alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2022464EN.01000301.xml

| 6.12.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 464/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.12.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 464/3

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10910 – MACQUARIE / ABERDEEN / AIP / CERTAIN MÁSMÓVIL ASSETS)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 464/03)

On 16 November 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 32022M10910. 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 32022M10910. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.

---

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

---
Exhibit 31.1  CERTIFICATION OF THE PRESIDENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT  I, Peter Destler, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of GD Conference Center, Inc. for the period ended June 30, 2007;  2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the period presented in this quarterly report;  4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:  a. designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;  b. evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and  c. presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;  5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):  a. all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and  b. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and   6. I have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the 14th day of August, 2007.



/s/ Peter Destler

Peter Destler

President (Principal Executive and Financial Officer)
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2984 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

<DOC>
114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 2984

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 15, 2016

   Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                           Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  To amend the Federal Power Act to provide that any inaction by the 
 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission that allows a rate change to go 
into effect shall be treated as an order by the Commission for purposes 
                     of rehearing and court review.

    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 ``Fair Ratepayer Accountability, 
Transparency, and Efficiency Standards Act'' or the ``Fair RATES Act''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENT TO THE FEDERAL POWER ACT.

    Subsection (d) of section 205 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 
824d(d)) is amended by adding at the end the following: ``Any absence 
of action by the Commission that allows a change to take effect under 
this section, including the Commission allowing the sixty days' notice 
herein provided to expire without Commission action, shall be treated 
as an order issued by the Commission accepting such change for purposes 
of section 313.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives March 14, 2016.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
# C_2019054EN.01000401.xml

| 11.2.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 54/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.2.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 54/4

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht Linz (Austria) lodged on 8 October 2018 — HK, IJ v Deutsche Lufthansa AG

(Case C-630/18)

(2019/C 54/05)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landesgericht Linz

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: HK, IJ

Defendant: Deutsche Lufthansa AG

The case was removed from the Register of the Court of Justice by order of the Court of 15 November 2018.

---
## MA**TERIA LS NOT INCLUDED IN** 

**AI RWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE (A**  **D) DOCKET**

**FAA -**  **2013 -**  **04 90**  Docket Number
**2008 -**  **SW -**  **00 4**  **- AD**  Directorate Identifier Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in DMS Docket and Maintained in the Supplemental AD Docket Bell Alert Se rvice Bulletin No. 407 - 05 - 67, dated June 8, 2005 .


### MA **Y BE VIEWED AT:** Federal Aviation Administration

Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region Rules Docket 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663 Fort W orth, Texas 76137 **DURING THE HOURS OF:** 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
DRAFT 20110319

1.1 

### Risk Matrix

Considerations

 People

 Continuity of Operation Plan (COOP)

 Environmental

 Budget



### Severity Definitions

1. Insignificant a) No first aid required injury/illness b) No lost work time c) None to very limited operational impact, less than 1 hour d) None to minimal equipment loss less than 1 day out of service e) No environmental impact f) None to minimal budget impact

2. Minor a) Injury/illness, first aid required b) Little to no lost work time, less than 2 days (16 hours) c) None or very limited operational impact, less than 4 hours d) None to minimal equipment loss less than 2 days out of service e) Contained with none to limited impact f) Minimal budget impact

3. Major a) Injury/illness 1 to 5 persons b) Death less than 2 persons c) Lost work time less than 1 week (40 hours) d) Loss of total operations less than 2 hours e) Loss of partial operations less 1 day, (24 hours) f) Equipment loss less than a week g) Non-contained but manageable/mitigated within 1 day h) Moderate budget impact

4. Hazardous a) Injury/illness 6 to 49 people b) Death less than 5 persons, not Mass Casualty Incident (MCI) c) Lost work time 1 week to 1 month d) Loss of total operation 2 to 12 hours e) Partial loss of operation 48 hours or less f) Equipment loss less than 30 days g) Non-contained, resulting in environmental impact 1 to 30 days h) Serious budget impactDRAFT 20110319

5. Catastrophic a) Injury/illness greater than 50 persons b) Death greater than 5 persons, MCI c) Lost work time greater than one month d) Loss of total operation 12+ hours e) Loss of partial operations greater than 48 hours f) Total loss of equipment g) Non-contained, long term impact 30+ days h) Grave budget impact



### Probability Definitions

1. Extremely Improbable a) Almost impossible b) Possibly only once in 10 to 100 years

2. Extremely Remote a) Conceivable but highly unlikely b) Possibly once in every 5 to less than 10 years

3. Remote a) Possibly once a year or multiple times from 1 year to or less than 5 years b) Unlikely but possible to occur

4. Probable a) Likely to occur multiple times per year or once per month b) Regularly expected to occur in the system

5. Frequent a) Likely to occur once a day or multiple times per week b) Continuously expected to occur in the system
#### MORENO v. STATE.

