alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2014334EN.01001001.xml

| 21.11.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 334/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.11.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 334/10

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 1241/2014

of 7 November 2014

entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Westfälischer Pumpernickel (PGI))

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2),

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Germany's application to register the name ‘Westfälischer Pumpernickel’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Germany's application to register the name ‘Westfälischer Pumpernickel’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

| (2) | As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Westfälischer Pumpernickel’ should therefore be entered in the register, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Westfälischer Pumpernickel’ should therefore be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name ‘Westfälischer Pumpernickel’ (PGI) is hereby entered in the register.

The name referred to in the first paragraph identifies a product in Class 2.3. Bread, pastry, cakes, confectionery, biscuits and other baker's wares in accordance with Annex XI to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 (3).

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

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

Done at Brussels, 7 November 2014.

For the Commission,

On behalf of the President,

Phil HOGAN

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ C 196, 26.6.2014, p. 20.

2

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).

3

---
<PAGE>
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                               .


                                   EXHIBIT 11

                        COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                     Year Ended December 31,
                                    ------------------------
                                     2007     2006     2005
                                    ------   ------   ------
                                         (In thousands,
                                     except per share data)
<S>                                 <C>      <C>      <C>
BASIC
Net Income                          $  724   $2,096   $3,073
/ Weighted Average Shares            3,833    4,014    3,822
Basic Earnings Per Share            $ 0.19   $ 0.52   $ 0.80
                                    ======   ======   ======
DILUTED
Net Income                          $  724   $2,096   $3,073
/ Weighted Average Shares            3,875    4,081    3,920
Diluted Earnings Per Share          $ 0.19   $ 0.51   $ 0.78
                                    ======   ======   ======
</TABLE>

Per share data has been retroactively adjusted for stock dividend.

Notes:

-    Where applicable, diluted share computations include the effects of
     outstanding stock options.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Arctic Research Commission

Notice is hereby given that the U.S. Arctic Research Commission will hold its 103rd meeting in Washington, District of Columbia, on March 4-5, 2015. The business sessions, open to the public, will convene at 9:00 a.m.

The Agenda items include:

(1) Call to order and approval of the agenda

(2) Approval of the minutes from the 102nd meeting

(3) Commissioners and staff reports

(4) Discussion and presentations concerning Arctic research activities.

The focus of the meeting will be on Arctic policy issues, and on programs and research projects affecting the Arctic.

If you plan to attend this meeting, please notify us via the contact information below. Any person planning to attend who requires special accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language interpreters, must inform the Commission of those needs in advance of the meeting.

                    Contact person for further information: John Farrell, Executive Director, U.S. Arctic Research                           ( print page 6688)                        Commission, 703-525-0111 or TDD 703-306-0090.                

Kathy Farrow,

Communications Specialist.

[FR Doc. 2015-02347 Filed 2-5-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18

- 30875

PARKCREST BUILDERS, L.L.C.,

Plaintiff

- Counter Defendant

- Appellee

v. LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY,

Intervenor

- Appellee

v. HOUSING AUTHORITY OF NEW ORLEANS,

Defendant

- Counter Claimant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 2:15

- CV

- 1533

Before KING, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges

. PER CURIAM: * The Housing Authority of New Orleans (HANO) engaged Parkcrest Builders, LLC as the general contractor for the construction of a new housing

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED March 10, 2020 Lyle W. Cayc e Clerk Case: 18-30875 Document: 00515339580 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/10/2020No. 18

- 30875

2 project in New Orleans . The p roject faced numerous and extensive delays, eventually leading to Parkcrest’s termination as general contractor and, subsequently, the termination of its surety, Liberty Mutual. Parkcrest sued HANO for breach of contract in terminating the contract withou t cause; after HANO terminated Liberty Mutual from the project, Liberty Mutual intervened alleging HANO’s breach; and HANO fil e d a counterclaim against Liberty
Mutual alleging bad faith breach and fraudulent misrepresentation. The
district court determine d, after a 7

