alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2005101EN.01002402.xml

| 27.4.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 101/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.4.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 101/24

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.3697 — Symantec/Veritas)

(2005/C 101/09)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 15 March 2005, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32005M3697. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32005M3697. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex)

---
# Equity and the Technical Service Providers Program

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  About NRCS 
-  Priorities 
-  Equity 
-  Equity and the Technical Service Providers Program 

NRCS is utilizing a multipronged approach to improve technical assistance to underserved communities. We are continually working to expand the number of conservation technical experts who can offer technical assistance and one-on-one conservation advice to historically underserved producers.

NRCS is utilizing a multipronged approach to improving technical assistance to underserved communities. The agency is continually working to expand the number and availability of conservation technical experts capable of offering technical assistance and one-on-one conservation advice to historically underserved producers. The NRCS Equity program initiatives include increasing TSP Program participation of providers who can offer conservation technical assistance for historically underserved producers (see Priority Action 4.6 of the NRCS Equity Action Plan).

Technical service providers (TSPs) offer services to agricultural producers such as farmers, ranchers, and non-industrial private forest landowners on behalf of NRCS. TSPs help producers to plan, design, and implement conservation practices or develop conservation activity plans to improve agricultural operations. TSPs include individuals, private businesses, Indigenous and American Indian tribes, nonprofit organizations, and public agencies.

Offering technical services through an approved third party like a TSP ensures:
              - NRCS conservation program participants have additional options to access technical assistance,
              - quality conservation work by vetted and trained professionals, and
              - personalized, one-on-one assistance to meet the needs of one’s conservation efforts.

##   Related Content

### Technical Service Providers

Technical service providers (TSPs) work on behalf of the customer to offer planning, design, and implementation services that meets NRCS criteria.  This assistance helps improve the producer's operation and addresses resource concerns on their land.
# C_2005088EN.01000602.xml

| 12.4.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 88/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.4.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88/6

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.3738 — Kodak/KPG)

(2005/C 88/06)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 21 March 2005, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32005M3738. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32005M3738. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex)

---
# C_2004228EN.01004202.xml

| 11.9.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 228/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.9.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 228/42

---

ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 25 May 2004

in Case T-264/03: Jürgen Schmoldt and Others v Commission of the European Communities (1)

1

(Action for annulment - Procedural time-limit - Natural or legal persons - Acts of individual concern to them - Decision - Thermal insulation standards - Inadmissibility)

(2004/C 228/96)

Language of the case: German

In Case T-264/03: Jürgen Schmoldt, residing in Dallgow-Döberitz (Germany), Kaefer Isoliertechnik GmbH & Co. KG, established in Bremen (Germany), Hauptverban der Deutschen Bauindustrie eV, established in Berlin (Germany), represented by H.-P. Schneider, lawyer, against Commission of the European Communities (Agents: K. Wiedner, assisted by A. Böhlke, lawyer, with an address for service in Luxembourg) — application for annulment of Article 1 of, and Table 1 of the Annex to, Commission Decision 2003/312/EC of 9 April 2003 on the publication of the reference of standards relating to thermal insulation products, geotextiles, fixed fire-fighting equipment and gypsum blocks in accordance with Council Directive 89/106/EEC (OJ 2003 L 114, p. 50), — the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber), composed of J. Azizi, (President), M. Jaeger and F. Dehousse, Judges; H. Jung, Registrar, has made an order on 25 May 2004, the operative part of which is as follows:

| 1. | The action is dismissed as inadmissible; |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as inadmissible;

| 2. | The applicants shall bear their own costs and those incurred by the defendant, including those relating to the interlocutory proceedings in Case T-264/03 R. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The applicants shall bear their own costs and those incurred by the defendant, including those relating to the interlocutory proceedings in Case T-264/03 R.

---

(1)  OJ C 239, 4.10.2003.

1

---
# C_2004217EN.01000501.xml

| 28.8.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 217/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.8.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 217/5

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Third Chamber)

of 1 July 2004

in Case C-65/03: Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Belgium (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Articles 12 EC, 149 EC and 150 EC - Secondary education diploma awarded in another Member State - Access to higher education)

(2004/C 217/08)

Language of the case: French

In Case C-65/03: Commission of the European Communities (Agent: D. Martin) v Kingdom of Belgium (Agent: A. Snoecx) — application for a declaration that, by failing to take the measures necessary to ensure that holders of secondary education diplomas awarded in other Member States can gain access to higher education organised by Belgium's French Community under the same conditions as holders of the certificat d'enseignement secondaire supérieur (CESS), the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 12 EC, 149 EC and 150 EC — the Court (Third Chamber), composed of: A. Rosas, President of the Chamber, R. Schintgen and N. Colneric (Rapporteur), Judges; C. Stix-Hackl, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 1 July 2004, in which it:

| 1. | Declares that, by failing to take the measures necessary to ensure that holders of secondary education diplomas obtained in other Member States can gain access to higher education organised by Belgium's French Community under the same conditions as holders of the certificat d'enseignement secondaire supérieur (CESS), the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 12 EC, read in conjunction with Articles 149 EC and 150 EC; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by failing to take the measures necessary to ensure that holders of secondary education diplomas obtained in other Member States can gain access to higher education organised by Belgium's French Community under the same conditions as holders of the certificat d'enseignement secondaire supérieur (CESS), the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 12 EC, read in conjunction with Articles 149 EC and 150 EC;

| 2. | Orders the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 83 of 5.4.2003.

