alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 November 30, 2016

p1121

Order 

Clerk

November 30, 2016

152231(19)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 152231

COA: 326074

Bay CC: 98-001264-FH 

RICHARD CONRAD WITBRODT, 98-001265-FH

Defendant-Appellant. 

____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s July 26, 2016 

order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was 

entered erroneously.
Summary of EPA Meeting with the National Mining Association (NMA)

June 14, 2012

On June 14, 2012, representatives from EPA’s Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery (ORCR)

met with representatives of NMA regarding NMA’s comments on the Definition of Solid Waste 

rulemaking. 

Attendees:

Tracy Atagi, EPA/ORCR

Amanda Kohler, EPA/ORCR

Ross Elliott, EPA/ORCR

Richard Huggins, EPA/ORCR

Kathy Lett, EPA/ORCR

MaryBeth Sheridan, EPA/ORCR

Marilyn Goode, EPA/ORCR

Tawny Bridgeford, NMA

Michael Giannetto, Goodwin Procter

John Mudge, Newmont Mining
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l unani m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T T HE L MA J UD I T H R E VO L OR I OOV ALLE , P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 10- 72765 A ge nc yN o. A 072- 439- 395 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

an O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d D e c e m be r19, 2012 ** B efo re: G O O D W IN , W A L L A C E , an dF IS H E R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. T he l m aJudi th R e vol or i o- O va l l e , ana t i ve and c i t i z e n of G ua t e m a l a , pe t i t i ons f orr e vi e w of

the B oar d of

I m m i gr a t i on A ppe a l s ’ or de rdi s m i s s i ng he rappe a l f r om an i m m i gr a t i on j udge ’ s de c i s i on de ny i ng he rappl i c a t i on f ora s y l um and 

# FI LED

DE C 28 2012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2 10- 72765

w i thh ol di ng of re m ov al . W e have j uri sdi ct i on un der 8 U . S . C . § 1 25 2. W e r evi ew f o rs ub s tan tia l e v id e n c e th e a g e n c y 's f a c tu a l f in d in g s , W

akkaryv. H

older , 558 F . 3d 1 0 4 9 , 1 0 5 6 ( 9 th C i r . 2 0 0 9 ) , an dd e n yth e p e t i t i o n f o rr e v i e w. R e vol or i o- O va l l e f

e ar s harm f

r om the pe opl e w ho ki l l e d he rhus band, but s h e te s tif ie dth a t s h e d o e s n o t k n o w w h o k ille dh im , an ds h e d idn o t te s tif ya s to w hy he w as ki l l ed. W e r ej ec tR evol ori o-O val l e’ s c on t ent i on thatshe e st abl i shed p a s t p e r s e c u tio n in lig h t o f o u rp r io rd e c is io n . See R ev olori o-O val le v . G on zales , N o. 06 -709 90 , 20 07 W L 16 49 93 4 (9th C i r. June 6, 20 07 ). S ub st ant i alevi dence s upport s the a ge nc y ’ s f

i ndi ng tha tR e vol or i o- O va l l e f a i l e d t o e s t abl i s h a w e ll- f o u n d e df e aro f f u tu r e p e r s e c u tio n o n a c c o u n t o f ap r o te c te dg r o u n d . See O c h a v e v . I

NS , 254 F . 3d 859, 865- 66 ( 9th C i r . 2001) ( a s y l um ge ne r a l l yi s not avai l abl e t o v i ct i m s of c i vi l stri fe , un l es s they are si ng l ed ou ton ac coun tof a p ro t ect edg ro u n d ). A cco rd i n g l y, R ev o l o ri o -O v al l e’ s asyl u m cl ai m fai l s. B e c aus e R e vol or i o- O va l l e f a i l e d t o m e e tthe l ow e rbur de n of pr oof f or asyl u m , h er cl ai m fo r w i th h o l d i n g o f rem o v al n ecessaril y fai l s. See Zehat ye v. G on zales , 4 5 3 F .3 d1 1 8 2 , 1 1 9 0 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 6 ) . P E T I T I ON F OR RE V I E W DE NI E D.
# C_2015233EN.01000202.xml

| 17.7.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 233/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.7.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 233/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7643 — CNRC/Pirelli)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2015/C 233/04)

On 1 July 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 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 32015M7643. 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 32015M7643. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

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

1

---
1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 44263

STATE OF IDAHO,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

BRANDON LEE STERLING,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

2016 Unpublished Opinion No. 790

Filed: November 28, 2016

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED

OPINION AND SHALL NOT

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Ada

County. Hon. Jason D. Scott, District Judge. 

