alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2023162EN.01001001.xml

| 5.5.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 162/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.5.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 162/10

---

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

SA.102761

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2023/C 162/08)

| Date of adoption of the decision | 21.3.2023 |
| --- | --- |
| Aid number | SA.102761 |
| Member State | Romania |
| Region | Romania |
| Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary) | RRF — State aid scheme aimed at developing electricity storage in Romania |
| Legal basis | Order of the Minister of Energy 1229 of 28 November 2022 approving the State aid scheme aiming at supporting investments in the development of electricity storage capacities (batteries), as amended by the order of the Minister of Energy 1299 of 16 December 2022 |
| Type of measure | Scheme |
| Objective | Environmental protection, Energy efficiency |
| Form of aid | Direct grant |
| Budget | Overall budget: 512 029 388 RON
  Annual budget: 512 029 388 RON |
| Intensity | |
| Duration | Until 31.12.2023 |
| Economic sectors | Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Ministry of Energy |
| str. Academiei 39-41, sector 1, București. |

Date of adoption of the decision

21.3.2023

Aid number

SA.102761

Member State

Romania

Region

Romania

Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary)

RRF — State aid scheme aimed at developing electricity storage in Romania

Legal basis

Order of the Minister of Energy 1229 of 28 November 2022 approving the State aid scheme aiming at supporting investments in the development of electricity storage capacities (batteries), as amended by the order of the Minister of Energy 1299 of 16 December 2022

Type of measure

Scheme

Objective

Environmental protection, Energy efficiency

Form of aid

Direct grant

Budget

Overall budget: 512 029 388 RON

Annual budget: 512 029 388 RON

Intensity

Duration

Until 31.12.2023

Economic sectors

Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply

Name and address of the granting authority

Ministry of Energy

str. Academiei 39-41, sector 1, București.

Other information

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

https://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm

---
- 568 - 

### N ebraska 

### S upreme 

### C ourt 

### A dva nc e 

### S 297 N ebraska 

### R eport
COHAN v . MEDICAL IMAGING CONSULTANTS
Cite as 297 Neb. 568



### M ary 

### C oha n a n d 

### T erry 

### C oha n 

### , i n divi

a n d as wife a n d husba n d 

### , appella n t

c ross



### - appellees 

### , v



### . M edi c al 

### I m 

### C o n sulta n ts 

### , P .C., et al 

### ., appell

a n d c ross



### - appella n ___ N.W.2d ___

Filed August 25, 2017. No. S-16-145.

suppleme n tal opi n 

### Appeal from the District Court for Douglas County: J ames 

### T

. G leaso n 

### , Judge. Supplemental opinion: Former opinion modi

fied. Motions for rehearing overrule

Richard J. Rensch and Sean P. Rensch, of Rensch & Rensch Law, P.C., L.L.O., for appellants.

David D. Ernst and Kellie Chesire Olson, of Pansing, Hogan, Ernst & Bachman, L.L.P., for appellees Medical Imaging Consultants, P.C., and Robert M. Faulk, M.D.

William R. Settles and Kate Geyer Johnson, of Lamson, Dugan & Murray, L.L.P., for appellees Bellevue Obstetrics and Gynecology Associates, P.C., et al.

H eavi c a n 

### , C.J., W right 

### , M iller



### - L erma n 

### , C assel 

### , S K el c h 

### , J Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/ 09/08/2017 01:10 AM CDT- 569 - 

### N ebraska 

### S upreme 

### C ourt 

### A dva nc e 

### S 297 N ebraska 

### R eport
COHAN v . MEDICAL IMAGING CONSULTANTS
Cite as 297 Neb. 568



### P er 

### C uriam 

### We consider the appellees’ motions for rehearing concern

ing our opinion in Cohan v. Medical Imaging Consultants

. 1 

### We overrule the motions, but we modify the original opinion as follows: In the section of the opinion designated “ 3. C ross



