alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# CE2004078EN.01058501.xml

| 27.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 78/585 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 78/585

---

(2004/C 78 E/0619)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3553/03

by Claude Moraes (PSE) to the Commission

(1 December 2003)

Subject:   Missing Cypriots

Subject:

A group of my constituents, the Organisation of Relatives of Missing Cypriots (UK), wish to know what the situation is in resolving the case of the missing persons in Cyprus.

Does the Commission believe the Government of Turkey could exert more pressure on the Turkish Cypriot leadership to uphold its duties and responsibilities to human rights? If so, could the Commission please state whether this issue will form part of Turkey's accession negotiations?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(29 January 2004)

(29 January 2004)

Mr Clerides and Mr Denktash met in June and July 2002 to exchange proposals on the issue of missing persons. The basis for this exchange was their agreement of 31 July 1997. The Greek Cypriot side proceeded with its programme of exhumations and identifications in areas under its control. Investigations are carried out by the United States (US) funded bi-communal Institute for Neurology and Genetics. The Turkish Cypriot side has not yet designated scientists who would work with the Institute.

In its set of measures vis-à-vis the Turkish Cypriots of 30 April 2003 the Government of the Republic announced several measures regarding relatives of missing and killed Turkish Cypriots. The measures provide ‘inter alia’ for access to information, meetings between relatives of missing persons and Government officials, exploratory excavations of burial places, and arrangements for the establishment of a DNA Bank. A list of 500 Turkish Cypriots whose cases have been submitted to the Committee of Missing Persons (CMP) was published by the Government of the Republic in Turkish Cypriot newspapers on 14 June 2003. The Commission has also learned that information concerning the fate of 201 missing Turkish Cypriots was officially conveyed to the International Committee of the Red Cross by Government authorities.

In letter of 3 December 2003 to Mr Papadopoulos and Mr Denktash, United Nations Secretary-General Annan urged the two leaders to invite their respective members of the CMP to resume formal meeting in order to reactivate the work of the Committee.

As for Turkey, the Commission has repeatedly indicated to Turkey the need to use its influence over the Turkish Cypriot leadership to find a comprehensive settlement. After the formation of a new ‘government’ in the north under opposition leader Mr Talat there is a window of opportunity to reach a settlement on the basis of the Annan plan in the coming months. In the event of a settlement based on the Annan plan, the question mentioned by the Honourable Member will be solved on the basis of the relevant provisions.

---
REF ID:A51719B 

MEMO ROUTING SL!r I -.ER USE FOR APPROVALS, DISAPPROVALS, 

:ONCURRENCF.S, OR SIMILAR ACTIONS 

INITIALS 

ORGAN17A'n0N .<HD LOl".Al"IOlll \__ DATE 

3 

4 

REMARKS 

CIRCULATt 

COORDINATION 

FILE 

INFORMATION 

NECESSARY ACTION 

NOTE AND RETURN 

SEE ME 

SIGNATURE 

__ __,,,,,--+------;.ti~ J] 

fROM !iAMf: O;:;;r;&tTU: DATE, \-

ORGANIZATION AN~~ ~ON£ j 7 

DD fORM 95 ReplacesDAAOOForm895,!Apr4S,andA.FBQ . ' !'U [>~ P<>rxu. t2. l0 Nov '7· which may be used. 

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 02-28-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352a 
PL 86-36/50 USC 3605 

On behalf of all the members of the United States Communications 

Intelligency Board I take pleasure in extending a cordial welcome to Mr. 

D and to all the members of the United Kingdom Delegation to this 

Conference. In doing so, I wish to convey the regrets expressed by 

Mr. Dnl.les, the Chairman of USCIB, at being unable to attend this meeting, 

to extend the welcome him.self on behalf of the Board. 

This is the S!!JCond time that we have gathered together to deal with 

a problem, or rather a series of problems, presenting a most unusual aspect 

for us as specialists in the COMIIT field. Our basic interest in that 

field, as is that of all the members of the London Signal Intelligence 

Board with wham we collaborate so closely, is to foster and to cultivate 

the gardens from which come products of great value for intelligence 

purposes. And yet this conference, like the previous one held ILn 1951 

on the same subject, has as its ultimate aim and effect that of making 

sane of those gardens arid and completely unproductive to everybody, 

including you and us. The least harm that this conflict in ou:tlook and 

aim is apt to bring to the members of the US team is that it may be a cause 

for or bring about a certain amount of confusion in thinking processes; 
-··~---·----

at the worst, the conflict can lead to a bad case of what some of us here 

designate technically as "cryptologic schizophrenia.n I hope that the 

members of our team are prepared to avoid the dange:fs of confused thinking 

arising from the conflict I mention and I hope they will not succumb to 

that unfortunate-and very distressful psychological illness. As for the 

members of the UK team, we are prepared to do what we can by way of social ro ,.,u,, 

divertissement to minimize the deleterious effects that the conference may 

exercise over them and their thinking processes. 

