alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2011132EN.01000901.xml

| 19.5.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 132/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.5.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 132/9

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 481/2011

of 18 May 2011

establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 of 21 December 2007 laying down implementing rules for Council Regulations (EC) No 2200/96, (EC) No 2201/96 and (EC) No 1182/2007 in the fruit and vegetable sector (2), and in particular Article 138(1) thereof,

Whereas:

Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in Annex XV, Part A thereto,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The standard import values referred to in Article 138 of Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 are fixed in the Annex hereto.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 19 May 2011.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 18 May 2011.

For the Commission, On behalf of the President,

José Manuel SILVA RODRÍGUEZ

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 350, 31.12.2007, p. 1.

2

---

ANNEX

Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

| (EUR/100 kg) |
| --- |
| CN code | Third country code (1) | Standard import value |
| 0702 00 00 | JO | 50,2 |
| MA | 49,5 |
| TN | 91,1 |
| TR | 80,7 |
| ZZ | 67,9 |
| 0707 00 05 | TR | 108,2 |
| ZZ | 108,2 |
| 0709 90 70 | MA | 86,8 |
| TR | 107,4 |
| ZZ | 97,1 |
| 0709 90 80 | EC | 27,0 |
| ZZ | 27,0 |
| 0805 10 20 | EG | 55,4 |
| IL | 66,8 |
| MA | 39,8 |
| TR | 68,2 |
| ZZ | 57,6 |
| 0805 50 10 | TR | 76,5 |
| ZA | 91,9 |
| ZZ | 84,2 |
| 0808 10 80 | AR | 89,5 |
| BR | 87,8 |
| CA | 108,5 |
| CL | 81,8 |
| CN | 107,5 |
| NZ | 101,1 |
| US | 143,4 |
| UY | 64,4 |
| ZA | 83,6 |
| ZZ | 96,4 |

(EUR/100 kg)

CN code

Third country code (1)

Standard import value

0702 00 00

JO

50,2

MA

49,5

TN

91,1

TR

80,7

ZZ

67,9

0707 00 05

TR

108,2

ZZ

108,2

0709 90 70

MA

86,8

TR

107,4

ZZ

97,1

0709 90 80

EC

27,0

ZZ

27,0

0805 10 20

EG

55,4

IL

66,8

MA

39,8

TR

68,2

ZZ

57,6

0805 50 10

TR

76,5

ZA

91,9

ZZ

84,2

0808 10 80

AR

89,5

BR

87,8

CA

108,5

CL

81,8

CN

107,5

NZ

101,1

US

143,4

UY

64,4

ZA

83,6

ZZ

96,4

---

(1)  Nomenclature of countries laid down by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1833/2006 (OJ L 354, 14.12.2006, p. 19). Code ‘
  ZZ
  ’ stands for ‘of other origin’.

---
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

December 5, 2016

No. 04-16-00698-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF R.R.A.,

From the 166th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015PA02475

Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

 Appellant’s motion for extension of time to file a brief is granted. We order appellant’s 

brief due December 27, 2016.

_________________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

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

court on this 5th day of December, 2016.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
#### Bert NEWMAN v. STATE.

No. 17758.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 27, 1935.

T. C. Hutchings, of Mt. Pleasant, for appellant.

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

LATTIMORE, Judge.

Conviction for manufacturing intoxicating liquor; punishment, one year in the penitentiary.

This is a prosecution had under the provisions of what is known as the Dean Law (Pep.Code 1925, art. 666 et seq., as amended). Following what has been said by us in an opinion this day handed down in Guy Meadows v. State, 88 S.W.(2d) 481, the judgment in this case will be reversed and the prosecution ordered dismissed.
**EXHIBIT 32.02**

 

**Section 1350 Certification**

 

In connection with this quarterly report of ML Transtrend DTP Enhanced FuturesAccess LLC (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (this “Report”), I, Barbra E. Kocsis, Chief Financial Officer of Merrill Lynch Alternative Investments LLC, the manager of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant 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. The information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 

Date:  May 13, 2011

 

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

 

----
#### Nathan Kurhan *vs.*Jacob Green.

January 6, 1939.

*M. Caro,*for the plaintiff.

*Badger, Pratt, Doyle & Badger,*for the defendant.