1

---
Approved for Release: 2020/02/07 C05111989 · .. I WF a·[;bt\£ I . . BYEMAN I 111111111111111111111 llili 11111111111111111111111111111111111111 14 00003751D 

JS( NATIONAL.. RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE 

WASHINGTON, o.e. 

OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR .. 

Pi:A--/)·'7 

August 6, 1969 

MEMORANDUM FOR MR. PACKARD 

MR. HELMS· 

SUBJECT: Background Material for ExCom Meeting of August 7 

Attached, for your information, is a copy of a talking paper 

which describes the issue for discussion by ExCom at its meeting 

on August 7. 

Also attached is a paper which discusses the related subject 

of an arms control satellite and an alternative "no elaboration" 

approach to verification of a strategic arms limitation agreement. 

F. Robert Na.ka 

Copy to Mr. Nitze 

irrr r1nn1 111111 1111111( 11111111111111111111111111111111 

'MllHOl,( VIA 

BYEMAN 

CONTROl l'fST[M 

TOP SECRET l[.iCLUOED f'll(U4 'AUTOMAffC tUGlltAIUf,j. 

000 DIRICTIYl U00.10 0015 NOT A,,LY 

Approved for Release: 2020/02/07 C05111989 

COlfT.Ol NO BYE 1 3 0 6 2 - 6 9 
Approved for Release: 2020/02/07 C05111989 

I UI' ~tliKt I 

jBf NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE 

WASHINGTON, O.C. 

OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR August 6, 1969 

HANDLE Vf,'t 

MEMORANDUM FOR DR. STEININGER 

SUBJECT: Background Material for August 7 ExCom 

I have attached a copy of a revised talking paper to replace 

the one I sent you on August 4 (BYE 13053-69). Our reason for 

revising the paper was to insure that there was no misunderstanding 

that the issue was one of security and policy implications of SALT 

rather than the arms control satellite initiative as several people 

have been led to believe. 

We have removed the arms control satellite initiative text 

from the issue and have appended it as an information paper relating 

to the verification of any arms limitation agreeme!lt that may be 

reached sometime downstream. We are not proposing that it be 

addressed as an issue by the ExCom at this time. 

I have also attached a copy of this discussion for your use. 

IF. Robert Naka 

CONTROL HO BYE 

BYEMAN TOP SECRET CO'PV or 

CONTROl SYSTEM EXCLUDED FROM AUTOMATIC RECiRAD1NG 

000 DIRECTIVE 5!00. i O DOES NOT APPLY 

PAGE or 

Approved for Release: 2020/02/07 C05111989 

HANDLE VIA 

BYEMAN 

CONTROL 5YSTf:M 

13062-69 

C01'1ES 

PAGES
# C_2005068EN.01002901.xml

| 19.3.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 68/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.3.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 68/29

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.3687 — Johnson & Johnson/Guidant)

(2005/C 68/06)

(Text with EEA relevance)

| 1. | On 15 March 2005, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking Johnson & Johnson (‘J&J’, USA) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking Guidant Corporation (‘Guidant’, USA) by way of purchase of shares. |
| --- | --- |

1.

On 15 March 2005, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking Johnson & Johnson (‘J&J’, USA) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking Guidant Corporation (‘Guidant’, USA) by way of purchase of shares.

1

| 2. | The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






  — | for J&J: consumer goods, pharmaceuticals, medical devices and diagnostic; |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

—

for J&J: consumer goods, pharmaceuticals, medical devices and diagnostic;

| — | for Guidant: medical devices used in the treatment of cardiovascular conditions. |
| --- | --- |

—

for Guidant: medical devices used in the treatment of cardiovascular conditions.

| 3. | On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. |
| --- | --- |

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

| 4. | The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
  Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (No (32-2) 296 43 01 or 296 72 44) or by post, under reference number COMP/M.3687 — Johnson & Johnson/Guidant, to the following address:





  European Commission |
| --- | --- |
| Directorate-General for Competition, |
| Merger Registry |
| J-70 |
| B-1049 Brussels |

4.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (No (32-2) 296 43 01 or 296 72 44) or by post, under reference number COMP/M.3687 — Johnson & Johnson/Guidant, to the following address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition,

Merger Registry

J-70

B-1049 Brussels

---

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

1

---
#### Gill, Respondent, vs. Janz *(née*Gill) and others, Appellants.

For the appellants: *J. Elmer Lehr*of Milwaukee.

For the respondent: *Churchill, Bennett & Churchill*of Milwaukee.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.
Exhibit 13(a)

                                906 Certification



                                                                  June 30, 2004



         The certification set forth below is being submitted to the Securities
and Exchange Commission in connection with the Annual Report on Form 20-F for
the year ended December 31, 2003 (the "Report") for the purpose of complying
with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the "Exchange Act") and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United
States Code. This certification is not to be deemed filed pursuant to the
Exchange Act and does not constitute a part of the Report accompanying this
letter.