To the mE111bers of the UK team who have come directly from London, I 

• 

want to say that I hope that your visit to Washington will not only be 

profitable to all of us but also that it will be a pleasurable interlude 

between the rigors of-attendance at the coronation festivities and return 

to the everyday grind at Eastcote. I want you all to feel free to call 

upon any of us for assistance or infonnation as may be required. 

I will now call upon I .... ____ ..... J who may want to make some remarks. 

PL 86-36/50 USC 3605
h-'Ofeaaor S&\ttlderis ~L~ 

~ Ball 

'Ullivera!ty or <:Mcasa Chi~ J'(, nli.no!e 

'Dla:t Pt:Ot .. 007 Macte.ne: 

REF ID:A66012 

1 3 APR 1954 

Ia a ptfJT!ows letter to~, it vu ft.Ated that, ~nt to 

'9 ~ ~ meting or tho Jhtion,_"\l hourit-;; ~ ~!fie 

A4v1aory Board, the ~ ~, ~ •a ..i.o ~ or the 

1ka...-4.1 wm w Ule to ~ vith J"OU tm -.ttera ot ::pfm#1 araant-

•t1.cm. .m4 htiira aettnu... 

We de ~ ~.U.ine • joint M4't!Ji& or all 1;taoe pe.;nele IW4. 

their ebn1r.am oa f!0..-21 MsJ 19'1+. l>m1.ns t:tlo mo:r:o.ias or ._ f'tnt 

lrs.:71 all the :eeeactt«r/ ~in &rt.a!J.a vw. \ie ~li•hed. 

l'!tda ahnuld require~ a~ at bcui-1. !!. ~ct the 

flnt ~will \:lo k'tctod to aoqua1nting ~ v1t.h tho bJ.gtil1~ta 

flt the orpni:at1'!"n -4 t'ta ltt-df. '!ht lte<ind !f!q1 21 Mr(y., vtll 

h ~to• deto.1~ puanttttt011 U'J4 4ieeu!tlion at~~ 

~ '9chnieal prtt>lml G4 to pl.ml.a for ~~?It pmel etiv1 ... 

tin. 

I\ ia dn~ bc"--.,cd tlmt you "111 \e .t>le to attend the 

~inp on bo"'..h theco ~. 

U 70U will lAt m know" iibat rou plan to attend and \btJ ~ 

or ~1 JOU prehr, I V11l have the nee4!asaxy ~1 ~ eent 

to )'OU, 

MJlh Announces joint meting o1' Pa.nala ct' .NSAS..1(61 and invites 

attendance or lm:lx:fbers. 

cc: 

1¥ McDOnald/Iittt I tr.RI 

_:___.Asst to S/M3ST/ero 

@'pproved for Release by NSA on 07-23-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352a
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1427 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1427

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to facilitate increased 
 coordination and alignment between the public and private sector with 
              respect to quality and efficiency measures.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 21, 2015

 Ms. Stabenow introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to facilitate increased 
 coordination and alignment between the public and private sector with 
              respect to quality and efficiency measures.

    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 ``Quality Measure Alignment Act of 
2015''.

SEC. 2. FACILITATION OF INCREASED COORDINATION AND ALIGNMENT BETWEEN 
              THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR WITH RESPECT TO QUALITY AND 
              EFFICIENCY MEASURES.

