alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Diario Oficial C 178/2016

| | ISSN 1977-0928 |
| --- | --- |
| Diario Oficial
  de la Unión Europea | C 178 |
| | |
| Edición en lengua española | Comunicaciones e informaciones | 59° año18 de mayo de 2016 |

ISSN 1977-0928

Diario Oficial

de la Unión Europea

C 178

Edición en lengua española

Comunicaciones e informaciones

59° año18 de mayo de 2016

---

| Número de información | Sumario | Página |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | Corrección de errores |
| 2016/C 178/01 | Corrección de errores de la Posición (UE) n.o 1/2016 del Consejo en primera lectura con vistas a la adopción del Reglamento del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo relativo a la Agencia Ferroviaria de la Unión Europea y por el que se deroga el Reglamento (CE) n.o 881/2004 — Adoptado por el Consejo el 10 de diciembre de 2015( DO C 56 de 12.2.2016 ) | 1 |

Número de información

Sumario

Página

Corrección de errores

2016/C 178/01

Corrección de errores de la Posición (UE) n.o 1/2016 del Consejo en primera lectura con vistas a la adopción del Reglamento del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo relativo a la Agencia Ferroviaria de la Unión Europea y por el que se deroga el Reglamento (CE) n.o 881/2004 — Adoptado por el Consejo el 10 de diciembre de 2015( DO C 56 de 12.2.2016 )

o

o

( DO C 56 de 12.2.2016 )

1

---

| ES | |
| --- | --- |

ES

---

Corrección de errores

| 18.5.2016 | ES | Diario Oficial de la Unión Europea | C 178/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.5.2016

ES

Diario Oficial de la Unión Europea

C 178/1

---

Corrección de errores de la Posición (UE) n.o 1/2016 del Consejo en primera lectura con vistas a la adopción del Reglamento del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo relativo a la Agencia Ferroviaria de la Unión Europea y por el que se deroga el Reglamento (CE) n.o 881/2004 — Adoptado por el Consejo el 10 de diciembre de 2015

(
  Diario Oficial de la Unión Europea C 56 de 12 de febrero de 2016
  )

(2016/C 178/01)

En la página 39, en el artículo 65, apartado 10:

donde dice:

«10.   El Parlamento Europeo, previa recomendación del Consejo por mayoría cualificada, aprobará antes del 30 de abril del año N + 2 la gestión del director ejecutivo en la ejecución del presupuesto del ejercicio N.»,

debe decir:

«10.   El Parlamento Europeo, previa recomendación del Consejo por mayoría cualificada, aprobará antes del 15 de mayo del año N + 2 la gestión del director ejecutivo en la ejecución del presupuesto del ejercicio N.».

---
Exhibit
32.1








CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 0F 2002





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Mountain West Business Solutions, Inc.
(the Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended herein as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I. Matthew Milonas, Chief
Executive and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.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; and





(2) The
information contained in the Report fully presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations or the Company.








Date:  June
      15, 2009
              By:
              /s/ Matthew
      MilonasMatthew
      Milonas
                Chief
      Executive Officer
                Chief
      Financial Officer
Cite as 2013 Ark. App. 451



## ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION IV No. CR-12-670

JAMES COLLIER III APPELLANT V.

STATE OF ARKANSAS APPELLEE Opinion Delivered August 28, 2013 APPEAL FROM THE JEFFERSON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [No. CR-2011-23-1] HONORABLE BERLIN C. JONES, JUDGE A F F I R M E D ; M O T I O N T O WITHDRAW GRANTED
LARRY D. VAUGHT, Judge Appellant James Collier III was convicted by a Jefferson County jury of aggravated assault on a family or household member and of committing the assault in the presence of a child. He was sentenced to a six-year term of imprisonment for the former conviction and a two-year term of imprisonment for the latter, to be served consecutively. Pursuant to Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-3(k) (2012), Collier’s counsel filed a motion to be relieved as counsel. The motion is accompanied by an abstract and addendum of the proceedings below, and a brief in which counsel asserts that there is nothing in the record that would support an appeal. Collier has filed a pro se statement of points for reversal, and the State has filed a response to Collier’s statement. 1

1 This is the second time we have reviewed the case. In Collier v. State, 2013 Ark. App. 119, we ordered rebriefing because counsel failed to comply with our rules for no-merit cases. Specifically, in the prior appeal, we noted that counsel abstracted, but failed to discuss, two adverse evidentiary rulings. However, that error has now been corrected, and counsel has again filed a motion to withdraw.Cite as 2013 Ark. App. 451

The test for filing a no-merit brief is not whether there is any reversible error, but rather would an appeal be wholly frivolous. Tucker v. State , 47 Ark. App. 96, 885 S.W.2d 904 (1994). Based on our review of the record for potential error pursuant to Andersand the requirements of Rule 4-3(k), we hold that the appellant’s appeal is wholly without merit. Therefore, pursuant to sections (a) and (b) of In re Memorandum Opinions , 16 Ark. App. 301, 700 S.W.2d 63 (1985), we issue this memorandum opinion granting counsel’s motion to be relieved and affirming the court’s judgment. Affirmed; Motion to withdraw granted. W HITEAKER and H IXSON , JJ., agree. Cecilia Ashcraft , for appellant. Dustin McDaniel , Att’y Gen., by: Jake H. Jones , Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee.

