alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# CE2004084EN.01091101.xml

| 3.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 84/911 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 84/911

---

(2004/C 84 E/1006)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0909/04

by Margrietus van den Berg (PSE) to the Commission

(24 March 2004)

Subject:   To Serve and Protect — Netherlands Railways

Subject:

The Dutch newspaper Het Parool reported on 11 March 2004 that, as of 1 April 2004, the security firm To Serve and Protect is to lose its contract to a competing firm. Using unorthodox methods, To Serve and Protect has achieved outstanding results in making Amsterdam's railway stations safe, to the complete satisfaction of all parties.

Netherlands Railways (NS), which has employed it hitherto, says that To Serve and Protect is no longer eligible because it does not comply with European public procurement criteria. The firm's excessively small size is a particular problem according to the NS. The latter's spokesman says that a business must have a turnover of at least EUR 4,5 million per annum and employ at least 400 staff.

| 1. | If a firm is doing a good job and is competitive but too small, surely this last point cannot be grounds for debarring it from bidding for a contract? What does the Commission think about this? |
| --- | --- |

1.

If a firm is doing a good job and is competitive but too small, surely this last point cannot be grounds for debarring it from bidding for a contract? What does the Commission think about this?

| 2. | What is the true state of affairs? |
| --- | --- |

2.

What is the true state of affairs?

| 3. | Can the Commission appreciate that such reports give newspaper-readers a negative impression of Europe and makes them angry at Europe? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Can the Commission appreciate that such reports give newspaper-readers a negative impression of Europe and makes them angry at Europe?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(30 April 2004)

(30 April 2004)

The EU rules on public procurement do not include an obligation to exclude companies from participating in invitations to tender because of their size. However, the awarding bodies are permitted to require participants in the procedures for the award of contracts to have the technical, economic and financial capacity necessary for the performance of the contract in question, such as a minimum turnover and/or a minimum number of employees. In order to avoid negative consequences for small companies, under EU rules groups of companies are allowed to tender. In the case mentioned by the Honourable Member it was Netherlands Railways (NS) which considered that a minimum annual turnover of EUR 4,5 million and a staff of at least 400 people was necessary to carry out the contract in question.

The Commission is aware of the negative impact of information which does not give enough explanation in order to be understood and correctly assessed. It therefore regrets the biased way in which information has been given to the public on this subject.

---
.. 

REF ID:A65509 

';rbe !fonombl.e J. F.dgar Hoover 

Director 1 l'ederal Bureau ot Inveatigation 

Vuhixlgtou 25,, D. C. 

D9ar Mr. Boover: 

~ an old-timer 1n Gover~nt Service aM hi• ~tulations to the great 111aey ;rou V1ll receive en the thirtieth 

-=1veril0.17 ot your Directorab:f.» ot the l'ederal Bureo.u or 

InveatigationT llov vell I reant:>er our eer~ Maociat1on 1zl 

tbe Teapot Dome d.tQ"a and wba.t a. arovth there hU been 1n the 

m tince those d&)'SJ, ~ 7CAJr Jl8&ll:l.f'1cent J.eaderahtp ud 

v1ee guitlance! 

M;r eord1a1 greetiDp and 'belt v:Ubee tor loJJ6..continued 

•uceese of the Bureau am ;your good health. 

tUncae:i.,., 

@'pproved for Release by NSA on 07-23-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352a
Exhibit  32.1





CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER





Pursuant
to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350)





I, Michael E. Kibler, as the President
and Chief Executive Officer of US 1 Industries, Inc., certify that, to the best
of my knowledge and belief,  the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
period ended September 30, 2010, which accompanies this certification fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 and the information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of US 1
Industries, Inc. at the dates and for the periods indicated.  The
foregoing certification is made pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350) and shall not be relied upon for any other
purpose.  The undersigned expressly disclaims any obligation to update
the foregoing certification except as required by law.