Exceptions dismissed because prematurely entered in the full court. This is one of eight cases which were tried together in the Superior Court and transmitted to the full court under a consolidated bill of exceptions of the defendants. After verdict for the plaintiff in each of the cases, there was filed by the plaintiff in each of the cases, except that of Daniel Basil *vs.*Jacob Green, motions for new trial on the ground that the damages awarded were inadequate, and a motion was also filed by the defendants, in each of the eases that a new trial be ordered because the verdicts were against the evidence and the weight of the evidence and against the law applicable to the cases. After hearing, the judge of the Superior Court granted the motions of the several plaintiffs and ordered a new trial in each case, except that of Daniel Basil *vs.*Jacob Green, limited to the matter of damages only, and denied the motions of the defendants. Since the entry of the cases in the full court, the defendants have waived their exceptions in all of the cases except that of Nathan Kurhan *vs.*Jacob Green. Inasmuch as a new trial has been ordered in that case, it is not properly before the full court because, standing alone, it was not ripe for entry therein, G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 231, § 135, and therefore the exceptions must be dismissed and the case remanded to the Superior Court.
EXHIBIT 32.01

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 on Form 10-Q of LaPorte Bancorp, Inc. (the Registrant) for the quarter ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission, the undersigned 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. | Such Form 10-Q 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 such Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                |  |  |  |                                                                         
|--------------- |  |  |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------
|August 10, 2010 |  |  |  | /s/ Lee A. Brady                                                        
|Date            |  |  |  | Lee A. Brady President and
Chief Executive Officer LaPorte Bancorp, Inc.



|                |  |  |  |                                                                                               
|--------------- |  |  |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|August 10, 2010 |  |  |  | /s/ Michele M. Thompson                                                                       
|Date            |  |  |  | Michele M. Thompson
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer LaPorte Bancorp, Inc.

This certification accompanies each report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Registrant for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.



45
---

Exhibit 32.1

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

The undersigned, Ian McBean, Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer of Auror Capital Corp. (the Company), hereby certifies,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

|(1) | the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Auror Capital
      Corp. for the fiscal quarter ended April 30, 2008 (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.                                                                                  



Dated: June 11, 2008



/s/ Ian
McBeanIan McBean Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer)

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 Auror Capital
Corp. and will be retained by Auror Capital Corp. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
Order entered December 14, 2016

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-16-01261-CV

BLAKE SMITH, M.D., BAYLOR SCOTT & WHITE HEALTH SYSTEM, BAYLOR 

REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER AT GRAPEVINE, TEXAS HEART HOSPITAL OF 

THE SOUTHWEST LLP D/B/A THE HEART HOSPITAL BAYLOR PLANO AND 

RICHARD FEINGOLD, D.O., Appellants

V.

HARRY JOHNSON AND LYNN JOHNSON, Appellees

On Appeal from the 192nd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-16-01488

ORDER

Before the Court is appellants’ Baylor Scott & White Health System, Baylor Regional 

Medical Center of Grapevine, Texas Heart Hospital of the Southwest LLP d/b/a The Heart 

Hospital Baylor Plano, and Richard Feingold D.O. December 12, 2016 unopposed motion for 

extension of time to file a brief. Appellants’ motion is GRANTED. Appellants’ brief shall be 

filed January 10, 2017. Any further extensions motions in this accelerated appeal will be 

disfavored. 

/s/ CRAIG STODDART 

JUSTICE
# L_2011277DE.01003602.xml

| 22.10.2011 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 277/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.10.2011

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 277/36

---

Berichtigung der Durchführungsverordnung (EU) Nr. 620/2011 der Kommission vom 24. Juni 2011 zur Änderung des Anhangs I der Verordnung (EWG) Nr. 2658/87 des Rates über die zolltarifliche und statistische Nomenklatur sowie den Gemeinsamen Zolltarif

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 166 vom 25. Juni 2011
  )

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 166 vom 25. Juni 2011

Auf Seite 17, Anhang, Nummer 2 Buchstaben b und d:

anstatt:

„Geräte auf Mikroprozessorenbasis, mit eingebautem Modem für den Internetanschluss, für den interaktiven Informationsaustausch, geeignet zum Empfang von Fernsehsignalen (sog. ‚Set-Top-Boxen (STB) mit Kommunikationsfunktion‘, einschließlich Geräte, die mit einer Aufnahme- oder Wiedergabefunktion ausgestattet sind, vorausgesetzt, das Gerät behält den wesentlichen Charakter einer Set-Top-Box, d. h. die Kommunikationsfunktion)“

muss es heißen:

„Geräte auf Mikroprozessorenbasis, mit eingebautem Modem für den Internetanschluss, für den interaktiven Informationsaustausch, geeignet zum Empfang von Fernsehsignalen (sog. ‚Set-Top-Boxen (STB) mit Kommunikationsfunktion‘, einschließlich Geräte, die mit einer Aufnahme- oder Wiedergabefunktion ausgestattet sind, vorausgesetzt, das Gerät behält den wesentlichen Charakter einer Set-Top-Box mit Kommunikationsfunktion)“.

---
Page 1
of 1
 REPORT
ON ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE
 CoreLogic
Commercial Real Estate Services, Inc. (the "Asserting Party"), an
indirect 
subsidiary of CoreLogic, Inc, is responsible for assessing compliance
as of December 31, 
2012, and for the period from January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2012
(the 
"Reporting Period") with the servicing criteria set forth in Title 17,
Sections 
229.1122(d)(1)(iv), (d)(2)(v), (d)(2)(vi), (d)(2)(vii), (d)(4)(xi),
(d)(4)(xii) and (d)(4)(xiii) 
of the Code of Federal Regulations applicable to the Asserting Party
(the "Applicable 
Servicing Criteria"). The servicing activities covered by this report
include all loans for 
commercial mortgage loan outsourcing customers for which the Asserting
Party served as 
the commercial tax service provider (the "Platform").
 The
Asserting Party has assessed its compliance with the Applicable
Servicing Criteria for 
the Reporting Period and has concluded that the Asserting Party has
complied, in all material 
respects, with the Applicable Servicing Criteria as of December 31,
2012, and for the 
Reporting Period with respect to the Platform taken as a whole.
 PricewaterhouseCoopers
LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, has 
issued an attestation report on the assessment of compliance with the
Applicable 
Servicing Criteria as of December 31, 2012, and for the Reporting
Period.
 CORELOGIC
COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC.
 /s/
Vicki Chenault
 
 Vicki
Chenault 
Senior Vice President 
February 6, 2013
SHARE

# Division Contacts
II

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 287

To amend the Small Business Act to require the establishment of a regional

or branch office of the Small Business Administration in each State.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 21, 1999

Mr. ROTH (for himself and Mr. BIDEN) introduced the following bill; which

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Small Business

A BILL

To amend the Small Business Act to require the establishment of a regional or branch office of the Small Business

Administration in each State.

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 ‘‘Small Business Admin5 istration Equal Representation Act’’.

6 SEC. 2. SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION DISTRICT OF7 FICES.

8 Section 4(a) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C.

9 633(a)) is amended—
2

•S 287 IS

1 (1) in the third sentence, by striking ‘‘branch and re2 gional’’ and inserting ‘‘regional, district, and branch’’; and

3 (2) by inserting after the second sentence the follow4 ing: ‘‘The Administration shall establish not less than 1

5 district office of the Administration in each of the several

6 States.’’.

Æ
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. L U I S A L B E R T O G A R C I A , a .k .a . L u is A lb e rto Ju ar e s - G ar c ia , a .k .a . L u is A lb e rto Juar ez -G ar ci a, D e f

e n d an t - A p p e llan t. N o. 10- 10107 D . C. N o . 4 : 0 9 - c r - 0 2 1 0 3 - FRZ ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt

f orthe D i s tr i c tof

A r i z ona F r ank R . Z apa t a , D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d O c t obe r25, 2011 ** B e f o r e : T R O T T , G O U L D , an dR A W L I N S O N , C ir c u it Ju d g e s . L u is A lb e rto G ar c iaap p e a ls f r o m h is g u ilty - p le ac o n v ic tio n a n d4 2 - m o n th s e n te n c e im p o s e df

o rr e - e n trya f

te rd e p o rta tio n , in v io la tio n o f 8 U .S .C . § 1 3 2 6 . P ur s ua ntt o A n de rs v . Ca lifo rn ia , 386 U . S . 738 ( 1967) , G ar c i a ’ s c ouns e l ha s f i l e d a 