No. 15389.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 16, 1932.

T. H. Miller, of George West, for appellant.

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

MORROW, P. J.

The possession of intoxicating liquor for the purpose of sale is the offense; penalty assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for one year.

It was shown that Guadalupe Garza testified that she purchased from the appellant a bottle of whisky for which she paid him 50 cents, and that upon another occasion she purchased from him a bottle for. which she paid him 40 cents.

As shown by bill of exception No. 1, the reception of this evidence was opposed upon the assumption that the evidence mentioned showed a different offense from that with which the appellant was charged. It is quite true that the possession of intoxicating liquor is one offense and the sale- of it is another offense. However, in a prosecution for the possession 'of intoxicating liquor for the purpose of sale, evidence of the sale of such liquor is relevant. The contention of the appellant cannot be sustained. See Hood v. State, 111 Tex. Cr. R. 95, 10 S.W.(2d) 94; Overley v. State, 104 Tex. Cr. R. 386, 283 S. W. 796; May v. State, 97 Tex. Cr. R. 284, 260 S. W. 873; Sipanek v. State, 100 Tex. Cr. R. 489, 272 S. W. 141.

From bill of exception No. 2, as qualified by the judge presiding at the trial, it is understood that Marcos Moreno requested Maria Robles to see Guadalupe Garza and request her not to say that he had sold her liquor because he had not done so, and that Maria Robles, after talking to her, told the appellant that Guadalupe Garza said that she had already reported to the sheriff that the appellant had sold liquor to her, and that she was going to tell it. Apparently the message sent to Guadalupe Garza by Maria Robles and her report of the reply were transactions which the appellant instigated and which are not denied, and of which it is thought under the facts before this court that the appellant is not in a position to complain.

From bill of exception No. 3, it appears that Guadalupe Garza testified that she bought whisky from the appellant upon two occasions, at one time buying a bottle for which she paid him 50 cents and at another time buying one for which, she paid him 40 cents.

*510The law seems well settled to the effect that, in a prosecution for the possession of intoxicating. liquor for the purpose of sale, proof .of sales of whisky made by the accused not too remote from the time of the offense on trial, may be properly received as bearing upon the intent with which the liquor is possessed. On the subject, the authorities cited above are in point.

Perceiving no error in the record justifying a reversal, the judgment is affirmed.
# C_2023327EN.01000701.xml

| 15.9.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 327/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 327/7

---

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.107138

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2023/C 327/06)

| Date of adoption of the decision | 23.8.2023 |
| --- | --- |
| Aid number | SA.107138 |
| Member State | Czechia |
| Region | Praha, Strední Cechy, Jihovýchod, Severovýchod, Moravskoslezko, Strední Morava, Jihozápad, Severozápad |
| Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary) | Czechia — TCTF: Temporary price scheme to reduce impact of natural gas and electricity price increases on undertakings |
| Legal basis | The Act No 458/2000 Coll., on business conditions and public administration in the energy sectors and amending certain laws (the ‘Energy Act’), which in its Section 19d enables the Government of the Czech Republic (the ‘Government’) to set prices for electricity or gas supplied to customers or other market participants in exceptional market situations in a Government Decree (Annex II); |
| Type of measure | Scheme |
| Objective | Remedy for a serious disturbance in the economy |
| Form of aid | Direct grant |
| Budget | Overall budget: 19 000 000 000 CZK
  Annual budget: 19 000 000 000 CZK |
| Intensity | |
| Duration | Until 31.12.2023 |
| Economic sectors | All economic sectors eligible to receive aid |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Ministry of Industry and Trade |
| Na Františku 32, 110 15 Praha 1, Czechia |

Date of adoption of the decision

23.8.2023

Aid number

SA.107138

Member State

Czechia

Region

Praha, Strední Cechy, Jihovýchod, Severovýchod, Moravskoslezko, Strední Morava, Jihozápad, Severozápad

Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary)

Czechia — TCTF: Temporary price scheme to reduce impact of natural gas and electricity price increases on undertakings

