alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2022246EN.01000201.xml

| 29.6.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 246/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.6.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 246/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10723 – BROOKFIELD / JINDAL GROUP / JINDAL PLASTIC FILMS BUSINESS)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 246/02)

On 21 June 2022, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32022M10723. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32022M10723. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
#### GOUGH et ux. v. HOME OWNERS’ LOAN CORPORATION.

No. 3893.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. El Paso.

Nov. 23, 1939.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 4, 1940.

John T. Hill, of El Paso, for appellants.

Isaacks & Lattner, of El Paso- (S. J. Isaacks, of El Paso, of counsel), for appel-lee.

*772HIGGINS, Justice

(after stating the case as above).

Jannie Gough acquired the legal .title to the lots. The appellee holds under her. The title of the defendant is an equitable one. Bona fide purchasers and lien-holders for value, acquiring the title to realty or a lien thereon from the owner of the legal title, are protected against equitable titles such as here asserted by John T. Gough. In order for a holder of such equitable title to prevail against such a purchaser or lienholder, it must be shown the latter acquired their rights with notice, actual or constructive, of the outstanding equitable title. The record here is wholly insufficient to show actual notice of the outstanding equitable title. Nor is the evidence sufficient to put either the City Mortgage or the Home Owners’ Loan Corporation upon inquiry which would charge either of them with constructive notice of the outstanding equitable title asserted by John T. Gough. The quotations from the trial court’s findings disclose the facts upon which appellants rely as sufficient to constitute constructive notice of the outstanding equitable title. We concur in the ruling of the trial court that such facts were insufficient for the purpose indicated. Johnson v. Bingham, Tex.Civ.App., 251 S.W. 529, affirmed, Tex.Com.App., 265 S. W. 130 and Tex.Com.App., 265 S.W. 884; Strong v. Strong, Tex.Civ.App., 66 S.W.2d 751, affirmed 128 Tex. 470, 98 S.W.2d 346, 109 A.L.R. 739. In this connection it should be further stated the evidence shows that at times the plaintiff and his wife lived in the house upon the property with Mrs. Jannie Gough, but. at the time the loan was made by the City Mortgage Company and the deed of trust executed secur*773ing the same, Gough was not living in the home, though he was there for three or four weeks at that time on a visit from Ranger, Texas, where he resided. Under the authorities cited above the casual residence at times upon the property with Mrs. Jannie Gough was not inconsistent with Mrs. Gough having complete legal and equitable title to the lots. In any event, it cannot be said that as a matter of law it charged the City Mortgage Company or the Home Owners’ Loan Corporation with constructive notice of the outstanding equitable title. Viewed in its aspect most favorable to the appellants, -it raised but an issue of fact as to whether or not, under all of the circumstances reflected by the record, it was sufficient to place the City Mortgage Company or the Home Owners’ Loan Corporation upon inquiry, and thus affect them with constructive notice.

This issue the trial court found against appellants and its findings upon the issue should not be set aside.

The judgment is affirmed.

PRICE, C. J., did not participate in the disposition of this appeal.
# C_2022042EN.01000101.xml

| 27.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 42/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 42/1

---

Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries

(2022/C 42/01)

In accordance with Article 35(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Union control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), a decision has been taken to close the fishery as set down in the following table:

| Date and time of closure | 18.12.2021 |
| --- | --- |
| Duration | 18.12.2021 - 31.12.2021 |
| Member State | European Union (All Member States) |
| Stock or Group of stocks | COD/1N2AB. |
| Species | Cod (Gadus morhua) |
| Zone | Norwegian waters of 1 and 2 |
| Type(s) of fishing vessels | — |
| Reference number | 25/TQ92 |

Date and time of closure

18.12.2021

Duration

18.12.2021 - 31.12.2021

Member State

European Union (All Member States)

Stock or Group of stocks

COD/1N2AB.

Species

Cod (Gadus morhua)

Zone

Norwegian waters of 1 and 2

Type(s) of fishing vessels

—

Reference number

25/TQ92

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.

