alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2023087EN.01001201.xml

| 9.3.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 87/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.3.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 87/12

---

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive practices and dominant positions at its meeting on 12 December 2022 concerning a draft decision in case AT.40462 - Amazon Marketplace and AT.40703 - Amazon Buy Box

Rapporteur: Bulgaria

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2023/C 87/06)

1.

The Advisory Committee (17 Member States) shares the Commission’s preliminary concerns expressed in its draft Decision under Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 54 of the EEA Agreement.

2.

The Advisory Committee (17 Member States) agrees with the Commission that the proceedings in the two cases AT.40703 and AT.40462 can be concluded by means of a decision pursuant to Article 9(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, as described in the draft Decision.

3.

The Advisory Committee (17 Member States) agrees with the Commission that the offered commitments are suitable, necessary and proportionate and should be made legally binding, as set out in the draft Decision.

4.

The Advisory Committee (17 Member States) agrees with the Commission’s draft Decision that, in light of the offered commitments, there are no longer grounds for action by the Commission, without prejudice to Article 9(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003.

5.

The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal.

6.

The Advisory Committee asks the Commission to take into account all the other points raised during the discussion.

---
#### BURNETT v. SURRATT et al.

No. 3416.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. El Paso.

Sept. 24, 1936.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 22, 1936.

Frederick A. Jones and George C. Cochran, both of Dallas, for plaintiff in error.

Leffingwell & Dixon and Sarah Daniels, all of Dallas, for defendant in error.

WALTHALL, Justice.

In this case appellant contested the probating of the will of W. A. Burnett, deceased, and alleged as grounds for such contest that the instrument filed therein as the will of the deceased was not his will; that it was not executed with the formalities required by law; that the deceased was not of sound mind and memory, and for that reason was not capable of making a will; and that he was unduly influenced.

Appellees answered by general demurrer and general denial. The case was tried in the county court of Dallas county and duly appealed to the district court. On the trial in the district court the case was submitted to a jury on special issues, and all issues submitted were found in favor of appellees, and the trial judge entered judgment on the verdict of the jury that the instrument in writing purporting to be the last will and testament of Walter A. Burnett, deceased, be admitted to probate and embraced in the judgment a copy of the will, and directed that appellees, named in the will as joint executors, be executors under the will, and directs that .the judgment be certified to the county probate court for its observance.

Appellant contestant’s motion for a new trial was overruled, and appellant brings this case to court by writ of error.

No statement of facts is found in the record.

We have found no fundamental error.

The case is -affirmed.
**EXHIBIT 32.02**

** **

**Section 1350 Certification**

** **

**In connection with this quarterlyreport of ML Systematic Momentum FuturesAccess LLC (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the quarter ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (this “Report”), I, Barbra E. Kocsis,Chief Financial Officer of Merrill Lynch Alternative Investments LLC, themanager of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:**

** **

1. This Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2. The information contained in this Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 

 
| Date:  May 14, 2010 |                                          |
|--------------------------|-----------------------------------------------|
|                     |                                          |
| By:                      | /s/  BARBRA E. KOCSIS                         |   |
|                     | Barbra  E. Kocsis                             |   |
|                     | Chief  Financial Officer                      |   |
|                     | (Principal  Financial and Accounting Officer) |   |

 

----
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2820 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2820

To reauthorize the Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Act of 2005, and 
                          for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 18, 2015

 Mr. Smith of New Jersey (for himself, Ms. Matsui, Mr. Jolly, and Mr. 
   Fattah) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To reauthorize the Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Act of 2005, and 
                          for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

     This Act may be cited as the ``Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research 
Reauthorization Act of 2015''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO THE STEM CELL THERAPEUTIC AND RESEARCH ACT OF 
              2005.

