alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

IN THE MATTER OF 

BAER AIR, INC. 

Respondent 

FAA CASE NO. 2011S0150234 

(Civil Penalty Proceeding) 

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE 

Honorable J .E. Sullivan 

Hearing Date: NOT YET ASSIGNED 

Hearing Location: NOT YET ASSIGNED 

RECEIVED 

NOV 13 2014 

HEARING DOCKET 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE AND SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Teresa L. Champion, Esq., Company Counsel and Chief 

Compliance Officer, Sky Link Aviation, Inc., 45005 Aviation Drive, Suite 132, Dulles, Virginia 

20166-7534, Tel No.: 703-318-4000, Fax No.: 703-318-4018, Email: 

tchampion@skylinkaviation.com, hereby appears as substitute counsel of record for Gregory S. 

Winton, Esq. and Jared M. Allen, Esq. of The Aviation Law Firm, 1997 Annapolis Exchange 

Dated this 5th day ofNovember 2014. 

Annapolis, MD 21401 

Tel: (301) 294-8550 

Fax: (301) 294-2525 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certifY that I have this date sent via U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid, an original and one 

copy of the foregoing Respondent's Notice of Appearance and Substitution of Counsel addressed 

to: 

ORIGINAL AND ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, SW. 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building--Suite 2Wl 000 

Washington, DC 20591 

ONE COPY 

Judge J.E. Sullivan 

US. Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200New Jersey Ave, S.E. (Ell-310) 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

Tel: (202) 366-6941 

Fax: (202) 366-7536 

And, further, that I have this date sent by electronic mail and by U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, a 

copy of the foregoing addressed to: 

ONE COPY 

Vincent Bennett 

Office of the Regional Counsel, ANE-7 

12 New England Executive Park 

Burlington, MA 01803 

Tel: (781) 238-8044 

Fax: (781) 238-7055 

Email: Vincent.bennett@faa.gov 

Dated: November 5, 2014 

ONE COPY 

Teresa L. Champion, Esq., 

Company Counsel 

Sky Link Aviation, Inc. 

45005 Aviation Drive, Suite 132 

Dulles, Virginia _2, 66-7534 

Tel: (703) 3 ~84.9( 0 

Fax: (703) -4018 

Email: · on@skylinkaviation.com
# C_2015397EN.01000101.xml

| 28.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 397/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.11.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 397/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7821 — Ardian France/Solina)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2015/C 397/01)

On 24 November 2015, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website 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 (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32015M7821. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32015M7821. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---

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

1

---
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN THE INTEREST OF I.K. AND E.K.,

CHILDREN

,

Appellant, **§**

**§**

**§**

**§**

**§**

**§**

**§** No. 08

- 2 2

- 00 0 55

- CV

Appeal from the

3 83 rd District C ourt

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC# 2019DCM7783 )

O R D E R

The notice of appeal was filed April 1, 2022

. On April 14, 2022, we initially abated the

appeal for the trial court to hold a hearing regarding notice of the judgment. The appeal was

reinstated on June 20, 2022.

On June 22, 2022, the Appellant notified the Court his trial counsel no longer represent ed

him. Appellant’s current counsel made her first appearance on July 18, 2022. The reporter’s record

was filed on September 1, 2022. On September 20, 2022, Appellant’s counsel filed her first motion

for extension based on the fact the record was incomplet e and required supplementation. The Court

granted th at extension. On October 18, 2022, Appellant’s counsel requested a second extension

due to the record still not being complete. The Court granted the second motion. On November

28, 2022, Appellant’s coun sel requested an order of abatement until the supplemental record wasfiled. That motion for abatement was granted. On December 19, 2022, the case was reinstated,

giving Appellant until January 2, 2022 to file the brief.

Appellant’s counsel has filed her t hird motion for extension requesting she be given until

February 1, 2023 to submit the brief. The Court will grant a seven

- day extension to

January 9, 2023 . NO FURTHER EXTENSIONS OF TIME TO FILE THE BRIEF WILL BE

CONSIDERED BY THE COURT.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 21st day of December , 20 2 2

.