-2-
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

RULE 13a-14(b) OF

THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934



In connection with the annual report on Form 10-K, (the Report), of Triton PCS, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended December
31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission as of the date hereof, I, David D. Clark, 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) the Report fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as appropriate, 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/ David D, ClarkName:

David D. ClarkTitle:

Chief Financial OfficerDate:

March 19, 2004




A signed
original of this written statement required by Rule 13a-14(b), 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 Rule
13a-14(b), has been provided to Triton PCS, Inc. and will be retained by Triton PCS, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



This certification accompanies the annual report on Form 10-K to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of Triton PCS, Inc. under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the
date of the annual report on Form 10-K, irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing).
#### Grant Thurston v. J. W. Lamb, Appellant.

Amount in Controversy on Appeal to Supreme Court. Where-each party claims judgment for just one hundred dollars against his adversary, an appeal -will be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Kinne, J., took no part.

*Appeal from lama District Court.*— Hon. L. Gr. Kinne, Judge.

Tuesday, February 6, 1894.

Action for the recovery of specific personal property, it being for a horse alleged in the petition to be of the value of eighty dollars; and there is a claim for *364twenty dollars for wrongful detention. Tire answer denies the right of the plaintiff to the possession of the horse, ¡and admits that the defendant’s claim to the possession of the horse is by virtue of a chattel mortgage, as stated in the petition. The answer contains an averment that the horse is of the value .of one hundred dollars. The action was originally before a justice of the peace, and came to the district court on appeal, where the jury returned a verdict for plaintiff; assessing the value of the horse at ninety dollars, and the damages at twenty dollars. The plaintiff remitted “all of said -damages,” and afterwards the court rendered judgment on the verdict. The defendant *appeals.*

Appeal *dismissed.*

*W. H. Stivers*for appellant.

*Struble <& Stiger*for appellee.

G-ranger, C. J.

There is no certificate of the trial judge, and the appellee moves to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the amount in controversy does not exceed one hundred dollars. The motion must -be sustained. It is true that the amount -is to be “as shown by the pleading.” Taking appellant’s answer as a guide, the amount is fixed at precisely one hundred dollars. It “does not exceed” that sum. We are then to look to the amount as fixed by the petition. The value of the horse is there fixed at eighty dollars, and the damage at twenty dollars, making precisely •one hundred dollars. The same rule applies as to the answer. It is well settled that a party can take judgment for no more than he asks. These parties differ in their averments as to value, but each, if he recovers, is limited to his own prayer for judgment. Plaintiff asks for judgment for the value, as he alleged it. He could not properly have more. No condition could have arisen under the pleading to have justified a *365judgment for more than one hundred dollars, exclusive of costs. This seems decisive of this motion. It was the duty of the jury to fix the value of the horse at whatever the testimony might show it, not exceeding-the higher amount claimed, so that it might be adopted in the final judgment. The terms of the judgment do not appear in the rfecord, so that we are not advised as to whether the judgment stands for the ninety dollars as value, or not. But, assuming that it does, it is-because the right thereto was not brought in question except as to the entire amount. These views render it unnecessary to consider the effect of the *remittitur*as to damage. The motion is sustained, and the appeal dismissed.

Kinne, J., took no part.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.26







                                                                January 13, 1999

Mr. Robert M. Russo
33-20 28th Street
Long Island City, NY  11106


Dear Bob:

     This letter agreement shall confirm our understanding regarding the payment
of $71,617 of deferred salary owed to you ("the "Deferred Salary"). We agree
that the Deferred Salary shall be payable as follows: (i) $40,000 in cash on or
before January 31, 1999 and (ii) 5,855 shares of Network-1 common stock at a
value of $5.40 per share. If this letter confirms our agreement, please execute
at the appropriate space provided below.


                                    Very truly yours,

                                    Network-1 Security Solutions, Inc.



