alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2020094DE.01005301.xml

| 27.3.2020 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 94/53 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2020

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 94/53

---

Berichtigung der Richtlinie (EU) 2015/1480 der Kommission vom 28. August 2015 zur Änderung bestimmter Anhänge der Richtlinien 2004/107/EG und 2008/50/EG des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates betreffend Referenzmethoden, Datenvalidierung und Standorte für Probenahmestellen zur Bestimmung der Luftqualität

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 226 vom 29. August 2015
  )

Seite 9, Anhang II Nummer 2 Buchstabe a Ziffer i erster Gedankenstrich zur Änderung von Anhang III Abschnitt C Absatz 1 der Richtlinie 2008/50/EG:

Anstatt:

| „— | Der Luftstrom um den Messeinlass darf nicht beeinträchtigt werden (d. h., bei Probenahmestellen an der Baufluchtlinie sollte die Luft in einem Bogen von mindestens 270° oder 180° frei strömen), und im Umfeld des Messeinlasses dürfen keine Hindernisse vorhanden sein, die den Luftstrom beeinflussen (d. h., Gebäude, Balkone, Bäume und andere Hindernisse sollten einige Meter entfernt sein, und Probenahmestellen, die für die Luftqualität an der Baufluchtlinie repräsentativ sind, sollten mindestens 0,5 m vom nächsten Gebäude entfernt sein);“ |
| --- | --- |

„—

Der Luftstrom um den Messeinlass darf nicht beeinträchtigt werden (d. h., bei Probenahmestellen an der Baufluchtlinie sollte die Luft in einem Bogen von mindestens 270° oder 180° frei strömen), und im Umfeld des Messeinlasses dürfen keine Hindernisse vorhanden sein, die den Luftstrom beeinflussen (d. h., Gebäude, Balkone, Bäume und andere Hindernisse sollten einige Meter entfernt sein, und Probenahmestellen, die für die Luftqualität an der Baufluchtlinie repräsentativ sind, sollten mindestens 0,5 m vom nächsten Gebäude entfernt sein);“

muss es heißen:

| „— | Der Luftstrom um den Messeinlass darf nicht beeinträchtigt werden (d. h., die Luft sollte grundsätzlich in einem Bogen von mindestens 270° bzw. — bei Probenahmestellen an der Baufluchtlinie — von 180° frei strömen), und im Umfeld des Messeinlasses dürfen keine Hindernisse vorhanden sein, die den Luftstrom beeinflussen (d. h., Gebäude, Balkone, Bäume und andere Hindernisse sollten einige Meter entfernt sein, und Probenahmestellen, die für die Luftqualität an der Baufluchtlinie repräsentativ sind, sollten mindestens 0,5 m vom nächsten Gebäude entfernt sein);“. |
| --- | --- |

„—

Der Luftstrom um den Messeinlass darf nicht beeinträchtigt werden (d. h., die Luft sollte grundsätzlich in einem Bogen von mindestens 270° bzw. — bei Probenahmestellen an der Baufluchtlinie — von 180° frei strömen), und im Umfeld des Messeinlasses dürfen keine Hindernisse vorhanden sein, die den Luftstrom beeinflussen (d. h., Gebäude, Balkone, Bäume und andere Hindernisse sollten einige Meter entfernt sein, und Probenahmestellen, die für die Luftqualität an der Baufluchtlinie repräsentativ sind, sollten mindestens 0,5 m vom nächsten Gebäude entfernt sein);“.

---
Exhibit
32




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 on Form 10-K/A of Bio-Path Holdings, Inc. (the
“Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I Peter H. Nielsen, Chief Executive Officer
and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, 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) 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.




Date:
           October 5, 2010
            By:  /s/  Peter
      H. NielsenPeter
      H. NielsenChief
      Executive Officer(Principal
      Executive Officer)Chief
      Financial Officer(Principal
      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.
# C_2004179EN.01000801.xml

| 10.7.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 179/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.7.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 179/8

---

Action brought on 12 May 2004 by the Italian Republic against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case C-211/04)

(2004/C 179/16)

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 12 May 2004 by the Italian Republic, represented by Ivo Maria Braguglia, acting as Agent, assisted by Maurizio Fiorelli, Avvocato dello Stato.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul Commission Regulation (EC) No 316/2004 (1) amending Regulation (EC) No 753/2002 (2) laying down certain rules for applying Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 (3) as regards the description, designation, presentation and protection of certain wine sector products, in particular as regards the amendment of Articles 24, 36 and 37 of Regulation No 753/2002 concerning the protection of traditional terms. |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Commission Regulation (EC) No 316/2004 (1) amending Regulation (EC) No 753/2002 (2) laying down certain rules for applying Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 (3) as regards the description, designation, presentation and protection of certain wine sector products, in particular as regards the amendment of Articles 24, 36 and 37 of Regulation No 753/2002 concerning the protection of traditional terms.