# FI LED NO V 03 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS10- 10107 2 bri ef st at i ng there ar e no g roun ds for r el i ef , al on g w i th a m ot i on t o w i thd raw as coun se l of re cord. W e have provi ded the appel l antw i th the op po rtun i ty t o fi l e a pro se s up pl em ent albri ef . N o p ro se supp l em ent albri ef or answ er i ng bri ef

has be e n f i l e d. O uri nde pe nde ntr e vi e w of the r e c or d pur s uantt o P e n s o n v . O h io , 4 8 8 U . S. 7 5 , 8 0 - 8 1 ( 1 9 8 8 ) , d is c lo s e s n o a r g u ab le g r o u n d s f o rr e lie f o n d ir e c t ap p e a l. C o u n sel ’ s m o t i o n t o w i th d raw i s G R A N T E D . AF F I RME D.
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3507 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

99 West 2nd Street in Fond du Lac, Wisconsin, as the ‘‘Lieutenant 

Colonel James ‘Maggie’ Megellas Post Office’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 15, 2015 

Mr. GROTHMAN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 99 West 2nd Street in Fond du Lac, Wisconsin, as the ‘‘Lieutenant Colonel James ‘Maggie’ 

Megellas Post Office’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LIEUTENANT COLONEL JAMES ‘‘MAGGIE’’ 

4 MEGELLAS POST OFFICE. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

6 Postal Service located at 99 West 2nd Street in Fond du 

7 Lac, Wisconsin, shall be known and designated as the 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3507 IH

1 ‘‘Lieutenant Colonel James ‘Maggie’ Megellas Post Of2 fice’’. 

3 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg4 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

5 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

6 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Lieutenant Colonel 

7 James ‘Maggie’ Megellas Post Office’’. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### State, Plaintiff, vs. Soderberg, Defendant.*

*July 1, 1947.*

*225
      *Harlan B. Rogers,*special counsel -for the Board of State Bar Commissioners, for the plaintiff.

Application to set aside judgment of disbarment denied on-September 9, 1947.

Per Curiam.

The failure of the defendant to comply with the mandate of the court in the first proceeding and his failure to appear and answer the complaint filed by the State Bar Commissioners requires the court to take the matters alleged in the complaint filed on February 17, 1947, as confessed. It is held that the prayer o'f the petition filed on February 17, 1947, should now be granted.

Therefore, it is ordered, that the license granted to Clarence E. Soderberg to practice law in the courts of this state be and the same is hereby revoked and annulled. The clerk of this court is ordered .to strike his name from the roll of attorneys and directed to give due notice thereof.
* 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. 96-40498 

Summary Calendar

__________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

ISAUL SALINAS, JR.,

 Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. M-95-CR-163-02

_________________________________________________________________

April 11, 1997

Before KING, JOLLY, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Isaul Salinas Jr., appeals his convictions for conspiracy to

possess with intent to distribute approximately seven kilograms

of cocaine and attempted possession with intent to distribute

approximately seven kilograms of cocaine. Salinas argues that

the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions. He

also contends, for the first time on appeal, that the district

judge’s questioning of him deprived him of a fair trial. Our
2

review of the record and the arguments and authorities convinces

us that no reversible error was committed. The evidence was

sufficient for a reasonable jury to find Salinas guilty beyond a

reasonable doubt. See United States v. Alix, 86 F.3d 429, 435-36

(5th Cir. 1996). Nor did the district judge plainly err by

questioning Salinas during trial. See United States v. Mizell,

88 F.3d 288, 296-97 (5th Cir. 1996).

AFFIRMED.
Conference Call with Tribal Environmental Professionals 

July 18, 2007 

Meeting Note to the Docket 

Discussion Topics 

On July 18, 2007, representatives from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

participated in a meeting with interested tribal environmental professionals to start a 

workgroup focused on implementation of the rule titled: “Review of New Sources and 

Modifications in Indian Country.” The attendees discussed the following: 

 Purpose of the workgroup 

 Ideas for the rule’s implementation plan 

 How to set implementation priorities 

 Types of outreach needed 

 Tribal consultation on permit issuances 

 How to help tribes that want delegation of the federal NSR program 

 What kinds of training is needed 

 Frequency of workgroup calls and meetings