    (a) In General.--Section 1890(b) of the Social Security Act (42 
U.S.C. 1395aaa(b)) is amended by inserting after paragraph (3) the 
following new paragraph:
            ``(4) Facilitation of increased coordination and alignment 
        between the public and private sector with respect to quality 
        and efficiency measures.--
                    ``(A) In general.--The entity shall facilitate 
                increased coordination and alignment between the public 
                and private sector with respect to quality and 
                efficiency measures.
                    ``(B) Annual reports.--The entity shall prepare and 
                make available to the public annual reports on its 
                findings under this paragraph. Such public availability 
                shall include posting each report on the Internet 
                website of the entity.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 20

- 00404

- CV

I N THE E STATE OF S TEVEN S TAVRON

, D ECEASED §

§

§

§ O n Appeal from Probate Court No. 1

of Tarrant County ( 2013

- PR00606

- 1

- C )

November 10, 2021

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Womack

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there

was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the trial

court is affirm ed

.

It is further ordered that each party shall pay its own costs of this appeal , for

which let execution issue.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By /s/ Dana Womack

Justice Dana Womac k
'3 / o Se~J ~., ./"\ 

\ 

,_)' 

f); /} ;T !./~ '.-' (';;,A_ 3 7) • e_ • , , .,v-i il. if '·I v v I 

AVSJliNDARE 

SENDER 

EXPEDITEUR 

AllSENDER 

-------·- -··-·---··--·---

{Vi. f. vq· 

FLYGBEFORDRAS OVER HELA VJl:RLDEN UTAN 

TILLJl:GGSAVGIFT. BEFORORAS !CKE SOM AEROGRAM, OM NAGOT LJl:GGES !NUT!. 

GODKANT AV KUNGL. GENERAlPOSTSTYRElSEN 

·------

' 

i ~Ai ~ i 

: r ~ : -~ . . ... 

I-

· .... ~ _ .... 

[lungdohls, Nybro
Exhibit 12.3

 

Section 302 – Certification of the Chief Executive Officer

 

 

I, Patricio Jottar, certify that:

 

1.         I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Compañía Cervecerías Unidas S.A.;

 

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

 

3.         Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

 

Date: May 17, 2013

/s/ Patricio Jottar        

                                                                                  Patricio Jottar 

Chief Executive Officer
# CE2004088EN.01072101.xml

| 8.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 88/721 |
| -------- | -- | -------------------------------------- | --------- |

---

(2004/C 88 E/0741)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1007/04

by Manuel Medina Ortega (PSE) to the Commission

(25 March 2004)

Subject:   Breakdown of the POSEI item in the 2004 Budget

Until 2004, the Community's annual budget allocated, under the EAGGF-Guarantee framework, a budgetary line to each POSEI, establishing two sub-items within each: one on ‘Supply’ and another on ‘Other measures’, i.e. support for local production. I am speaking about Item B1-320 Poseidom (B1-3200 Supply and B1-3201 Other measures), B1-321 Poseima (B1-3210 Supply and B1-3211 Other measures) and B1-322 Poseican (B1-3220 Supply and B1-3221 Other measures).

As a result of the changes to the structure of the 2004 Budget, the POSEIs budgetary items have been globalised and unified within the framework of Title 05 on agricultural and rural development, in Item 05 02 11 04, which also contains the amounts for the Aegean Islands and other amounts, e.g. subsidies for rice supplies to Reunión, which were formerly separate. This system entails the loss of the previous clarity and transparency, since the quantities assigned to each POSEI can no longer be distinguished, and within each of the latter, the amounts assigned to each of the aforementioned sub-items. Given that implementation for 2002 also appears in globalised form, it is likewise impossible to work out what was implemented within each POSEI.

What is the amount assigned to Poseican for budgetary year 2004?

Of this amount, how much is earmarked for the Specific Supply Arrangements and how much to Support measures for local production?

What was the total of the amounts actually paid out in 2002 and 2003 for the Specific Supply Arrangements on the one hand, and for other Poseican measures on the other?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(21 April 2004)

The 2004 appropriation for the Poseican programme is EUR 137 million: EUR 103 million for the special supply arrangements and EUR 34 million for support for local production.

Actual expenditure in 2002 and 2003 was:

| — | Special supply arrangements:
—
2002: EUR 88,8 million; —
2003: EUR 84,7 million. | — | 2002: EUR 88,8 million; | — | 2003: EUR 84,7 million. |
| - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | - | ----------------------- | - | ----------------------- |
| — | 2002: EUR 88,8 million; | | | | |
| — | 2003: EUR 84,7 million. | | | | |

| — | Other measures:
—
2002: EUR 19,5 million; —
2003: EUR 26,8 million. | — | 2002: EUR 19,5 million; | — | 2003: EUR 26,8 million. |
| - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------- | - | ----------------------- | - | ----------------------- |
| — | 2002: EUR 19,5 million; | | | | |
| — | 2003: EUR 26,8 million. | | | | |

---
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. §1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Iteris, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for thequarter ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, James S. Miele, ChiefFinancial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.                                       The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.                                       The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
|   | /s/ JAMES  S. MIELE |
|--------|--------------------------|
|   | James  S. Miele          |
|   | Chief  Financial Officer |
|   |                     |
|   | July 27,  2010      |

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906, or any other documentauthenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appearsin typed form within the electronic version of this written statement requiredby Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained bythe Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request.

