reda, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of operations
            of the Company.


/s/ Albert Reda
---------------
Albert Reda,
Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer
February 15, 2008
# C_2010011EN.01001002.xml

| 16.1.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 11/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.1.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 11/10

---

Order of the Court of 24 September 2009 — Município de Gondomar v Commission of the European Communities

(Case C-501/08 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Cohesion Fund - Regulation (EC) No 1164/94 - Cancellation of Community financial assistance - Action for annulment - Admissibility - Measures of direct and individual concern to the applicant)

2010/C 11/17

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Município de Gondomar (represented by: J.L. da Cruz Vilaça and L. Pinto Monteiro, advogados)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: P. Guerra e Andrade and B. Conte, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal brought against the order of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) of 10 September 2008 in Case T-324/06 Município de Gondomar v Commission in which the Court of First Instance declared inadmissible the action for annulment of Commission Decision C(2006) 3782 of 16 August 2006 on the cancellation of the financial assistance granted by the Cohesion Fund for Project No 95/10/61/017 — Redevelopment of Greater Oporto/South — Gondomar subsystem

Município de Gondomar

Commission

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The appeal is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The appeal is dismissed.

| 2. | The Município de Gondomar shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The Município de Gondomar shall pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 19, 24.01.2009.

1

---
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 114 (Monday, July 30, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Page S5658]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

              INTRODUCTION OF BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

  The following bills and joint resolutions were introduced, read the 
first and second times by unanimous consent, and referred as indicated:

           By Mrs. FEINSTEIN:
       S. 3454. A bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 
     2013 for intelligence and intelligence-related activities of 
     the United States Government and the Office of the Director 
     of National Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency 
     Retirement and Disability System, and for other purposes; 
     from the Select Committee on Intelligence; placed on the 
     calendar.
           By Mr. WARNER (for himself and Mr. Johnson of 
             Wisconsin):
       S. 3455. A bill to require the establishment of customer 
     service standards for Federal agencies; to the Committee on 
     Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
           By Mr. BLUMENTHAL (for himself, Mr. Whitehouse, and Mr. 
             Cornyn):
       S. 3456. A bill to amend title 18, United States Code, with 
     respect to child pornography and child exploitation offenses; 
     to the Committee on the Judiciary.
           By Mr. NELSON of Florida (for himself and Mrs. Murray):
       S. 3457. A bill to require the Secretary of Veterans 
     Affairs to establish a veterans jobs corps, and for other 
     purposes; read the first time.
           By Mr. LAUTENBERG (for himself and Mrs. Feinstein):
       S. 3458. A bill to require face to face purchases of 
     ammunition, to require licensing of ammunition dealers, and 
     to require reporting regarding bulk purchases of ammunition; 
     to the Committee on the Judiciary.

                          ____________________
```
# C_2008272EN.01001401.xml

| 25.10.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 272/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.10.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 272/14

---

Action brought on 9 September 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Spain

(Case C-392/08)

(2008/C 272/24)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: S. Pardo Quintillán and A. Sipos, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | Declare that, by failing to draw up external emergency plans for all establishments to which Article 9 of Council Directive 96/82/EC (1) of 9 December 1996 on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances applies, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 11(1)(c) of Directive 96/82/EC. |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare that, by failing to draw up external emergency plans for all establishments to which Article 9 of Council Directive 96/82/EC (1) of 9 December 1996 on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances applies, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 11(1)(c) of Directive 96/82/EC.

1

| — | order the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

According to Article 2(1) of Directive 96/82/EC, Article 9 of the directive, the Directive is to apply to establishments where dangerous substances are present in quantities equal to or in excess of the quantities listed in Annex I, Parts 1 and 2, column 3.

Under Article 11(1)(c) of that directive, Member States are to ensure that, for all establishments to which Article 9 applies, the authorities designated for that purpose are to draw up an external emergency plan for the measures to be taken outside the establishment.

The objective of this application is to seek a declaration that by failing to draw up external emergency plans for all establishments to which Article 9 applies, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 11(1)(c) of Directive 96/82/EC.

---

(1)  OJ 1996 L 10, p. 13.

1

---