Legal basis

The Act No 458/2000 Coll., on business conditions and public administration in the energy sectors and amending certain laws (the ‘Energy Act’), which in its Section 19d enables the Government of the Czech Republic (the ‘Government’) to set prices for electricity or gas supplied to customers or other market participants in exceptional market situations in a Government Decree (Annex II);

Type of measure

Scheme

Objective

Remedy for a serious disturbance in the economy

Form of aid

Direct grant

Budget

Overall budget: 19 000 000 000 CZK

Annual budget: 19 000 000 000 CZK

Intensity

Duration

Until 31.12.2023

Economic sectors

All economic sectors eligible to receive aid

Name and address of the granting authority

Ministry of Industry and Trade

Na Františku 32, 110 15 Praha 1, Czechia

Other information

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

https://competition-cases.ec.europa.eu/search?caseInstrument=SA

---
_ ^ SAN ANGELO REGIONAL AIRPORT 

SAN ^tek. 

BPrjioKiAT"Arel REGIONAL S IVIA l ni b I ItL U AIRPORT 

8618 Terminal Circle, Suite 101 • San Angelo. Texas 76904 • 325-659-6409 • Fax 657-0050 

March 11,2010 

The Honorable Raymond H. LaHood 

Secretary 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE 

Washington, DC 20590 :< 

Docket DOT-OST-2010-iii 

Dear Mr. Secretary: 

Thanks you for the opportxmity to express our support for the application for antitrust immimity and 

proposed joint business agreement filed by American Airlines and Japan Airlines. The proposed 

alliance between these two airlines is vital for oneworld to compete effectively with the Star and 

Sky Team alliance. This increased interalliance completion will in turn enhance the benefits of the 

Department's Open Skies policy-first by solidifying U.S.-Japan Open Skies, then by serving as a 

foundation for further liberalization across Asia. 

After a thorough review, we encourage the Department of Transportation to approve this application 

as it would enable the oneworld alliance airlines to work closely together to deliver highly competitive 

air transportation services. Approval for AA/JAL alliance will have a positive impact on air travel by 

offering customers more service, scheduling and pricing options and will help to ensure that customers 

continue to benefit from having three competitive alliances to choose from. 

I urge you to quickly approve this application. 

Sincerely, 

Luis EtClguezabal, A.A.E. 

San Angelo Regional Airport 

8618 Terminal Circle, Suite 101 

San Angelo, Texas 76904 

Luis.Elguezabal(g),sananaelotexas.us
#### FRANK v. STATE.

No. 18867.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 17, 1937.

Shead & Smith, of Longview, for appellant.

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

LATTIMORE, Judge.

Conviction for possessing narcotics; punishment, one year in the penitentiary.

The record is here without statement of facts or bills of exception. All matters of procedure appearing regular, the judgment is affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND RELATED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME OF J. C.
PENNEY COMPANY, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES AS OF JANUARY 27, 1996, AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-27-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-27-1996
<CASH>                                             173
<SECURITIES>                                       986
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,284
<ALLOWANCES>                                        63
<INVENTORY>                                      3,935
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 9,409
<PP&E>                                           6,408
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,127
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  17,102
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,020
<BONDS>                                          4,080
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        603
<COMMON>                                         1,112
<OTHER-SE>                                       4,169
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    17,102
<SALES>                                         20,562
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                21,242
<CGS>                                           14,352
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   19,275
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    82
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   219
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 325
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,341
<INCOME-TAX>                                       503
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                838
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       838
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     3.52
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     3.33
        

</TABLE>
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

TYLER NEFF, 

Appellant, 

v.

Case No. 5D22-540

LT Case No. 2018-CF-15488

STATE OF FLORIDA, 

Appellee. 

________________________________/

Decision filed November 8, 2022

Appeal from the Circuit Court

for Orange County, 

Bob LeBlanc, Judge.

Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and

Allison A. Havens, Assistant Public Defender,

Daytona Beach, for Appellant. 

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, 

and Kristen L. Davenport, Assistant Attorney 

General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee. 

PER CURIAM. 

AFFIRMED. 

COHEN, TRAVER and NARDELLA, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                      38,566,645
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                              536,309,127
<ALLOWANCES>                                (3,245,491)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                       4,199,817
<DEPRECIATION>                                 338,323
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             584,331,789
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                    329,737,515
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       123,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  67,425,009
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               584,331,789
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            37,207,613
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            14,463,616
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             2,200,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          11,356,779
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              9,187,218
<INCOME-TAX>                                 3,727,668
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          5,459,550
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 5,459,550
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.44
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.43
        

</TABLE>