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


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                       8,349,641
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               16,433,048
<ALLOWANCES>                                 4,100,000
<INVENTORY>                                 15,895,121
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            41,407,522
<PP&E>                                      90,127,475
<DEPRECIATION>                              10,773,708
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             191,280,408
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      143,403,046
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    73,139,616
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               197,690,856
<SALES>                                     22,013,267
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            22,063,919
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            29,462,635
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (7,398,716)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (7,398,716)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (2,549)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2,549)



</TABLE>
From: Graves, Linda

Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 3:51 PM

To: 'Michael McGaraghan'

Cc: Lewis, Ronald; 'Mahima Gupta'; Edwards, Brenda Subject: RE: Lighting Rulemaking: GSFL Co mpliance Lumen/Wattage Data request

Dear Mr. McGaraghan:

The attached spreadsheet contains the comp liance and certification data you requested.

Linda Graves, Lighting Standards Project Leader

202-586-1851

From: Michael McGaraghan [mailto:mmcgaraghan@energy-solution.com]

Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:19 PM

To: Graves, Linda

Cc: Lewis, Ronald; McCabe, Michael; MRivest@Navigantconsulting.com; mahima.gupta@navigantconsulting.com Subject: Lighting Rulemaking: GSFL Comp liance Lumen/Wattage Data request

Dear Ms. Graves,

I am writing to request that DOE provide the manuf acturer compliance data for linear fluorescent lamp wattage and lumens, upon which DOE based its GSFL analysis. (Page 16946 in Federal Register) DOE specified that the lumens and wattage reported for compliance purposes can be significantly different than the catalog lumen and wattage values, so we ar e unable to accurately evaluate this part of the analysis. In doing our own research about which lamps will meet each level, we have incorporated “ANSI rated wattage,” which DOE supplied in its analysis for most lamp types, and which may be more accurate than catalog rated lumens. However, ANSI rat ed wattage may also be significantly different than compliance data wattage, so our lumen per watt estimates are imprecise on both fronts.

One reason this is important is that for some lamps, our calculations seem slightly different than DOE’s analysis. For example, DOE found that T12’s would most likely not meet TSL 4 and would definitely not meet TSL 5. We have found some T12s that appear to be significantly more efficient than the TSL 4 standard and possibly also better than the TSL 5 st andard. It would also be helpful to have the compliance values that DOE used so that we could determine how far short of a given level each product is. For example—if 25W 4’ T8 lamps do not meet TSL 5, we need to know how much further improvement is needed to meet that level in order to provide informed comments.

We realize that this manufacturer data is sensitive, and that in order to make it public you may have to mask some information. However, if possible, we request that you provide the catalog initial lumens and catalog wattage for each lamp. At the very least we would need to know the product class and color temperature, in addition to the compliance lumen and wattage data.

Because this data weighed so heavily into the analysis of each trial standard level, we feel it should be made public. Thank you very much for your consideration.

Regards,

Mike

Mike McGaraghan Project Manager; Energy Solutions 1610 Harrison St, Oakland, CA 94612 (510) 482-4420 ext. 242 (510) 482-4421 (fax)
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2969 

To eliminate the separate participation rate for 2-parent families receiving 

TANF assistance. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 8, 2015 

Mr. HOLDING introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by 

the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To eliminate the separate participation rate for 2-parent 

families receiving TANF assistance. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘TANF Marriage Pen5 alty Elimination Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. MODIFICATION OF TANF PARTICIPATION RATE RE7 QUIREMENTS. 

8 (a) ELIMINATION OF SEPARATE PARTICIPATION

9 RATE REQUIREMENTS FOR 2-PARENT FAMILIES.—SecVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:51 Jul 09, 2015 Jkt 049200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H2969.IH H2969

smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2969 IH

1 tion 407 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 607) is 

2 amended— 

3 (1) in subsection (a)— 

4 (A) by striking all through ‘‘A State’’ the 

5 first place it appears and inserting the fol6 lowing: 

7 ‘‘(a) PARTICIPATION RATE REQUIREMENTS.—A 

8 State’’; and 

9 (B) by striking paragraph (2); 

10 (2) in subsection (b)— 

11 (A) in the subsection heading, by striking 

12 ‘‘RATES’’ and inserting ‘‘RATE’’; 

13 (B) in paragraph (1)(A), by striking 

14 ‘‘(a)(1)’’ and inserting ‘‘(a)’’; 

15 (C) by striking paragraph (2) and redesig16 nating paragraphs (3) through (5) as para17 graphs (2) through (4), respectively; 

18 (D) in paragraph (3) (as so redesignated), 

19 by striking ‘‘paragraphs (1)(B) and (2)(B)’’ 