- day bench trial, that Parkcrest and Liberty
Mutual were not to blame for the delays to the project , and found HANO liable to Liberty Mutual for the remaining balance of the contract minus undisputed items left for HANO to finish . HANO’s appea l asserts error at nearly every stage of the district court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law. After careful review of the record in this case, full consideration of the parties’ briefs and oral arguments, and the district court’s thorough finding s and conclusions, we affirm the district court’s judgment against HANO for essentially the reasons stated by that court. The district court’s judgment included an unquantified award of attorneys’ fees against HANO. Although HANO’s appeal designates this award as error, we have previously held “that an order awarding attorney’s fees or costs is not reviewable on appeal until the award is reduced to a sum certain.” S. Travel Club, Inc. v. Carnival Air Lines, Inc. , 986 F.2d 125, 131 (5th Cir. 1993) ; see also Thornton v. GMC. , 136 F.3d 450, 453 (5th Cir. 1998) (“Normally, an unquantified award of attorney’s fees does not constitute a final appealable order pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291.”). Accordingly, we lack jurisdiction over this portion of HANO’s appea l, and therefore dismiss for want of jurisdiction. AFFIRMED in part and DISMISSED in part. Case: 18-30875 Document: 00515339580 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/10/2020
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1952 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1952

 To amend title 23, United States Code, with respect to the revocation 
  or suspension of drivers' licenses of individuals convicted of drug 
                   offenses, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 5, 2017

Mr. O'Rourke (for himself, Mr. Amash, Mr. Jeffries, Mr. Sensenbrenner, 
  Mr. Nadler, and Mrs. Love) introduced the following bill; which was 
     referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 23, United States Code, with respect to the revocation 
  or suspension of drivers' licenses of individuals convicted of drug 
                   offenses, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Better Drive Act''.

SEC. 2. REVOCATION OR SUSPENSION OF DRIVERS' LICENSES OF INDIVIDUALS 
              CONVICTED OF DRUG OFFENSES.