Order denying Idaho Criminal Rule 35 motion, affirmed.

Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Elizabeth A. Allred, 

Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. 

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney 

General, Boise, for respondent. 

________________________________________________

Before MELANSON, Chief Judge; GRATTON, Judge;

and HUSKEY, Judge

________________________________________________

PER CURIAM

Brandon Lee Sterling pleaded guilty to possession of a controlled substance with the 

intent to deliver, felony, Idaho Code § 37-2732(a). The district court imposed a unified thirteenyear sentence, with three years determinate. Sterling timely appealed. This court affirmed the 

sentence in an unpublished opinion. State v. Sterling, Docket No. 43935 (Ct. App. June 29, 

2016). Sterling filed an Idaho Criminal Rule 35 motion, which the district court denied. Sterling

appeals.

A motion for reduction of sentence under I.C.R. 35 is essentially a plea for leniency, 

addressed to the sound discretion of the court. State v. Knighton, 143 Idaho 318, 319, 144 P.3d 

23, 24 (2006); State v. Allbee, 115 Idaho 845, 846, 771 P.2d 66, 67 (Ct. App. 1989). In 
2

presenting an I.C.R. 35 motion, the defendant must show that the sentence is excessive in light of 

new or additional information subsequently provided to the district court in support of the 

motion. State v. Huffman, 144 Idaho 201, 203, 159 P.3d 838, 840 (2007). An appeal from the 

denial of an I.C.R. 35 motion cannot be used as a vehicle to review the underlying sentence 

absent the presentation of new information. Id. Because no new or additional information in 

support of Sterling’s I.C.R. 35 motion was presented, the district court did not abuse its 

discretion. For the foregoing reasons, the district court’s order denying Sterling’s I.C.R. 35 

motion is affirmed.
**EXHIBIT
      32 .1**





**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U.S.C. 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


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





I,
      Steven
      Walin, Chief Executive Officer of GVI Security Solutions, Inc. (the "Company"),
      hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 adopted pursuant to Section 906
      of
      the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:





(i)
      The
      Company's accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2005
      fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





(ii)
      The
      information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


Date: March
                  30,2006
                By:
                /s/ Steven
                  WalinSteven Walin,
                  Chief
                    Executive
                    Officer
---

---

EXHIBIT 13.2

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 Annual Report of Top Image Systems Ltd. (the Company) on
Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Arie Rand, Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant
to § 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; and

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

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

Date: March 27, 2006

| |  | /s/ Arie Rand
Name: Arie RandTitle: Chief Financial Officer
| |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------



---

---
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1173 

CA 14-01183 

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, CARNI, WHALEN, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ. 

 

COUNTY OF LIVINGSTON, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

RONALD E. CHABOT AND BETHANY J. RAGUE, 

DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS. 

 

PHETERSON SPATORICO LLP, ROCHESTER (DERRICK A. SPATORICO OF COUNSEL),

FOR DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS. 

PHILLIPS LYTLE LLP, ROCHESTER (MARK J. MORETTI OF COUNSEL), FOR

PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from a judgment (denominated order) of the Supreme Court,

Livingston County (Dennis S. Cohen, A.J.), entered June 5, 2014. The

judgment, among other things, granted plaintiff’s motion for summary

judgment. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Defendants appeal from a judgment declaring that

plaintiff is the owner in fee of a parcel of real property that was

subject to an in rem foreclosure proceeding on delinquent tax liens

pursuant to RPAPL article 11 and dismissing the counterclaims. 

Defendants contend that plaintiff failed to comply with the notice

provisions of RPAPL 231 (2) (a) with respect to the public auction of

the property, which they contend constitutes a jurisdictional defect

in the in rem foreclosure proceeding. Although defendants raised that

issue as a counterclaim, defendants failed to oppose the motion for

summary judgment on that ground and thus that contention is not

properly before us (see Ciesinski v Town of Aurora, 282 AD2d 984,

985). Furthermore, defendants failed to move to open the default

judgment within one month as required by RPTL 1131. In any event,

defendants’ contention is without merit. Where, as here, a tax

district becomes vested with title to real property by virtue of a

foreclosure proceeding (see RPTL 1136 [3]), it is authorized to sell

or convey the real property “with or without advertising for bids,

notwithstanding the provisions of any general, special or local law”

(RPTL 1166 [1]). Contrary to defendants’ contention, our decision in

Matter of Foreclosure of Tax Liens [ExxonMobil Oil Corp.—Hughes] (41

AD3d 1243, 1243-1244) does not compel a different result. In that

case, respondent City of Buffalo had not been vested with title to the 
-2- 1173 

CA 14-01183 

property pursuant to RPTL 1136 (3).