1

2

3

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant claims that the regulation amending Regulation No 753/2002 is vitiated by reason of:

| — | unlawful procedure for the adoption of the regulation on the grounds of infringement of procedural rules and failure to ensure the right to be heard effectively; |
| --- | --- |

—

unlawful procedure for the adoption of the regulation on the grounds of infringement of procedural rules and failure to ensure the right to be heard effectively;

| — | failure to compare the interests of Community producers with those of producers outside the Community; |
| --- | --- |

—

failure to compare the interests of Community producers with those of producers outside the Community;

| — | lack of power and infringement of the rules of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

lack of power and infringement of the rules of the Council;

| — | infringement of Article 24(3) of the TRIPS agreement. |
| --- | --- |

—

infringement of Article 24(3) of the TRIPS agreement.

---

(1)  OJ L 55 of 24.02.2004, p. 16.

1

(2)  OJ L 118 of 04.05.2004, p. 1.

2

(3)  OJ L 179 of 14.07.1999, p. 1.

3

---
# L_2016110EN.01000501.xml

| 26.4.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 110/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.4.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 110/5

---

Corrigendum to Directive (EU) 2015/2436 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2015 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 336 of 23 December 2015
  )

On page 23, Article 54(1), first subparagraph:

for:

"Article 41, Articles 43 to 50",

read:

"Article 41, Articles 43 and 44 and Articles 46 to 50".

On page 24, Article 56, second paragraph:

for:

"Articles 1, 7, 15, 19, 20, 21 and 54 to 57 shall apply from 15 January 2019.",

read:

"Articles 1, 7, 15, 19, 20 and 21 shall apply from 15 January 2019.".

---
# C_2004228EN.01004403.xml

| 11.9.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 228/44 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.9.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 228/44

---

Removal from the Register of Case T-311/99 (1)

1

(2004/C 228/103)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

By order of 11 May 2004, the President of the Second Chamber (Extended Composition) of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities has ordered the removal from the Register of Case T-311/99, Tankstation Haarhuis B.V., supported by the Kingdom of the Netherlands v Commission of the European Communities.

---

(1)  OJ C 63 of 4.3.2000.

1

---
HomeRadioactive WasteStorage of Spent Nuclear Fuel

# Consolidated Interim Storage Facility (CISF)

The NRC has received two applications for Consolidated Interim Storage Facilities. These facilities are reviewed as applications for a specific license under 10 CFR Part 72 and, as proposed, are not co-located with a power reactor.

Under a **specific license**, an applicant submits a license application to the NRC and the NRC performs a technical review of all the safety and environmental protection aspects of the proposed ISFSI.  During this process, the NRC notifies all stakeholders (including the public) as to how and when they may participate in the regulatory process, which may include participating in public meetings, opportunities to comment on the scope and the draft findings of the environmental impact statement, and opportunities to request a hearing on the issuance of the license.  If the application is approved, the NRC issues a license that is valid for up to 40 years. A spent fuel storage license contains technical requirements and operating conditions (e.g., fuel specifications, cask leak testing, surveillance, and other requirements) for the ISFSI and specifies what the licensee is authorized to store at the site.  For more information, see the page on Licensing Process for ISFSIs.

NRC is currently reviewing applications for a CISF in Andrews County, Texas and a CISF in Lea County, New Mexico and plan to complete the safety, security, and environmental reviews by summer of 2021.To sign up for email notifications related to NRC's review of CISF license applications, please see Lyris Subscription Services.