Dated
      this 15th day of November 2010./s/ Michael E. KiblerMichael
      E. KiblerChief
      Executive
Officer





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906, has been provided to US 1 Industries, Inc. and will be retained
by US 1 Industries, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.
* 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. 02-50461 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus REYNALDO CONDE-COVARRUBIAS, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. A-01-CR-242-ALL-SS

-------------------- October 30, 2002 Before DeMOSS, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Reynaldo Conde-Covarrubias appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United States after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He contends that the sentence is invalid because it exceeds the two-year maximum term of imprisonment prescribed in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Conde-Covarrubias complains that his sentence was improperly enhanced pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) based on his prior deportation following an aggravated felony conviction. He argues that the sentencing provision is unconstitutional.No. 02-50461 -2- Alternatively, Conde-Covarrubias contends that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) define separate offenses. He argues that the aggravated felony conviction that resulted in his increased sentence was an element of the offense under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) that should have been alleged in his indictment.
In Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. Conde-Covarrubias acknowledges that his arguments are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres , but asserts that the decision has been cast into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). He seeks to preserve his arguments for further review. Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres

. See Apprendi , 530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied , 531 U.S. 1202 (2001). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres “unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule it.” Dabeit , 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED. AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
............. ~...------~,.-~~-~~'~' ~--~ ............ ---=-== 

REF ID:A63464 

... e. o. e.J.t. 

V1" ITU14eat 

o..r.l. 

•• e. lox 

lleo\rio J.oee ~ 

eo•cto~, -.w ton 

hr tr. 8111.tUI 

9-M JC".l tor~ let\~r of 811a#wr.t l955· 

• ~ u4 X *"JOlOd ~ YJ.a.it ffr1 llJCh ~ 

annctat. 1CUZ' -.k:hro Um w eet aq,qua!Jstod. vith our 

n.tt M4 ....... ttoa. 

l Y1ll ... looUlsa torw.rd '° be&d»c trors 70" Alt 

AJl1.l 

~~ 

80 1Mt .. ... "' t.t.t u..f -- ~J.a'to fw '1fPJZ .eXli T111.i W1~ u. 

llM:~\bs 70'D' ~ nip.rd.a, l ..._ 

~-

@'pp roved for Release by NSA on 06-19-2014 pursuantto E .0. 1352a
Exhibit 10 (15)
 Layne Christensen Company  Executive Incentive Compensation Plan
 (As Amended and Restated, Effective November 3, 2008)
 SECTION I. Purpose of the Plan.
   SECTION II. Administration.
  SECTION III. Participation.
  Group I
    
    Group IIGregory F. AluceAndrew B. Schmitt
    
    Steven F. CrookeEric R. DespainJerry W. FanskaJeffrey J. ReynoldsPhil Winner
 SECTION IV. Selection of Targets.
  SECTION V. Determination of Amount of Award.




---



##### 



GROUP I
  GROUP II
  ILLUSTRATION
  Percentage
    
    Group I
    
    Group IIof
    
    Base Salary
    
    Base SalaryTarget Achieved
    
    Percentage
    
    Percentage120
    % or more

    

    
    160
    %
    
    
    120
    %115
    %
    
    
    140
    %
    
    
    105
    %110
    %
    
    
    120
    %
    
    
    90
    %105
    %
    
    
    100
    %
    
    
    75
    %100
    % (Target)
    

    
    80
    %
    
    
    60
    %96
    %
    
    
    72
    %
    
    
    54
    %92
    %
    
    
    64
    %
    
    
    48
    %88
    %
    
    
    56
    %
    
    
    42
    %84
    %
    
    
    48
    %
    
    
    36
    %80
    %
    
    
    40
    %
    
    
    30
    %79
    % or less
    

    
    0
    %
    
    
    0
    %
   SECTION VI. Methods of Payment.
  SECTION VII. Deferred Accounts.
 Deferral Account.
 2




---



##### 



Timing of Deferral Election
 Payment of Deferred Account Within the 90-day period
 SECTION VIII. Termination of Employment or Change in Control Group.
    SECTION IX. Miscellaneous.
     SECTION X. Effective Date.
  3
**Exhibit 31.1**
I, Matthew P. Lawlor, certify that:
1.  I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Online Resources Corporation; 2.  Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect tothe period covered by this annual report; 3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this annual report, fairly presents in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations andcash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented inthis annual report; 4.  The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:
 a.  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known tous by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this annual report is being prepared;  b.  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the endof the period covered by this report based on such evaluation: and  c.  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected or isreasonably likely to materially affect the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting; and  d.  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter inthe case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting; and
5.  The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
 a.  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability torecord, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b.  Any fraud, whether or nor material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.        Date:  March 15,2005         By:  /s/ Matthew P. Lawlor    Matthew P. Lawlor    Chairman and Chief ExecutiveOfficer
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 on Form 10-Q of Whitman Education Group,
Inc. (the  "Company")  for the period ended  December 31, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Richard
C. Pfenniger, Jr., Chief Executive Officer, of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C.  ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that:

1)   the Report fully complies with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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



By:  /s/ Richard C. Pfenniger, Jr.
     ------------------------------
     Richard C. Pfenniger, Jr.
     Chief Executive Officer
     February 5, 2003
Re: Fw: Submission of Two Acetaldehyde Study Reports for HPV 2 Rule:

CASRN 75-07-0

David Brooks to: Paul Campanella 09/24/2012 02:18 PM

Cc: John Schaeffer, Mark Townsend

Hi Paul,

We have reviewed our contractor's report and it is acceptable. Please see attached file.

75-07-0_HPV2_FINAL Daphnia and Algae DA_09.14.2012.docx

Dave

David Brooks

Risk Assessment Division (7403M)

High Production Volume Chemical Branch

EPA East Room 6308N

(202) 564-8603
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

August 9, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-60689

Summary Calendar

MANUEL ANGUIANO-ARTEAGA,

Petitioner,

versus

ALBERTO R. GONZALES, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent.

--------------------

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

(BIA No. A41 631 765)

--------------------

Before SMITH, WIENER, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Petitioner Manuel Anguiano-Arteaga (Anguiano) appeals (1) the

Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) reversal of the immigration

judge’s grant of a waiver of inadmissibility and (2) the BIA’s

final order of removal based on Anguiano’s commission of an

aggravated felony. Anguiano argues that his crime of indecency

with a child by exposure was not an aggravated felony. The

respondent argues that we lack jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.

§ 1252(a)(2)(C). 
2

We have held that, under § 1252(a)(2)(C), jurisdiction will be

precluded when the alien is removable for committing an aggravated

felony. See Nehme v. INS, 252 F.3d 415, 420 (5th Cir. 2001).

Anguiano’s conviction under TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 21.11(a)(2) is an

aggravated felony. See United States v. Zavala-Sustaita, 214 F.3d

601, 607 (5th Cir. 2000). Consequently, we lack jurisdiction to

consider his petition. See § 1252(a)(2)(C); Nehme, 252 F.3d at

420. In addition, we lack jurisdiction over the BIA’s

“discretionary exercise of its power to review and reverse the IJ’s

grant of, rather than eligibility for, section 212(c) relief.” See

Delgado-Reynua v. Gonzales, 450 F.3d 596, 600 (5th Cir.

2006)percent. We therefore dismiss this portion of Anguiano’s

petition for review. 

Anguiano also argues that the BIA should have remanded the

matter to the immigration judge rather than ordering him removed.

The BIA did not exceed the scope of its authority in so doing.

See Delgado-Reynua, 450 F.3d at 600-601. This portion of

Anguiano’s petition for review is therefore denied. 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED IN PART FOR LACK OF

JURISDICTION; DENIED IN PART.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### APPEAL 

### O F 

### F LORIDA 

### S ECOND 

### D ISTRICT

THE ESTATE OF HENRY L. HENDERSON, by and through LINDA JANE

HENDERSON, Personal Representative,

Appellant,
v. EAST BAY NC, LLC; CLEAR CHOICE HEALTH CARE, LLC; and MARGARET DALTON (as to EAST BAY REHABILITATION CENTER), Appellees. No. 2D22-3291 February 16, 2024 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County; David A. Demers, Judge. Lisa M. Tanaka of Wilkes & Associates, P.A., Tampa, for Appellant. Scot E. Samis of Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP, St. Petersburg, for Appellees.
PER CURIAM. Affirmed. NORTHCUTT, KELLY, and, BLACK, JJ., Concur. Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
COPY • 

GAS-26 (12 Oct 1950) 1st Ind HLW/bnm 

SUbJect: Recission of G-2 Policy on Release o£ Cryptographic Pr:l.nciples 

Headquarters, Army Security Agency, The Pentagon, 8600 AAU, Washington 25, D. c., 

27 October 1950 

TO: Director,, Armed Forces Security Agency, WashJ.Dgton 25, D. c., 

ATTN: AFSA-OO'r 

Enclosed for your llli'ormation is a copy of Office Memorandum from Deputy 

AC of s, G-2, Department of the Army, dated 1 JUl.y 1950 which rescinds policy 

on release of Cryptographic Principles. 