    (a) Cord Blood Inventory.--Section 2 of the Stem Cell Therapeutic 
and Research Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 274k note) is amended in subsection 
(h)--
            (1) in paragraph (1)--
                    (A) by striking ``$23,000,000 for each of fiscal 
                years 2011 through 2014 and''; and
                    (B) by inserting before the period at the end the 
                following: ``and $23,000,000 for each of fiscal years 
                2016 through 2020''; and
            (2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``2011 through 2015'' and 
        inserting ``2015 through 2020''.
    (b) National Program.--Section 379B of the Public Health Service 
Act (42 U.S.C. 274m) is amended by striking ``2011 through 2014'' and 
inserting ``2016 through 2020''.
                                 <all>
```
##### 



MAXCO, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
EXHIBIT 99.2  CERTIFICATION

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 this annual report on Form 10-K of Maxco, Inc. (the
Company) for the period ended March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Vincent Shunsky, as
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)  This Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)  Information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

Date: June 30, 2003

/s/ Vincent ShunskyVincent ShunskyChief Financial Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
**MEMORANDUM**

**DATE:** 08/ 28 /2014 **FROM:** Laura Farris/EPA Region 8 **TO:** Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket Id: OAR–2013
- 0602 **SUBJECT:** South Da kota 111d Call held on 08/27 /2014 **SUMMARY :**  EPA p articipated in a conference call with the State of S outh Dakota on 08/27 /2014 to discuss their question s about the Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants , which was proposed on June 2, 2014. **ATTENDEES: EPA Headquarters**  Jeremy Marks, Bill Stevens, Erica Wilson, Jim Ketcham
- Colwill, Jan Cortelyou, David Solomon, Nathan Topham, Marguerite McLamb, Brian Fisher, Matt Clouse, Chris Sherry, Gabrielle Stevens, Beth Conlin, Misha Vakoc **EPA Region 8**  Carl Daly, Laura Farris **Exter nal Stakeholders**  SD P ublic U tilities C ommission : Brian Rounds and Darren Kearney SD Department of Environment and Natural Resources: Brian Gustafson, Kyrik Rombough **Attachments** SD’s 111d Discussion Questions
Exhibit 4.4

 

FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE

SELECT ENERGY SERVICES, INC.

2016 EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN

 

WHEREAS, Select Energy Services, Inc. (the “Company”) maintains the Select Energy Services, Inc. 2016 Equity Incentive Plan (the “Plan”); and

 

WHEREAS, the Company desires to amend the Plan in certain respects.

 

NOW, THEREFORE, subject to approval by the Company’s stockholders and the consummation of the transactions contemplated by that certain Agreement and Plan of Merger by and among the Company, Rockwater Energy Solutions, Inc., Rockwater Energy Solutions, LLC, SES Holdings, LLC Rockwater Merger Sub, Inc. and Rockwater Merger Sub, LLC, dated as of July 18, 2017 (the “Merger Agreement”), the Plan shall be amended as follows effective as of the Closing Date (as defined in the Merger Agreement):

 

1.                                      The following two sentences shall be added to the end of Section 4(a) of the Plan:

 

“Notwithstanding any provision herein, subject to the listing rules of the stock exchange, if any, on which the Stock is listed, shares of Stock delivered with respect to Substitute Awards granted in assumption of, or in substitution for, awards held by individuals who become Eligible Persons as a result of a merger, consolidation or acquisition of another entity or the assets of another entity by or with the Company or an Affiliate shall not reduce the number of shares of Stock in the Share Pool; provided, however, that such Substitute Awards issued in connection with the assumption of, or in substitution for, outstanding options intended to qualify as ISOs shall count against the limitation with respect to shares that may be issued upon the exercise of ISOs provided in Section 4(a). Subject to the listing rules of the stock exchange, if any, on which the Stock is listed, a number of shares under a pre-existing shareholder-approved plan of an entity directly or indirectly acquired by the Company or any Affiliate as a result of a merger, consolidation or acquisition equal to the shares remaining available for delivery under such pre-existing shareholder-approved plan as of the date of the consummation of such transaction (as appropriately adjusted to reflect such transaction) may, if and to the extent permitted by the Board, be delivered with respect to Awards under the Plan and such shares shall not reduce the number of shares of Stock in the Share Pool; provided, however, that such Awards shall not be made after the date awards or grants could have otherwise been made under the terms of such pre-existing shareholder-approved plan, absent the transaction.”

 

2.                                      Except as amended hereby, the Plan is specifically ratified and reaffirmed.

 

[Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank]
**Exhibit 32.1**

**Certification**

I, James H. Dennedy, Interim President and Chief ExecutiveOfficer of Agilysys, Inc. (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to my knowledge: 