    Section 159 of title 23, United States Code, and the item relating 
to that section in the analysis for chapter 1 of such title, are 
repealed.
                                 <all>
```
#### FINDLEY, ROBERTS & CO. v. J. W. GIDNEY, Adm’r.

All the creditors of an intestate dying in this State, whether resident or non-resident, are entitled to prove their debts and share in the assets. Nor does it make any difference that there are not more assets in the hands of the administrator here, than will pay the debts of the domestic creditors, and there are assets fn another State where the other creditors reside, upon which they might administer and pay their debts.

Civil ActioN, tried before Schenck, J., at Chambers in Cleaveland County, May 10th, 1875.

The complaint alleges: That the plaintiffs are citizens of the State of Maryland, aud are wholesale merchants in the City of Baltimore.

That during the year 1873 they sold and delivered to John L. Moore, the intestate of the defendant, goods, wares aud merchandize to the amount of $267.51, which amount with interest, is still due and owing to them, and which said Moore promised to pay.

Said Moore is dead, and was at the time of his death a resident of the State of North Carolina, and the defendant is his administrator.

The estate of the intestate is insolvent and will not pay the debts due from it to creditors residing in the State o North Carolina.

A large amount of assets have come into the hands of the defendant as administrator, and the plaintiffs have demand *396ed their *pro rata*share of the same to be applied to their said debt, which has been refused.

The complaint prays, “ That the said J. *W.*Gidney, Administrator, be required to render an account of the administration of said estate and that an account be stated under the direction of the Court, and for judgment, &c.

The defendant demurred to the complaint, and for cause of demurrer alleged:

That the facts set forth do not entitle the plaintiff to the relief claimed, because the domestic or home assets should be first applied to the domestic or home debts, and the complaint admits that such debts will exhaust the assets under the control of the defendant.

Upon the hearing the demurrer was overruled and the defendant appealed.

*Battle, Battle & Mordeeai,*for the appellant.

No counsel *contra,*in this Court.

Reade, J.

When letters of administration or letters testamentary are sued out in this State, all of the creditors of the deceased, whether resident in this State or not, are entitled to prove their debts and share in the assets; and resident creditors have no preference over the non-residents. Nor does it make any difference that there are not more assets here than will pay the creditors here, and that there are assets in another State where the other creditors reside, upon which they might administer and pay their debts. All the creditors can prove their debts and share the assets here, and then, when letters are sued out in the other State, all the creditors can prove and share there, as we suppose.

There is no error. This will be certified.

Per Curiam. Judgment affirmed.
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Jacob Inbar, ChiefExecutive Officer of AML Communications Inc., (the “Company”), certify that:

1.             Ihave reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of AML Communications, Inc.;

2.             Basedon my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.             Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

4.             Theregistrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a)        Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)         Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

(c)        Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.             Theregistrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)        Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

(b)       Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.

Date: November 13, 2006
| /s/ Jacob Inbar         |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
| By: Jacob Inbar         |
| Chief Executive  Office |

 

----
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 23


                      CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
                                           

Board of Directors
Claremont Technology Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No.
333-28161) on Form S-8 of Claremont Technology Group, Inc. of our report dated
August 14, 1997,  relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Claremont
Technology Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries as of June 30, 1997 and 1996, and the
related consolidated statements of operations, shareholders' equity, and cash
flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended June 30, 1997, which
report appears in the June 30, 1997 annual report on Form 10-K of Claremont
Technology Group, Inc.



                                                           KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP

Portland, Oregon,
September 19, 1997
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# Reliability of Ultrasonic In-Service Inspection of Welds in Reactor Internals of Boiling Water Reactors (NUREG/CR-7159)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-7159 (PDF - 3.72 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** November 2012**Date Published:** April 2013

**Prepared by:** G. J. Schuster, S. L. Crawford, A. A. Diaz, P. G. Heasler, and S. R. Doctor

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory P. O. Box 999 Richland, WA 99352

**Prepared for**: Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

D. A. Jackson and W. E. Norris, NRC Project Managers

NRC Job Codes Y6604 and N6398

Availability Notice

## Abstract

Instances of stress corrosion cracking in reactor pressure vessel internal components have been found, especially in the boiling water reactor (BWR) core shroud. Results from in-service inspection are an important aspect of integrity evaluations. One of the major goals of the work described in this report is to quantify the crack detection reliability and sizing error of ultrasonic inspection methods for reactor internals. A mockup is described, along with its application to the assessment on nondestructive evaluation reliability for in-service inspection of reactor internals. The mockup of a BWR core shroud includes cracks in some of the 40 welded assemblies selected to represent field conditions. The selected material and geometry include most conditions and alloys used in the core shroud and its support structure. This report provides an overview of the work being performed and focuses on the parametric study results relating ultrasonic response and its variance to inspection effectiveness. Results of a blind test of an in-service inspection vendor’s phased array technique are also provided in this report.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, March 25, 2021
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>      5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                           6,430
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,637
<ALLOWANCES>                                       170
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                25,020
<PP&E>                                           1,441
<DEPRECIATION>                                     833
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  29,875
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           18,630
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            55
<OTHER-SE>                                      10,984
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    29,875
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                20,119
<CGS>                                           18,386
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   19,381
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   6
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    732
<INCOME-TAX>                                       232
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                500
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       500
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .09
        

</TABLE>
*March 10, 1931.*

#### Marcou, Administrator, Appellant, vs. Rockland State Bank and another, Respondents.

For the appellant: *T. H. Skemp*of La Crosse.

For the respondents: *A. E. Frederick*of Sparta.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.
# NutBal - Version 1.0.1

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Resources 
-  NutBal - Version 1.0.1 

The Nutritional Balance Analyzer (NUTBAL)

(NUTBAL) is a decision-support tool using farm or ranch specific information regarding animal attributes, environmental conditions, pasture conditions, feeding program, and metabolic modifiers to produce two primary reports.  The tool evaluates feed value in relationship with animal nutrient deficiency or desired gain. The tool will identify the most cost efficient option, amount to be fed, and cost per day.

### Download Software

              - NUTBAL-PRO1.0.1.exe
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>     5
<MULTIPLIER>  1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                    JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                          $12,434
<SECURITIES>                     32,169
<RECEIVABLES>                    45,776
<ALLOWANCES>                     (1,385)
<INVENTORY>                           0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                      0
<PP&E>                               40
<DEPRECIATION>                      (36)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                   66,874
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>               552
<BONDS>                               0
<COMMON>                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                 0
<PREFERRED>                           0
<OTHER-SE>                       66,322
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>     66,874
<SALES>                               0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                  2,679
<CGS>                                 0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                         0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                    246
<LOSS-PROVISION>                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                    0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                   2,433
<INCOME-TAX>                          0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>               2,433
<DISCONTINUED>                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                       0
<CHANGES>                             0
<NET-INCOME>                      2,433
<EPS-PRIMARY>                      0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                      0.00
        

</TABLE>