                                    By: /s/Avi Fogel
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                        Avi Fogel
                                        President and Chief Executive Officer


Agreed and Accepted:


/s/Robert M. Russo
------------------------
Robert M. Russo
----

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

| 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 result of operations of the                Company                as of the dates and for the periods explained in the                report. |
|---|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | /s/                Michael Garin       |   | /s/                Wallace Macmillan   |
|--------|----------------------------------------|--------|----------------------------------------|
|   | Michael                Garin           |   | Wallace                Macmillan       |
|   | Chief                Executive Officer |   | Chief                Financial Officer |
|   |                                   |   |                                   |
|   |                                   |   |                                   |
|   | November                9, 2006        |   |                                   |

----
TED A. SMITH,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Respondent.

___________________________/

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-2470

Opinion filed June 23, 2016.

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus -- Original Jurisdiction.

Ted A. Smith, pro se, and Darryl M. Alston, as next of friend, for Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

DENIED.

B.L. THOMAS, WETHERELL, and WINSOR, JJ., CONCUR.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          78,130<F1>
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,176<F2>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 513,097
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        153,672<F3>
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           210
<OTHER-SE>                                     344,006
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   513,097
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                38,597
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                31,345
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,713
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,012
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,012
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (1,047)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,965
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .14
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .14
<FN>
<F1>Includes restricted cash of $1,203
<F2>Includes deferred rent receivable of $783
<F3>Includes note payable-interim financing of $122,500
</FN>


</TABLE>
### -82 -80 -78 -76 -74 38 40 42 

## ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲


## ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 

### 500 1000 1500 100 18 12 06 00 07/07 

## NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

# Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 07 Jul 07

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 38.81 N 76.74 WMeters AGL 

## ★ ■ ■ ■ ■


## ★ ■ ■ ■ ■ 

## ★ ● ● ● ●


## ★ ● ● ● ●
Exhibit 32.2Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) of the Exchange Act
and 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 Advant-e Corporation (the Company) for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the report), the undersigned,
Jason K. Wadzinski, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certifies 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; 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: May 13, 2011 |  | By: |  | /s/ James E. Lesch     
|                    |  |     |  | James E. Lesch         
|                    |  |     |  | Chief Financial Officer
RE: Docket Number 2023 -CA -0247

Tom C. Miller

Versus - - 

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

STATE OF LOUISIANA

Jose Gustavo Erazo, Gabisa Insurance Company and

Liberty Mutual Insurance Company

19th Judicial District Court

Case #: 665938

East Baton Rouge Parish

On Application for Rehearing filed on 10/ 04/ 2023 by National General Insurance Company, et al

Rehearing 17e -w? ' eof

OCT 19 2423

44. 

Mitchell R. Theriot
Exhibit 32.2



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 the Annual Report of Service Bancorp, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the year ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Dana S.
Philbrook, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, 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; 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/ Dana S. Philbrook                    
|Dana S. Philbrook Chief Financial Officer
|                                         
|September 10, 2004                       



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.
# L_2012089EN.01007201.xml

| 27.3.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 89/72 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 89/72

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING DECISION

of 23 March 2012

amending Decision 2006/133/EC requiring Member States temporarily to take additional measures against the dissemination of Bursaphelenchus xylophilus (Steiner et Buhrer) Nickle et al. (the pine wood nematode) as regards areas in Portugal, other than those in which it is known not to occur

(notified under document C(2012) 1844)

(2012/175/EU)

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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

Having regard to Council Directive 2000/29/EC of 8 May 2000 on protective measures against the introduction into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the Community (1), and in particular the fourth sentence of Article 16(3) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Decision 2006/133/EC (2) lays down certain protective measures to be applied until 31 March 2012. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Decision 2006/133/EC (2) lays down certain protective measures to be applied until 31 March 2012.

| (2) | Decision 2006/133/EC should continue to apply for a period allowing an adequate revision of the measures it provides for. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Decision 2006/133/EC should continue to apply for a period allowing an adequate revision of the measures it provides for.

| (3) | Decision 2006/133/EC should therefore be amended accordingly. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Decision 2006/133/EC should therefore be amended accordingly.

| (4) | The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plant Health, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plant Health,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

Article 2 of Decision 2006/133/EC is amended as follows:

| 1. | in the first paragraph, the words ‘31 March 2012’ are replaced by ‘31 October 2012’; |
| --- | --- |

1.

in the first paragraph, the words ‘31 March 2012’ are replaced by ‘31 October 2012’;

| 2. | in the third paragraph, the words ‘31 March 2012’ are replaced by ‘31 October 2012’. |
| --- | --- |

2.

in the third paragraph, the words ‘31 March 2012’ are replaced by ‘31 October 2012’.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 23 March 2012.

For the Commission

John DALLI

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 169, 10.7.2000, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 52, 23.2.2006, p. 34.

2

---