### - A ppeal

by 

### A ppellees 

### ,” we add a sentence at the end of the first paragraph, 2 

### such that the paragraph reads as follows: Appellees’ cross-appeals assign as error the admission of Dr. Naughton’s testimony. Appellees moved to strike Dr. Naughton’s testimony because they claimed that only Mary’s prognosis at the time of trial was relevant and that Nebraska did not recognize a theory of recovery based upon loss of chance. The district court, in overruling the motions to strike, found that Dr. Naughton’s opinion was relevant for the limited purpose of establishing that early discovery of cancer leads to a better prognosis. We understand the district court to have used “prognosis” to refer to the risk of recurrence and the probability of an improved outcome. The remainder of the opinion shall remain unmodified. F ormer opi n io n modif 

### M otio n s for reheari n g overru 

### F u n ke 

### , J., not participatin

1 Cohan v. Medical Imaging Consultants, ante p. 111, ___ N.W.2d ___

(2017).

2 Id. at 129-130, ___ N.W.2d at ___.
|                                                |
|------------------------------------------------|
|                                                |  |  |
| Delaware                                       | 0-17948 | 94-2838567 |
| (State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation) | (Commission File Number) | (IRS Employer Identification No.) |

----

|        |
|--------|
|        |  |
| o      | Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425) |
|   |   |
| o      | Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12) |
|   |   |
| o      | Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b)) |
|   |   |
| o      | Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c)) |

----

|             |
|-------------|
|             |  |  |
| Exhibit No. |   | Description |
| 99.1        |   | Press release dated May 5, 2015, relating to Electronic Arts Inc.’s financial results for the fiscal quarter and fiscal year ended March 31, 2015. |

----

|        |
|--------|
|        |  |  |  |
|   |   |  ELECTRONIC ARTS INC. |
|   |   |   |   |
| Dated: | May 5, 2015 | By: | /s/ Blake Jorgensen |
|   |   |   | Blake Jorgensen |
|   |   |   | Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer |

----

|             |
|-------------|
|             |  |  |
| Exhibit No. |   | Description |
| 99.1        |   | Press release dated May 5, 2015, relating to Electronic Arts Inc.’s financial results for the fiscal quarter and fiscal year ended March 31, 2015. |
Exhibit
32.2








Chief
Financial Officer’s Certification required under Section 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002





In
connection with the quarterly report of TIB Financial Corp. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Stephen J. Gilhooly, Executive Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this Report fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 and that, to my knowledge, the information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operation of the Company.








Date:           August
      11, 2008
            /s/
      Stephen J. GilhoolyStephen
      J. Gilhooly
              Executive
      Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer











A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906, has been provided to TIB Financial Corp. and will be retained by
TIB Financial Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

May 3, 2022

No. 04-21-00516-CV

Lon E. GRINAGE & Marilyn Grinage,

Appellants

v.

Jason Phillip THOMPSON & Terrie Mylene Thompson,

Appellees

From the 218th Judicial District Court, Wilson County, Texas

Trial Court No. CVW1900810

Honorable Lynn Ellison, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Appellant’s amended brief was due on April 29, 2022. Before the due date, Appellant 

filed a motion for an extension of time to file the brief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(d). 

Appellant’s motion is GRANTED. The brief is due on May 31, 2022. See id.

_________________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 3rd day of May, 2022.

___________________________________

Michael A. Cruz, 

Clerk of Court
*Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 95-20988

Summary Calendar

_____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

EDITH FAYE GREEN,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Southern District of Texas

USDC No. CR-H-95-79-13

_________________________________________________________________

August 1, 1996

Before JOLLY, JONES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Edith Faye Green appeals her conviction for mail fraud,

contending that the district court erred in relying upon the $2.4

million loss amount calculated in the presentence report. We have

reviewed the record and the briefs of the parties and have found no

reversible error. United States v. Wimbish, 980 F.2d 312, 313 (5th
-2-

Cir. 1992), cert. Denied, 508 U.S. 919 (1993); United States v.

Calverley, 37 F.3d 160, 162-64 (5th Cir. 1994) (en banc), cert.

denied, 115 S.Ct. 1266 (1995); U.S.S. G. § 2F1.1.