20 and inserting ‘‘paragraph (1)(B)’’; and 

21 (E) in paragraph (4) (as so redesignated), 

22 by striking ‘‘rates’’ and inserting ‘‘rate’’; and 

23 (3) in subsection (c)— 

24 (A) in paragraph (1)— 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 2969 IH

1 (i) by striking all through ‘‘For pur2 poses of subsection (b)(1)(B)(i)’’ and in3 serting the following: 

4 ‘‘(1) GENERAL RULES.—For purposes of sub5 section (b)(1)(B)(i)’’; and 

6 (ii) by striking subparagraph (B); and 

7 (B) in paragraph (2)(D)— 

8 (i) by striking ‘‘paragraphs (1)(B)(i) 

9 and (2)(B) of subsection (b)’’ and insert10 ing ‘‘subsection (b)(1)(B)(i)’’; and 

11 (ii) by striking ‘‘in all families and in 

12 2-parent families, respectively,’’. 

13 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— 

14 (1) The paragraph heading for section 

15 409(a)(3) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 609(a)(3)) is 

16 amended by striking ‘‘RATES’’ and inserting ‘‘RATE’’. 

17 (2) Section 411(b)(1)(A) of such Act (42 

18 U.S.C. 611(b)(1)(A)) is amended by striking ‘‘rates’’ 

19 and inserting ‘‘rate’’. 

20 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

21 The amendments made by this Act shall take effect 

22 on October 1, 2015. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
FILED

September 3, 1998

Cecil Crowson, Jr.

Appellate C ourt Clerk

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT JACKSON

JULY 31, 1998 SESSION

CLONTE THOMAS, )

) NO. 02C01-9804-CR-00113

Appellant, )

) SHELBY COUNTY

VS. )

) HON. JOSEPH B. DAILEY,

STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) JUDGE

)

Appellee. ) AFFIRMED - RULE 20

ORDER

Petitioner appeals the summary dismissal of his second petition for postconviction relief. The trial court dismissed the petition finding the statute of

limitations had expired, and his allegations were resolved in his first petition for postconviction relief. We affirm the judgment of the trial court pursuant to Rule 20,

Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals. 

Petitioner was convicted of first degree murder on August 7, 1991. The

conviction was affirmed by this Court. State v. Clonte J. Thomas, C.C.A. No.

02C01-9112-CR-00262, Shelby County (Tenn. Crim. App. filed January 27, 1993,

at Jackson). The Tennessee Supreme Court denied permission to appeal on June

7, 1993. 

Petitioner filed his first petition for post-conviction relief on September 23,

1993, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel and erroneous jury instructions.

The petition was dismissed after an evidentiary hearing, and this Court affirmed the

dismissal. Clonte Thomas v. State, C.C.A. No. 02C01-9408-CR-00167, Shelby

County (Tenn. Crim. App. filed March 22, 1995, at Jackson). Permission to appeal

was denied by the Tennessee Supreme Court on July 10, 1995.

The present petition for post-conviction relief was filed on February 27, 1998.

The trial court summarily dismissed the petition finding it to have been filed outside

the statute of limitations, and the previous petition had been resolved on its merits.
2

Petitions filed after May 10, 1995, are controlled by the Post-Conviction

Procedure Act of 1995. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-201 Compiler’s Notes. The

statute of limitations is one (1) year. Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-202(a). For

convictions that were final prior to May 10, 1995, the last possible date for filing a

petition for post-conviction relief was May 10, 1996. See Jason L. Jennings v.

State, C.C.A. No. 01C01-9703-CR-00106 Davidson County (Tenn. Crim. App. filed

April 1, 1998, at Nashville). None of the exceptions to the one-year requirement

applies in this case. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-202(b). Thus, the trial court

correctly ruled that the petition was barred by the statute of limitations. 

Further, Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-202(c) provides that a second or

subsequent petition shall be summarily dismissed if a prior petition has been

resolved on its merits by a court of competent jurisdiction. As found by the trial

court, the prior petition was resolved on its merits; therefore, the trial court properly

dismissed the present petition summarily. 

It is, therefore, ordered that the judgment of the trial court be affirmed

pursuant to Rule 20, Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals. Costs are taxed to the

state as it appears the petitioner is indigent. 