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          500290
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  3951648
<ALLOWANCES>                                     67254
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               5400972
<PP&E>                                           60647
<DEPRECIATION>                                    9391
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 5506228
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          7238891
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     737699
<COMMON>                                      40844296
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   5506228
<SALES>                                       17096558
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              17137802
<CGS>                                         17314567
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 17314567
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              253353
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (400118)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (400118)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (400118)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.04)
        

</TABLE>
* 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. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-10053 Conference Calendar

RAY LOUIS JOHNSON, Petitioner-Appellant,

versus GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION, Respondent-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:97-CV-1603-P

- - - - - - - - - - October 21, 1998 Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and WIENER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Ray Louis Johnson, Texas prisoner # 683523, has appealed the district court’s dismissal of his petition for habeas corpus as untimely under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1); nevertheless, Johnson failed to raise that issue in his initial appellate brief. The Respondent has moved the court to dismiss Johnson's appeal for his failure to preserve the issue. That motion is GRANTED. Yohey v. Collins , 985 F.2d 222, 225 (5th Cir. 1993); UnitedNo. 98-10053 -2- States v. Prince , 868 F.2d 1379, 1386 (5th Cir. 1989). The appeal is DISMISSED. 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2.
No.------------------~-------·---· D. C. 

[pproved for Release by NSA on 12-18-2014 pursuant to E .0. 1352EI 
i. 

·.!'Orin 38ll. Rev;1~·
**Exhibit 32(1)****Certification of Chief Executive Officer**     I, Andrew B. Schmitt, President and Chief Executive Officer of Layne Christensen Company (the“Company”), do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:     (a) the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the annual period endedJanuary 31, 2005, which this certification accompanies, fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, asamended; and     (b) the information contained in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K/A forthe annual period ended January 31, 2005, which this certification accompanies,fairly presents, in all material aspects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.        Dated: November 21, 2005 */s/ A. B. Schmitt*     Andrew B. Schmitt  President and Chief Executive Officer
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DUANE RONALD BELANUS, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

LEO DUTTON; et al., 

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 18-35474 

D.C. No. 6:12-cv-00065-DLC 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Montana

Dana L. Christensen, Chief District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 24, 2020**

Before: GOODWIN, FARRIS, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.

Montana state prisoner Duane Ronald Belanus appeals pro se the district 

court’s judgment, following a jury trial, in his action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 

alleging that defendants failed to protect him from inmate assault. We have 

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

MAR 26 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
 2 

Belanus has not shown plain error in Jury Instruction 10. See C.B. v. City of 

Sonora, 769 F.3d 1005, 1016 (9th Cir. 2014) (where a party fails to preserve an 

objection to jury instructions in a civil case, we review only for plain error). First, 

because Belanus had been convicted at the time of the events at issue in this case, 

the district court properly applied Eighth Amendment standards to his claim. See 

Pierce v. Cnty. of Orange, 526 F.3d 1190, 1205 (9th Cir. 2008) (pre-trial detainees 

have a Fourteenth Amendment protection against conditions that amount to 

punishment, while convicted prisoners “may be subject to punishment so long as it 

does not violate the Eighth Amendment’s bar against cruel and unusual 

punishment”); Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 448 (9th Cir. 2000) (holding that a 

plaintiff who had been convicted but awaited sentencing should be treated as a 

convicted prisoner rather than a pretrial detainee for purposes of his constitutional 

claim). Second, Jury Instruction 10 accurately states the elements of an Eighth 

Amendment claim for deliberate indifference to a prisoner’s safety. See Farmer v. 

Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 847 (1994) (explaining requirements of such a claim). 

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Belanus’s requests 

for appointment of counsel because Belanus failed to demonstrate exceptional 

circumstances. See Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009) (standard 

of review; explaining the “exceptional circumstances” requirement). 

AFFIRMED.