     Jason C.S. Chang, the Chief Executive Officer and Freddie Liu, the Chief
         Financial Officer of ASE Test Limited, each certifies that, to the best
         of his knowledge:

     1.  the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
         15(d) of the Exchange Act; and

     2.  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
         ASE Test Limited.



                                              /s/ Jason C.S. Chang
                                              ---------------------------------
                                              Name:    Jason C.S. Chang
                                              Title:   Chief Executive Officer




                                              /s/ Freddie Liu
                                              ---------------------------------
                                              Name:    Freddie Liu
                                              Title:   Chief Financial Officer




                                    13(a)-1
#### Eric Jones et al., Respondents, v Gelbu P. Sherpa et al., Appellants.

[774 NYS2d 767]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (LeVine, J.), dated September 22, 2003, which granted the plaintiffs’ motion for leave to depose a nonparty witness, Thomas A. Corcoran, by videotape and stenographic record, to be used in lieu of his testimony at trial.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiffs’ motion for leave to depose their own treating physician, Thomas A. Corcoran, is not in the nature of discovery, and thus, the general rule foreclosing discovery after the filing of a note of issue *(see*22 NYCRR 202.21 [d]) does not apply *(see Beliavskaia v Perkin,*227 AD2d 246 [1996]; *Hill v Sheehan,*154 AD2d 912 [1989]). Under the circumstances of this case, the plaintiffs were properly permitted to depose Dr. Corcoran, a physician who resides and practices in Pennsylvania *(see*CPLR 3101 [a] [3]), and to use his deposition testimony at trial as evidence-in-chief *(see*CPLR 3117 [a] [3] [ii]; [4]; *Goldblatt v Avis Rent A Car Sys.,*223 AD2d 670 [1996]).

The defendants contend that the Supreme Court lacked the authority to direct the taking of Dr. Corcoran’s deposition without issuing a commission designating a person pursuant to CPLR 3108. Contrary to the defendants’ contention, the Supreme Court was not required to formally designate a commissioner where, as here, the plaintiffs elected, without objection, to designate an officer pursuant to CPLR 3113 (a) (2) before whom the deposition would be taken *(see*Siegel, Practice Commentaries, McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 7B, CPLR C3108:3, at 461; C3113:1, at 523; Weinstein-Korn-Miller, NY Civ Prac ¶ 3108.05; *cf. Wiseman v American Motors Sales Corp.,*103 AD2d 230, 235-236 [1984]).

*635The defendants’ remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review. Prudenti, P.J., Florio, H. Miller, Schmidt and Cozier, JJ., concur.
Exhibit
      32.1




CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO


18
      U.S.C.
§ 1350


AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
      connection with the Transition Report of Point.360 (the “Company”) on Form
      10-K/T for the period ended June 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Haig S. Bagerdjian, Chief Executive
      Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 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 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/
                  Haig S. BagerdjianHaig
                  S. BagerdjianChief
                  Executive OfficerNovember
                  9, 2007
#### Estate of Evans: Ladwig and another, Appellants, vs. Gates, Executor, Respondent.

For the appellants : *Lehner & Lelmer*of Princeton.

For the respondent: *George B. Heaney*of Berlin, attorney, and'T. *L. Doyle*of Fond du Lac of counsel.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2254 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2254

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 2635 Napa Street in Vallejo, California, as the ``Janet Capello Post 
                           Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 28, 2017

Mr. Thompson of California (for himself, Mr. DeSaulnier, Ms. Barragan, 
 Ms. Bass, Ms. Sanchez, Ms. Maxine Waters of California, Mr. LaMalfa, 
  Mr. Bera, Mr. Denham, Mr. Valadao, Mr. McClintock, Mrs. Torres, Mr. 
  Royce of California, Mr. Sherman, Mr. Rohrabacher, Mr. Hunter, Mr. 
   Nunes, Mr. Aguilar, Ms. Brownley of California, Mr. Calvert, Mr. 
   Carbajal, Mr. Cardenas, Ms. Judy Chu of California, Mr. Cook, Mr. 
Correa, Mr. Costa, Mrs. Davis of California, Ms. Eshoo, Mr. Garamendi, 
Mr. Huffman, Mr. Issa, Mr. Khanna, Mr. Knight, Ms. Lee, Mr. Ted Lieu of 
California, Ms. Lofgren, Mr. Lowenthal, Ms. Matsui, Mr. McNerney, Mrs. 
 Napolitano, Mr. Panetta, Mr. Peters, Ms. Roybal-Allard, Mr. Ruiz, Mr. 
Schiff, Ms. Speier, Mr. Swalwell of California, Mr. Takano, Mr. Vargas, 
  and Mrs. Mimi Walters of California) 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 2635 Napa Street in Vallejo, California, as the ``Janet Capello Post 
                           Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. JANET CAPELLO POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 2635 Napa Street in Vallejo, California, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Janet Capello Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Janet 
Capello Post Office Building''.
                                 <all>
```