____________________________

JOE G. RILEY, JUDGE

___________________________

PAUL G. SUMMERS, JUDGE

___________________________

DAVID G. HAYES, JUDGE
### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 23 - 0188

_________________ BANNER LEE BOYD,

Petitioner and Appellant, v. ST ATE OF MONTANA,

Respondent and Appellee. O R D E R

_________________ The record was filed for purposes of this appeal on March 29 , 2023 . The opening brief is now overdue. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Appellant shall prepare, file , and serve the opening brief on appeal no later than June 12 , 2 023 . Failure to file the brief within that time will result in dismissal of this appeal with prejudice and without further notice. The Clerk is directed to provide copies of this Order to all counsel of record.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 10 2023

05/10/2023
Case Number: DA 23-0188
```

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 126 (Thursday, June 30, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42542-42543]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-15707]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 60

Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources

CFR Correction

    In Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 60 (Sec.  60.1 
to end of part 60 sections), revised as of July 1, 2015, make the 
following corrections:

0
1. Reinstate the symbol T'';
0
e. On page 719, in Sec.  60.643, paragraph (a)(1)(ii), after ``R'';
0
f. On page 734, in Sec.  60.664, paragraph (f)(2) table 2, in the first 
column, in the first two entries, after ``HT'';
0
g. On page 1208, in Sec.  60.5410, paragraph (g)(1)(ii), after ``R'';
0
h. On page 1222, in Sec.  60.5415, paragraph (g)(1)(ii), after ``R''.

0
2. Reinstate the symbol T'';
0
c. On page 719, in Sec.  60.643, paragraph (a)(1)(i), after ``R'';
0
d. On page 734, in Sec.  60.664, paragraph (f)(2) table 2, in the first 
column, in the third and fourth entries, after ``HT'';
0
e. On page 1208, in Sec.  60.5410, paragraph (g)(1)(i), after ``R'';
0
f. On page 1222, in Sec.  60.5415, paragraph (g)(1)(i), after ``R''.

0
4. Reinstate the symbol > in the following places:
0
a. On pages 1111-1112, in table 1 to subpart KKKK, in the second 
column, before the number ``50'' in the third, seventh, tenth, and 
eleventh entries;
0
b. On pages 1111-1112, in table 1 to subpart KKKK, in the second 
column,

[[Page 42543]]

before the number ``850'' in the fourth and eighth entries;
0
c. On pages 1112, in table 1 to subpart KKKK, in the second column, 
before the number ``30'' in the thirteenth entry.
[FR Doc. 2016-15707 Filed 6-29-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
```
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, in his capacity as an officerof Channell Commercial Corporation (the “Company”), for purposes 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 endedMarch 31, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)of the Securities Exchange 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:                    April 29,2004

 

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

 

----
EXHIBIT 99.2

                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 Quarterly Report of Park Bancorp, Inc., (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on May 13, 2003, (the "Report"), I, Steven J. Pokrak,
Treasurer and Chief Financial 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, 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.


                                    /s/ Steven J. Pokrak
                                    Steven J. Pokrak
                                    Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer

                                    May 13, 2003
Order entered September 24, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-19-00439-CV

JOHN PANIAGUA; AND HERMELINDA MARAVILLA CORONA AND JOSE 

CAMERINO MARAVILLA, SR., INDIVIDUALLY, AS PERSONAL 

REPRESENTATIVES OF THE ESTATE OF JOSE CAMERINO MARAVILLA, 

DECEASED, ET AL., Appellants

V.

WEEKLEY HOMES, LLC, Appellee

On Appeal from the 298th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-19-02097

ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case has not been filed. By letter dated August 29, 2019, we 

informed appellants the court reporter notified us that the reporter’s record had not been filed 

because appellants had not (1) requested the record; or (2) paid for or made arrangements to pay 

for the record. We directed appellants to provide the Court with written verification showing the 

reporter’s record had been requested and that appellants had paid for or made arrangements to 

pay for the record or had been found entitled to proceed without payment of costs. We cautioned 

appellants that failure to provide the required documentation within ten days might result in the 

appeal being ordered submitted without the reporter’s record. To date, appellants have not 
provided the required documentation nor otherwise corresponded with the Court regarding the 

status of the reporter’s record. Accordingly, we ORDER this appeal submitted without a 

reporter’s record. 

Appellants’ brief is due THIRTY DAYS from the date of this order.

/s/ ERIN A. NOWELL 

JUSTICE