## CIS Applications

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, December 8, 2020

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - Spent Fuel Pools
          - Dry Cask Storage
          - Consolidated Interim Storage Facility (CISF)
          - Regulations, Guidance, and Communications
          - Licensing
          - Oversight
          - Public Involvement

#### Spotlight

#### Choose a Section

                - The Commission
                - License Renewal Generic Environmental Review
                - Job Openings
                - Palisades Restart
                - Environmental Justice 
                - Pilgrim Water Releases
                - Monticello Tritium Issue
                - International Strategy 2021-2025
                - Tribal Liaison Program
                - MAP-X
                - Transformation at the NRC - Updated
                - OIG Hotline
                - Rulemaking Activity
                - Commission Documents
                - Advanced Reactors
                - Nuclear Security
                - Strategic Plan

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, December 8, 2020
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**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 quarterly report of Pharmaceutical ProductDevelopment, Inc. (“PPD”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Fredric N. Eshelman, Chief Executive Officer of PPD, herebycertify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 Act of 1934; and 

 

2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of PPD as of, and for, the periods presented in the Report. 

 

Date: August 3, 2004
<PAGE>


                                  EXHIBIT 32.2

                               HINES HORTICULTURE

                            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 Quarterly Report of Hines Horticulture, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2003, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Claudia M. Pieropan, 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 Exhibit 99.2:

         (1)      The Report fully complies with the requirement 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.


                                                By: /s/ Claudia M. Pieropan
                                                    ---------------------------
                                                    Claudia M. Pieropan
                                                    CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

August 6, 2003

         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to Hines Horticulture, Inc. and will be retained by Hines
Horticulture, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2145 

To prohibit licenses or other authorization for United States persons to 

engage in activities relating to deepwater, Arctic offshore, or shale 

projects that have the potential to produce oil in the Russian Federation, 

or in maritime area claimed by the Russian Federation, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 25, 2017 

Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California introduced the following bill; which was 

referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

A BILL 

To prohibit licenses or other authorization for United States 

persons to engage in activities relating to deepwater, 

Arctic offshore, or shale projects that have the potential 

to produce oil in the Russian Federation, or in maritime 

area claimed by the Russian Federation, and for other 

purposes. 

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 ‘‘No Russia Exemptions 

5 for Oil Production Act’’ or the ‘‘No REX Act’’. 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2145 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON LICENSES OR OTHER AUTHORIZA2 TION FOR UNITED STATES PERSONS TO EN3 GAGE IN ACTIVITIES RELATING TO CERTAIN 

4 PROJECTS TO PRODUCE OIL IN THE RUSSIAN 

5 FEDERATION. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Effective as of the date of the en7 actment of this Act— 

8 (1) the Secretary of the Treasury, acting di9 rectly or through any specifically designated person, 

10 agency, or instrumentality, may not provide a license 

11 or other authorization pursuant to Directive 4 under 

12 Executive Order 13662 to engage in any of the ac13 tivities prohibited under such Directive; and 

14 (2) any license or other authorization provided 

15 before such date of enactment by the Secretary of 

16 the Treasury, acting directly or through any specifi17 cally designated person, agency, or instrumentality, 

18 pursuant to Directive 4 under Executive Order 

19 13662 to engage in any of the activities prohibited 

20 under such Directive shall have no force or effect. 

21 (b) DEFINITION.—In this section, the term ‘‘Direc22 tive 4 under Executive Order 13662’’ means Directive 4 

23 of September 12, 2014, under Executive Order 13662 of 

24 March 20, 2014 (79 Fed. Reg. 16169; relating to Blocking 

25 Property of Additional Persons Contributing to the SituaVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:14 Apr 27, 2017 Jkt 069200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H2145.IH H2145

lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 2145 IH

1 tion in Ukraine) or any successor Directive or other Exec2 utive action. 

Æ 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
July 2022

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Helping People Help the Land 

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

Conservation Practice Overview

Grazing Land Mechanical Treatment (Code 548) 

Grazing land mechanical treatment involves treating or

modifying soil and plant conditions using mechanical tools

to meet the desired purpose. 

Practice Information 

Mechanical treatments can improve soil permeability,

increase infiltration, reduce runoff, and renovate and

stimulate the plant community for greater productivity and

yield. The benefits are obtained by fracturing compacted

soil layers and breaking up root-bound conditions and thatch to increase plant vigor. 

This standard may be applied on pastureland, rangeland, grazed forest, and native pastures where

the slopes are less than 20 percent and on soils that are not too wet. 