1. The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the annual period ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission (the “Report”) fully complies (1) with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and 

2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operationsof the Company. 

Dated: June 14, 2011 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request. 

(1) As explained more fully in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, the Annual Report does not include, asrequired by the Rule 3-09 of Regulation S-X , the separate financial statements of Magirus AG, a privately owned German company in which the Company formerly held a 20% equity interest until the Company disposed of such interest onNovember 15, 2008.
# C_2022211DE.01009701.xml

| 30.5.2022 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | C 211/97 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.5.2022

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

C 211/97

---

Berichtigung der Bekanntmachung der Kommission über Wartezeiten bei tierärztlichen Behandlungen ökologischer/biologischer Nutztiere mit Tierarzneimitteln

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union C 126 vom 21. März 2022
  )

(2022/C 211/09)

Seite 4, Frage 3, letzter Absatz:

Anstatt:

„Somit sollte ab dem 28. Januar 2022 unter normalen Anwendungsbedingungen die Wartezeit zwischen der letzten Verabreichung eines chemisch-synthetischen allopathischen Tierarzneimittels, einschließlich Antibiotika, und der Herstellung ökologischer/biologischer Lebensmittel aus einem ökologisch/biologisch, an Land lebenden und zur Lebensmittelproduktion vorgesehenen Tier, das mit einem Tierarzneimittel behandelt wird, das gemäß den Zulassungsbedingungen für dessen Tierart verwendet wird, doppelt so lang sein wie die relevante, in Artikel 115 Absatz 1 der Verordnung (EU) 2019/6 festgelegte Wartezeit und mindestens 48 Stunden betragen.“

muss es heißen:

„Somit sollte ab dem 28. Januar 2022 unter normalen Anwendungsbedingungen die Wartezeit zwischen der letzten Verabreichung eines chemisch-synthetischen allopathischen Tierarzneimittels, einschließlich Antibiotika, und der Herstellung ökologischer/biologischer Lebensmittel aus einem ökologisch/biologisch, an Land lebenden und zur Lebensmittelproduktion vorgesehenen Tier, das mit einem Tierarzneimittel behandelt wird, das nicht gemäß den Zulassungsbedingungen für dessen Tierart verwendet wird, doppelt so lang sein wie die relevante, in Artikel 115 Absatz 1 der Verordnung (EU) 2019/6 festgelegte Wartezeit und mindestens 48 Stunden betragen.“

---
#### LEWIS v. STATE.

No. 18873.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 17, 1937.

Wiley B. Thomas, of Groveton, for appellant.

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

MORROW, Presiding Judge.

Theft of cattle is the offense; penalty assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for two years.

The record is before this court without statement of facts of bills of exception. Appellant entered a plea of guilty to the offense charged and waived a jury upon the trial of the case.

No error having been perceived, the judgment is affirmed.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 00-10060

Conference Calendar

 

STEVEN DALE FINCH,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

CLIFF WILLIAMS, Grand Prairie Police Officer, 

Defendant-Appellee.

--------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:99-CV-803-Y

--------------------

June 15, 2000

Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Steven Dale Finch, Texas prisoner # 0525887, appeals the

district court’s denial of his motion for appointment of counsel. 

Finch argues that the inmate who assisted him in filing the

instant case has been transferred, the case is too complex for

him to understand or investigate, he has no legal knowledge, and

he is indigent and cannot afford to hire an attorney. Because

Finch has not demonstrated exceptional circumstances which would

warrant the appointment of counsel, he has not shown that the
No. 00-10060 

-2-

district court abused its discretion in denying his motion. See 

Wendell v. Asher, 162 F.3d 887, 892 (5th Cir. 1998).

AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.27
 
  FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE JANUARY 1, 1996 RESTATEMENT OF THE PINKERTON'S, INC.
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      SUPPLEMENTAL RETIREMENT INCOME PLAN
                      -----------------------------------

California Plant Protection adopted this Plan, effective October 1, 1987.
Effective January 1, 1996, the Plan was restated in its entirety. This First
Amendment amends the Plan as follows:

     1.  Section 4.4(b) is hereby amended by adding to the end of the section
the following sentence:

     "Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the case of a Participant who is
     mandatorily retired pursuant to the Employer's mandatory retirement policy,
     the suspension of benefits shall only be applied to the benefit otherwise
     payable above the annual amount required by applicable law or regulation to
     permit a mandatory retirement policy (currently $44,000)."

     1.  Section 6.2 is hereby amended by adding to the end of the section the
following sentence:

     "Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the case of a Participant who is
     mandatorily retired pursuant to the Employer's mandatory retirement policy,
     the forfeiture shall only apply to benefits otherwise payable above the