PER CURIAM

Before Rodriguez , C.J., Palafox and Alley , JJ.
## IN THE COURT O F CRIMINA L A PPEA LS OF TEXAS NO. WR-82,334-01
EX P ARTE AP OLINAR MARQUEZCAMP OSANO, App licant
ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. 08-05-04380-C R IN THE 284TH DISTRICT COURT

F ROM MONTG OMERY COUNTY
Per curiam . O P I N I O N Pursuant to the provisions of Ar t i cl e 1 1
. 07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedur e, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant enter ed an open plea of guilty to
mu rd er , an d was sentenc ed to thirty year s’ imprisonment. The trial court cer tified that he had reta ined the right to appeal matter s relate d to sentencing
. Appl icant contends that his appointed appellate counsel rende red ineffe ctive assistance beca use he failed to timely file a notice of appea l. Appellate counsel has filed an aff idavit in which he states that he did not timely file the n otice of appea l, although he does not rec all why not.2

Appellate counsel also states that Applicant never wave red in his desire to pursue an appea l in this
case . The trial court has deter mined that appellate counsel failed to timely file a notice of appea l. We find that Applicant is entitled to the opportunity to file an out-of-time appea l of matters related to sentenc ing in Cause No. 08-05-04380- CR from the 284th District Court of Montgome ry County
. Applicant is order ed returne d to that time at which he may g ive a written notice of appea l so that he may then, with the aid of c ounsel, obtain a mea ningf ul appea l. Wi thin ten day s of the is suance of this opinion, the trial court shall deter mine whether Applicant is indig ent. I f Applica nt is indig ent and wi s h es to be repr esente d by counsel, the trial court shall immediately appoint an attorney to repr esent Applicant on direc t appea l. All time limit s shall be calc ulated as if the sentenc e had been imposed on the date o n which the mandate of this Court issues. We hold that, should Applicant desire to prosec ute an appea l, he must take aff irmative steps to file a written notice of appea l in the trial court within 30 day s after the mandate of this Court issues. Copies of this opinion s h all be sent to the Texas Depa rtment of Criminal J ustice-Corr ectional Institut ions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.

Deliver ed: Novembe r 19, 2014 Do not publish
**EXHIBIT32.2**

**CertificationPursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United StatesCode)**

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002 (Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, UnitedStates Code), I, Michael G. Long, Chief Financial Officer of EdgePetroleum Corporation, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), herebycertify, to my knowledge, that:

(1)                                  theCompany’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31,2006 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)                                  theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| Dated:    March 12, 2007 |   | /s/ Michael G.  Long |                                   |
|----------------------------------------------|--------|----------------------|----------------------------------------|
|                                         |   | Name:                | Michael G. Long                        |
|                                         |   |                 | Chief Financial and Accounting Officer |
|                                         |   |                 |
|                                              |        |                      |                                        |  |

 

----
# C_2016103EN.01000101.xml

| 18.3.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 103/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.3.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 103/1

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

17 March 2016

(2016/C 103/01)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1311 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 126,28 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4553 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,78218 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,2935 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0959 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,4768 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,044 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 310,05 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,2895 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,4776 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 3,2366 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4828 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4701 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,7744 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6555 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5314 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 312,85 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 17,4138 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,3317 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5353 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 14 749,54 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,5917 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 52,385 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 77,3560 |
| THB | Thai baht | 39,351 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,1438 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 19,8183 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 75,3790 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1311

JPY

Japanese yen

126,28

DKK

Danish krone

7,4553

GBP

Pound sterling

0,78218

SEK

Swedish krona

9,2935

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0959

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,4768

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,044

HUF

Hungarian forint

310,05

PLN

Polish zloty

4,2895

RON

Romanian leu

4,4776

TRY

Turkish lira

3,2366

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4828

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4701

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,7744

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6555

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5314

KRW

South Korean won

1 312,85

ZAR

South African rand

17,4138

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,3317

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5353

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

14 749,54

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,5917

PHP

Philippine peso

52,385

RUB

Russian rouble

77,3560

THB

Thai baht

39,351

BRL

Brazilian real

4,1438

MXN

Mexican peso

19,8183

INR

Indian rupee

75,3790

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-2062

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JAMES CHAPPELL DEW, a/k/a J. Chappell Dew, Jr., a/k/a James 

Chappell Dew, Jr., a/k/a James C. Dew, Jr.,

Defendant – Appellant,

and

VERONICA W. DEW; SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,

Defendants.