Activities that are involved with this practice may include contour furrowing, chiseling, terracing,

pitting, ripping, seeding, prescribed burning, flailing, and aerating. 

Common Associated Practices 

NRCS Conservation Practice Standard (CPS) Grazing Land Mechanical Treatment (Code 548) is

commonly used on rangeland and applied with other conservation practices such as NRCS CPSs

Range Planting (Code 550), Prescribed Grazing (Code 528), and Herbaceous Weed Treatment (Code

315). On pastureland the practice is used with NRCS CPS Pasture and Hay Planting (Code 512) and

Prescribed Grazing (Code 528). 

For further information, contact your local NRCS field office.
HomeNRC LibraryFOIA & Privacy ActRecent FOIA Requests2021

# Recent FOIA Requests - December 2021

This page presents a chronological listing of the subject and reference number of each Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act (FOIA/PA) Request submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) during December 2021. For additional detail, see the Index of Closed FOIA/PA Requests by Subject.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, January 4, 2022

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - January
          - February
          - March
          - April
          - May
          - June
          - July
          - August
          - September
          - October
          - November
          - December

#### Spotlight

#### Choose a Section

                - The Commission
                - License Renewal Generic Environmental Review
                - Job Openings
                - Palisades Restart
                - Environmental Justice 
                - Pilgrim Water Releases
                - Monticello Tritium Issue
                - International Strategy 2021-2025
                - Tribal Liaison Program
                - MAP-X
                - Transformation at the NRC - Updated
                - OIG Hotline
                - Rulemaking Activity
                - Commission Documents
                - Advanced Reactors
                - Nuclear Security
                - Strategic Plan

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, January 4, 2022
HomeNRC LibraryFOIA & Privacy ActRecent FOIA Requests2023

# Recent FOIA Requests - November 2023

This page presents a chronological listing of the subject and reference number of each Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act (FOIA/PA) Request submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) during November 2023. For additional detail, see the Index of Closed FOIA/PA Requests by Subject.

1 CON – Consultation

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, December 6, 2023

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - January
          - February
          - March
          - April
          - May
          - June
          - July
          - August
          - September
          - October
          - November
          - December

#### Spotlight

#### Choose a Section

                - The Commission
                - License Renewal Generic Environmental Review
                - Job Openings
                - Palisades Restart
                - Environmental Justice 
                - Pilgrim Water Releases
                - Monticello Tritium Issue
                - International Strategy 2021-2025
                - Tribal Liaison Program
                - MAP-X
                - Transformation at the NRC - Updated
                - OIG Hotline
                - Rulemaking Activity
                - Commission Documents
                - Advanced Reactors
                - Nuclear Security
                - Strategic Plan

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, December 6, 2023
#### United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company, Appellant, vs. Town of Spirit, Respondent.

*March 8*

April *2, 1929.*

*546The cause was submitted for the appellant on the brief of *Bloodgood, Kemper & Bloodgood,*attorneys, and *Eric Wm. Passmore,*of counsel, all of Milwaukee, and for the respondent on that of /. *A. DeBcwdeleben*of Phillips.

Rosenberry, C. J.

The plaintiff seeks to recover here upon the authority of *Burke v. M., L. S. & W. R. Co.*83 Wis. 410, 53 N. W. 692, and *Ætna Ins. Co. v. Aldrich,*38 Wis. 107. In neither of these cases, however, was the money paid in satisfaction of a judgment. We are cited to no cases and we find none where questions relating to the liability of parties which have been definitely settled and determined by a judgment and the judgment paid and satisfied, have been re-examined in a subsequent action between the same parties after the time for modifying or setting aside the judgment has expired.

It is quite evident that the rule of law applicable to this situation works great injustice in the instant case. On the other hand, grave considerations of public policy forbid a breaking down of a rule so long established and embodying a principle recognized by practically every known system of jurisprudence. A final judgment has always been treated as speaking the infallible truth as to the rights of parties in *547a controversy submitted to the court for its determination. In this very case the plaintiff no doubt required the entry of a judgment for the purpose of setting at rest all controvertible questions relating to its liability to the town and the liability.of the defaulting treasurer of the town to the town. Questions so set at rest must remain, at rest.

*By the Court.*— Order affirmed.