FOR THE CHIEF, ARMY SECURITY AGEl~CY: 

l Incl: 

Cy of OM dtd 7Ju150 

H. L. 'WHTITEN 

Lt. Colonel, AOC 

AdJutant General 

Army Security Agency 

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 08-30-2013 pursuantto E.O. 1352a 
• 

/ 

; ' 

• .F ID :A70836. 

,. 

· OFFICE MEMORANDUM UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT 

Major A. L. Smith/mjr/71994 

TO: ·Chief, Army Security Agency 

,FROM: Assistant Chief 9f Staff, G~2 ' Date : 7 July 1950 

SUBJECT: "Release of Cryptographic Principles. 

The policy announced in Mekorandum for the Chief, Army Security Agency, 

dated 2 9 April 1946; from the Acting Deputy AC of S, G-2, entitled: , 

' "Re lease· o'f Cryptographic Principles," is hereby rescinded. 

c 0 p y 

'· '-

\ 

' '.\ ' 

/t/A. R.'BOLLING 

/s/ A. R. BOLLING 

Major General, GSC 

Deputy A.C •. of S., "G-2 

. ,.
Exhibit 21

LTC PROPERTIES, INC.    LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES    As of December 31, 2009

Company

State of OrganizationAlbuquerque Real Estate Investments, Inc.

DelawareBakersfield-LTC, Inc.

DelawareBeaumont Real Estate Investments, LP

TexasBV Holding-LTC, Inc.

DelawareCoronado Corporation

DelawareEast New Mexico, Inc.

DelawareEducation Property Investors, Inc.

NevadaFlorida-LTC, Inc.

NevadaFort Wayne Real Estate Investments, Inc.

DelawareKansas-LTC Corporation

DelawareLTC GP I, Inc.

DelawareLTC GP VI, Inc.

DelawareLTC Partners IX, L.P.

DelawareLTC West, Inc.

NevadaLTC-Bedford, Inc.

DelawareLTC-Dearfield, Inc.

NevadaLTC-DS, Inc.

DelawareLTC-Gardner, Inc.

DelawareLTC-Griffin, Inc.

NevadaLTC-Jonesboro, Inc.

NevadaLTC-K1 Inc.

DelawareLTC-K2 Limited Partnership

DelawareLTC-K2 LP, Inc.

DelawareLTC-K2, Inc.

DelawareLTC-Lake Forest, Inc.

DelawareLTC-New Mexico, Inc.

NevadaLTC-Ohio, Inc.

DelawareLTC-Richmond, Inc.

NevadaL-Tex GP, Inc.

DelawareL-Tex L.P. Corporation

DelawareMissouri River Corporation

DelawareMonroeville Real Estate Investments, Inc.

DelawareNew Mexico Real Estate Investments, Inc.

DelawareNorth Carolina Real Estate Investments, LLC

North CarolinaPark Villa Corporation

DelawarePENN-IND Real Estate Investments, Inc.

DelawareSkilled Healthcare Holdings, Inc.

DelawareSouth Hills Real Estate Investments, Inc.

DelawareTexas-LTC Limited Partnership

TexasTexas-LTC Woodridge Limited Partnership

DelawareVacaville-LTC, Inc.

Delaware


---



QuickLinks
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION OF CEO AND CFO PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. § 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

§
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Form 10-Q of Xerox Credit Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the
Company), for the quarter ending September 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Gary R. Kabureck, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and John
F. Rivera, Vice President, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his/her knowledge, that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



/s/ Gary R. KabureckGary R. KabureckChief Executive OfficerOctober 30, 2009/s/ John F. RiveraJohn F. RiveraChief Financial OfficerOctober 30, 2009


This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and
shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of § 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of this written statement required by § 906 has been provided to Xerox Credit Corporation and will be retained by Xerox Credit Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.



22