No. 15-2063

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

VERONICA W. DEW,

Defendant – Appellant,

and
2

JAMES CHAPPELL DEW, a/k/a J. Chappell Dew, Jr., a/k/a James 

Chappell Dew, Jr., a/k/a James C. Dew, Jr.; SOUTH CAROLINA 

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,

Defendants.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the District 

of South Carolina, at Florence. Terry L. Wooten, Chief District 

Judge. (4:14-cv-00166-TLW)

Submitted: October 25, 2016 Decided: November 10, 2016

Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, 

Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James Chappell Dew, Veronica W. Dew, Appellants Pro Se. Julie 

Ciamporcero Avetta, Thomas J. Clark, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF 

JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., John Douglas Barnett, OFFICE OF THE 

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

James and Veronica Dew (Appellants) appeal the district 

court’s order and judgment granting the United States’ motion 

for summary judgment in the United States’ action seeking to 

reduce to judgment Appellants’ federal income tax liabilities, 

and to foreclose the federal tax liens securing those 

liabilities on Appellants’ jointly owned real property. We have 

reviewed the record and have considered the parties’ arguments 

and discern no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant James 

Dew’s application to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm the 

district court’s amended judgment. United States v. Dew, No. 

4:14-cv-00166-TLW (D.S.C. May 19, 2016). We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Please submit the attached FAA Rejection Letter to FAA-2015-3071.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

 FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

DAVID JAMES BARROR,

Appellant,

v. Case No. 5D15-4467

DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES,

Appellee.

________________________________/

Opinion filed December 2, 2016

Administrative Appeal from the 

Department of Financial Services.

Howard J. Hochman, of Law Offices of 

Howard J. Hochman, Miami, for Appellant.

Annie H. Duong and Gregory D. Venz, of 

Department of Financial Services, 

Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

David James Barror (“Barror”) appeals the final administrative order entered by the 

Department of Financial Services revoking his general insurance license. Barror has 

been licensed as a general lines insurance agent since August 5, 2008. One of the issues 

Barror raises centers on his contention that reversal is required because there are 

disputed issues of material fact entitling him to a hearing under section 120.57(1), Florida 

Statutes (2015). Based on the unique facts and circumstances of this particular case, we 
2

agree. We, therefore, reverse the order under review and remand this case for a hearing 

under section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes (2015). As to all other issues Barror raises, we 

affirm without further discussion.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED.

SAWAYA and EDWARDS, JJ., and BLACKWELL, A.L., Associate Judge, concur.
REF ID:A65539 

THE PRICE OF SECURIT!' 

"ETERNAL VIGILANCE IS THE PRICE 0"8 SECURITY. VIGILANCE 

ON TBE PART OF THOSE WHO ORmIN.ATE DISPATCH!B IN SEEING T.EIA.T 

ALL UNNECESSARY TRAFFIC IS OMITTED, VIGILANCE ON THE PABT OF 

iB:osE WHO DRAFT DISPATCHES m SEEING '!BAT THE PHRASEOLOGY IS 

NOT OF THE OBVIOUS .A.ND STEREO'l'!PED V.ARIIC'l'Y, VIGILANCE ON THE 

PART -OF THOSE WHO ENCIPHER THE MESSAGES Df ORDER THAT POOR OB 

CABELF.SS ENCIPHERING KAY NOT END.ANGER THE SYSTElll, VIGILANCE 

ON THE P.ABT OF THOSE Rl!SPONSIBLE FOB ITS AC'lU.AL 'l'J.U.NSMISSION 

TO SEE THAT NO ERROBS .ARE MADE WHICH DISCLOSE VALUABLE INFORMATION I .AND. FINALLY I vmILA.NCE ON TBE PART OF THOSE WHO u 

RECEIVE A.ND BANDLE DISPATCHBB TO KEEP THEIR CONTENTS SECRET. 

ONLY BY THE EXERCISE OF SUCH VIGILANCE CAN RADIO BE .A VALUABLE 

ASSET TO THE HIGH CO:r.BfllD INSTEAD OF .A SOURCE OF POTENTIAL 

DANGER AND PEHPETU.AL WORRY." 

Critique, u.s. Fleet Problem XI. 

-1-

JA'pproved for Release by NSA on 04-28-2014 pursuant to E.O. 1352§
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________ No. 1D 22

- 1233

_____________________________ J EFFREY B EDWELL , Petitioner ,

v.
M IKE W ILLIAMS , as Sheriff o f Jacksonville , Respondent

.

_____________________________

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

— Original Jurisdiction

.

September 23, 2022

P ER C URIAM

. D ENIED

. R AY , M AKAR , and N ORDBY , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 John Merrett, Jacksonville , for Petitioner

. No appearance for Respondent

.
Exhibit 10.2


 





ADDENDUM TO DIRECTOR SERVICES AGREEMENT


 





In accordance with the terms
of your Director Services Agreement dated December 31, 2020 and subject to Item 25. Changes to terms, Paragraph 25.2 subparagraph 25.2.1
we are providing you an update to Item 2. Duration of employment paragraph 2.1.