A F F I R M E D.
**Docket No. F AA**  **- 2013**  **- 1067**
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2781 

To amend title II of the Social Security Act to provide for full benefits 

for disabled widows and widowers without regard to age. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 15, 2015 

Mrs. LOWEY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend title II of the Social Security Act to provide 

for full benefits for disabled widows and widowers without regard to age. 

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

3 SECTION 1. FULL BENEFITS FOR DISABLED WIDOWS AND 

4 WIDOWERS WITHOUT REGARD TO AGE. 

5 (a) ELIGIBILITY FOR WIDOW’S INSURANCE BENE6 FITS.—Section 202(e) of the Social Security Act (42 

7 U.S.C. 402(e)) is amended— 

8 (1) in paragraph (1)(B)(ii), by striking ‘‘has at9 tained age 50 but has not attained age 60 and’’; 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2781 IH

1 (2) in paragraph (3)(A), by striking ‘‘after at2 taining age 50 if she was entitled before such mar3 riage occurred’’ and inserting ‘‘after having been en4 titled’’; and 

5 (3) in paragraph (3)(B), by striking ‘‘after at6 taining age 50’’. 

7 (b) ELIGIBILITY FOR WIDOWER’S INSURANCE BENE8 FITS.—Section 202(f) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 402(f)) is 

9 amended— 

10 (1) in paragraph (1)(B)(ii), by striking ‘‘has at11 tained age 50 but has not attained age 60 and’’; 

12 (2) in paragraph (3)(A), by striking ‘‘after at13 taining age 50 if he was entitled before such mar14 riage occurred’’ and inserting ‘‘after having been en15 titled’’; and 

16 (3) in paragraph (3)(B), by striking ‘‘after at17 taining age 50’’. 

18 SEC. 2. EXEMPTION FROM REDUCTIONS IN BENEFITS. 

19 Section 202(q) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

20 402(q)) is amended— 

21 (1) in paragraph (3)(A), by striking ‘‘age 50’’ 

22 and inserting ‘‘age 60’’; and 

23 (2) by adding at the end the following new 

24 paragraph: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 2781 IH

1 ‘‘(12) Notwithstanding any other provision of this 

2 section, there shall be no reduction under this subsection 

3 in the widow’s or widower’s insurance benefit of an indi4 vidual for any month in which such individual is under 

5 a disability (as defined in section 223(d)); and none of 

6 the provisions of this subsection shall apply with respect 

7 to such benefit even though such benefit may have been 

8 so reduced prior to the onset of such disability.’’. 

9 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE AND REDETERMINATION OF BEN10 EFITS. 

11 The amendments made by this Act shall apply with 

12 respect to monthly insurance benefits payable under title 

13 II of the Social Security Act for months after the month 

14 in which this Act is enacted. The Commissioner of Social 

15 Security (without the necessity of any application there16 for) shall redetermine the amount of any widow’s or wid17 ower’s insurance benefit which is payable for the month 

18 in which this Act is enacted in order to reflect such 

19 amendments as provided in the preceding sentence. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

 
 

EXHIBIT 10.1    
    


SUMMARY OF 2004 EXECUTIVE BONUS PLAN  


        On January 16, 2004, the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of Sonus Networks, Inc. (the "Company") approved a bonus program for
fiscal year 2004 for executive officers and employees, including certain executive officers of the Company reporting under Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Under the
program, any bonus to the Chief Executive Officer is awarded at the discretion of the Compensation Committee and any bonuses to other executive officers and employees are awarded at the discretion of
the Chief Executive Officer and Compensation Committee. The bonus awards are based on the Company's achieving certain revenue and operating profit targets for fiscal year 2004 as well as individual
performance objectives. The target bonus amounts for each eligible executive officer is set forth below: 



	Name
 
	 	Title
	 	Target Incentive

	

Hassan Ahmed	
 	

Chief Executive Officer	
 	
$	

236,000
	

Steve Edwards	
 	

Chief Marketing Officer	
 	
 	

147,000
	

Rubin Gruber	
 	

Chairman Emeritus of the Board of Directors	
 	
 	