     annual amount required by applicable law or regulation to permit a
     mandatory retirement policy (currently $44,000)."


EXECUTED at Encino, California, effective as of August 1, 1997.


                                PINKERTON'S, INC.

                                BY: /S/ DENIS R. BROWN
                                    -------------------------------------
                                    Denis R. Brown
                                    President and Chief Executive Officer
**Exhibit
      32.1**





**Certification****of Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial
      Officer**


**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 Shelby Acquisition III, Inc. (the
      "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended January 31, 2008 as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
      James R. Kerr, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to
      ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:





(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/
                James R. KerrJames
                R. KerrPrincipal
                Executive OfficerPrincipal
                Financial OfficerMarch
                17, 2008
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**

October 24, 2018

No. 04

- 18

- 00652

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF J.T.,

From the 408th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2017

- PA

- 01089 Honorable Renée Yanta, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

This is an accelerated appeal from the trial court’s final order terminating appellant’s parental rights. Appellant ’ s court

- appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief and motion to withdraw pursuant to Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), in which he asserts there are no meritorious issues to raise on appeal. See In re P.M.
, 520 S.W.3d 24
, 27 (Tex. 2016). Counsel
states he has provided cop ies of the brief and motion to withdraw to appellant and informed
app ellant of his right to review the record and file h is own brief. See id. ; Nichols v. State , 954 S.W.2d 83, 85

- 86 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio, July 23, 1997, no pet.); Bruns v. State , 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 1996, no pet.). Counsel’s lett er also enclosed a form for appellant to use to request review of the appellate record. If appellant would like a copy of the appellate record, he must file the motion in this court no later than November 7, 2018

. If appellant desires to file a pro se brief, we order that he do so by December 7, 2018. If appellant files a timely pro se brief, appellee may file a responsive brief no later than twenty days after appellant ’ s pro se brief is filed in this court. Alterna tively, if appellant does not file a timely pro se brief, appellee may file a brief in response to counsel ’ s brief no later than December 27, 2018. We order the motion to withdraw filed by appellant ’ s counsel is held in abeyance pending further order of th e court.

We further order the clerk of this court to serve a copy of this order on appellant and all counsel.

________________________________ _ Luz Elena D. Chapa, JusticeIN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 24th day of October, 2018

.

__________________________ _________ KEITH E. HOTTLE
, Clerk of Court
0

Gibbons Saitta 

# Piektt 

# at e Pickering J. , J. court in the first instance) NRS 34.724(2)(b); NRS 34.738(1). Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.

cc: Aldo Jovanny Morones Law Offices of John P. Parris Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

1 We express no opinion as to whether petitioner could meet the procedural requirements of NRS chapter 34.

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A 

### e
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER>    1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                          49,533
<SECURITIES>                                    11,929
<RECEIVABLES>                                   13,352
<ALLOWANCES>                                       213
<INVENTORY>                                      4,564
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 8,070
<PP&E>                                         431,749
<DEPRECIATION>                                  33,548
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 573,241
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           38,961
<BONDS>                                        282,651
<COMMON>                                           310
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                     232,606
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   232,916
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               205,628
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  159,817
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,200
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    88
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              21,603
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 29,108
<INCOME-TAX>                                    11,643
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             17,465
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    104
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    17,569
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .54
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .54
        

</TABLE>