 


Item 2. Duration of employment paragraph
2.1. shall be changed to read “Your term as a Director started on May 1, 2021 and will continue for a period of 60 months when it
will be reviewed further, unless and until it is ended under clause 21.”


 





This change is being made to assist
the audit process for the S-1 Registration Statement. Your signature below will acknowledge the acceptance of this change.


 





Thank you for your attention to this minor change.


 


	/s/ JOHN TRAINOR	 
	 	 
	Signature	 
	 	 
	JOHN TRAINOR	 
	Printed Name	 
	 	 
	Dated this 31st day of May, 2021
Exhibit 21.1
 SUBSIDIARIES OF OPLINK COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
 Jurisdiction ofName of Entity
    
    FormationAccumux Technologies, Inc.
    
    CaliforniaCayman Oplink Communications, Inc.
    
    Cayman IslandsEmit Technology Co., Ltd
    
    TaiwanOCP Asia, Inc.
    
    TaiwanOCP Asia Investment, Inc.
    
    TaiwanOplink Communications (HK) Limited
    
    Hong KongOplink Macau Commercial Services Company Limited
    
    Macau, ChinaOptical Communication Products, Inc.
    
    DelawareShanghai Oplink Communications, Inc.
    
    Shanghai, ChinaTaiwan Oplink Communications, Inc.
    
    TaiwanWuhan Oplink Smart-Command-Network Technology Co.,
Ltd
    
    Wuhan, ChinaZhuhai FTZ Oplink Communications, Inc.
    
    Zhuhai, ChinaZhuhai FTZ Oplink Optical Communications, Inc.
(formerly Zhuhai Oplink Communications, Inc.)
    
    Zhuhai, China
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


The Board of Directors and Stockholders
Turbodyne Technologies, Inc.

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Form S-8 of TURBODYNE TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (File Nos. 333-107995, 333-120986 and
333-122510) of our report dated January 16, 2006, included in this Annual Report
on Form 10-KSB of TURBODYNE TECHNOLOGIES, INC. for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2004. Our report contains an explanatory paragraph regarding the
Company's ability to continue as a going concern.


/s/ Vasquex & Company LLP
--------------------------
Los Angeles, California
July 6, 2006
#### In the Matter of the Estate of Emma Vonhaus, Deceased.

Surrogate’s Court, New York County,

December 20, 1937.

*728
      *Otto Dommasch,*for the executor.

*Oberwager & Oberwager,*for the Evangeline Lutheran Zion Church.

*Nathan J. Stein,*for the petitioners.

Delehanty,' S.

Deceased was approximately eighty years of age and physically infirm. There is some indication that she was also mentally infirm. Her will was drawn by a lawyer whom she had never seen. This lawyer was brought in for the preparation of the will by the sexton of the church which is the sole beneficiary of the estate. The lawyer received his instructions not privately but in the presence of the sexton, the pastor of the same church and a neighbor. All of these remained with deceased while the lawyer left and had the will typed in his office nearby. All three were present when the will was signed. The rule in *Marx*v. *McGlynn*(88 N. Y. 357) seems to be applicable to the transaction.

The proof establishes beyond question that the parties interested in the probate of the will were well aware of the existence of the petitioners and had means of locating them had they chosen to make effort to do so. As to one of the petitioners there is no proof whatever that he knew of the probate proceeding. As to the other petitioner there may be some reason to suppose that he was advised of the probate proceeding. That is surmise, however. At least it is established that the affidavits which are part of the probate file and which purport to show lack of knowledge of relatives did not disclose all that was known on the subject. For the special reasons inherent in this set of facts and for the reasons more broadly stated in the decision in *Matter of Westberg,*simultaneously decided (165 Misc. 728), the decree of probate is vacated. The petitioners are given leave to file objections within ten days after the decree in this proceeding is signed. If an issue is raised by such objections a trial of the issue will proceed in due course.

Submit, on notice, decree accordingly.
# C_2016074EN.01000202.xml

| 26.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 74/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 74/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7939 — HDI Assicurazioni/CBA Vita/Sella Life)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2016/C 74/03)

On 19 February 2016, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in Italian and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website 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 (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32016M7939. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32016M7939. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

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

1

---