88,000
	

Bradley Miller	
 	

Chief Accounting Officer	
 	
 	

51,250














QuickLinks



EXHIBIT 10.1
##### 



EXHIBIT 32(a)
 SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
  (1)
    
    The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the period ended
June 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (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 Company as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the
Report.
 /s/ Sherrill StoneSherrill StoneChairman of the Board and 
Chief Executive Officer

Date: September 28, 2005 The foregoing Certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350; it is not
being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act, and is not to be
incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date
hereof, regardless of any general incorporation languages in such filing.
**Exhibit 23.1**

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

The Board of Trustees

Pennsylvania Real Estate Investment Trust: 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement (File No. 333-169488, as amended, File No. 333-155723, as amended, File No. 333-155722, File No. 333-144607,File No. 333-144606, File No. 333-121962, as amended, File No. 333-110926, File No. 333-109849, File No. 333-109848, File No. 333-97679, File No. 333-97337, File No. 333-36626, File No. 333-74693, FileNo. 333-74695, File No. 333-70157, as amended, File No. 333-48917, as amended) on Form S-3 and (File No. 333-169487, File No. 333-148237, File No. 333-103116, File No. 333-97677, File No. 333-69877, FileNo. 33-59767, File No. 33-59771, File No. 33-59773) on Form S-8 of Pennsylvania Real Estate Investment Trust of our reports dated March 1, 2010, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Pennsylvania Real EstateInvestment Trust and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the related consolidated statements of operations, equity and comprehensive income, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31,2010, and the related financial statement schedule, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010, which reports appear in the December 31, 2010 annual report on Form 10-K of Pennsylvania RealEstate Investment Trust.
#### BROWN v. STATE.

No. 20560.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 14, 1939.

Forrest A. Bennett, of San Antonio, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

GRAVES, Judge.

The conviction is for aggravated assault; punishment, a fine of $50.

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception. The information and all matters of procedure appearing to be in proper form, the judgment is affirmed.
Exhibit 13.2

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, I, Anabelle L. Chua,
Senior Vice President and Treasurer of Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company, hereby certify, to my knowledge, that our annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2013 (the Report) fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, our financial condition and results of operations.

April 2, 2014



/s/ Anabelle L. ChuaANABELLE L. CHUASenior Vice President and Treasurer(Principal Financial Officer)


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not
being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
Exhibit 32.7



Statement of Chief Executive Officer



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of Southern California Gas Company (the "Company") certifies that:



(i)

the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission for the year ended December 31, 2008 (the "Annual Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and



(ii)

the information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.







February 24, 2009



/S/  Debra L. ReedDebra L. ReedChief Executive Officer
**EXHIBIT32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, in hiscapacity as an officer of Channell Commercial Corporation (the “Company”), forpurposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of his knowledge:

 

•                  TheQuarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2004fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

•                  Theinformation contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.

 

 

Date:  August 9, 2004

 

 
| /s/  William H. Channell, Jr. |                     |
|------------------------------------|--------------------------|
| Name:                              | William H. Channell, Jr. |
| Title:                             | Chief Executive Officer  |
|                               |
|                               |
| /s/  Thomas Liguori           |                     |
| Name:                              | Thomas Liguori           |
| Title:                             | Chief Financial Officer  |
|                                    |                          |  |  |

 

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-6453 

JERRY L. ADAMS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

G. M. JOHNSON, Health Service Director; H. J.

PONTON, Warden; SAYED KAZI, Prison Physician;

J. FIELDS, Director of Treatment Programs; G.

HARRIS, Registered Nurse,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., Senior

District Judge. (2:04-cv-00641-HCM)

Submitted: September 28, 2006 Decided: October 5, 2006

Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jerry L. Adams, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Jerry L. Adams seeks to appeal the district court’s order

dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint

for failing to submit three copies of the complaint or to file a

concise amended complaint. This court may exercise jurisdiction

only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain

interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000); Fed.

R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S.

541 (1949). The order Adams seeks to appeal is neither a final

order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. See

Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064,

1067 (4th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack

of jurisdiction. 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