Entered: November 13, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
EX-10.16





 Exhibit 10.16 

 
 



 
 September 26, 2014 

Mehrzad Khakpour 
 25092 Northrup Drive 

Laguna Hills, CA 92653 
 Dear Mehrzad: 

On behalf of Sonendo, Inc., I am pleased to offer you the position of Senior Director of Research, Technology & Innovation, effective
September 26, 2014 (the “Effective Date”). In your new capacity in the company, you will continue reporting to me. 
 Your base salary for
this full-time exempt position will be $190,000 per annum, paid semi-monthly. You will be eligible to participate in the Company’s bonus program, which may be amended from time to time, with a target incentive of 15% of your annual base salary.
Your actual incentive bonus payout will depend on the achievement of pre-determined objectives and, to the extent applicable, the Compensation Committee’s assessment of your individual performance. To be
eligible for the incentive bonus, you must remain employed and in good standing with the Company through the date that the incentive bonus is paid. The incentive bonus will be paid annually, typically within two months after the fiscal year for
which they are earned. 
 If you wish to accept the offer, please sign in the place provided below and return it to me within seven days from the date of
this letter. 
 This new position does not change the at will nature of our relationship. Our relationship is, and will always be, one of voluntary
employment at will. At will means that either the employee or the Company can terminate the employment relationship at any time with or without cause or reason. 

On behalf of the Sonendo team, I’d like to congratulate you and wish you success in your new position. 

 

	
	Very truly yours,
	
	/s/ Bjarne Bergheim
	Bjarne Bergheim
	President & Chief Executive Officer


  

	
	AGREED AND ACCEPTED this
	
	26 day of September, 2014
	
	 /s/ Mehrzad Khakpour

	Mehrzad Khakpour
	Date updated: 27-Feb-2014

  
 26061 Merit Circle, Suite 102 

Laguna Hills, California 92653 
 Ph:
949.SONENDO 
 Fax: 949.305.5201
ROBERT GLEN HILL II,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-3738

_____________________________/

Opinion filed November 3, 2016.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Angela Cox, Judge.

Robert Glen Hill II, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

LEWIS, ROWE, and KELSEY, JJ., CONCUR.
# C_2016074EN.01000201.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.7931 — Pai Partners/B&B Hotels)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2016/C 74/02)

On 22 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 English 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 32016M7931. 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 32016M7931. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

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

1

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

DANTE JACKSON,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 165 EM 2016

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 30th day of November, 2016, the Application for Extraordinary 

Relief under King’s Bench Powers is DENIED.
**EXHIBIT 32**

 

**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 of Accessory Specialists Incorporated (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Anthony N. DeMint, President and Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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; 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/ Anthony N. DeMint                                    

Anthony N. DeMint

President and Chief Accounting Officer

January 26, 2007
# C_2015405EN.01000501.xml

| 5.12.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 405/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.12.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 405/5

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

4 December 2015

(2015/C 405/05)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,0902 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 134,08 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4603 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,72010 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,2724 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0882 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,2495 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,035 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 313,10 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,3131 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,4711 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 3,1747 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4899 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4540 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,4492 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6319 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5216 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 268,29 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 15,7275 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 6,9802 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,6360 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 094,88 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,6052 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 51,327 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 73,6109 |
| THB | Thai baht | 39,081 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,1180 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 18,2499 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 72,8020 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,0902

JPY

Japanese yen

134,08

DKK

Danish krone

7,4603

GBP

Pound sterling

0,72010

SEK

Swedish krona

9,2724

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0882

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,2495

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,035

HUF

Hungarian forint

313,10

PLN

Polish zloty

4,3131

RON

Romanian leu

4,4711

TRY

Turkish lira

3,1747

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4899

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4540

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,4492

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6319

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5216

KRW

South Korean won

1 268,29

ZAR

South African rand

15,7275

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

6,9802

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,6360

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 094,88

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,6052

PHP

Philippine peso

51,327

RUB

Russian rouble

73,6109

THB

Thai baht

39,081

BRL

Brazilian real

4,1180

MXN

Mexican peso

18,2499

INR

Indian rupee

72,8020

---

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

1

Source

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN RE: 

REAPPOINTMENTS TO CRIMINAL 

PROCEDURAL RULES COMMITTEE

:

:

:

:

:

NO. 482

CRIMINAL PROCEDURAL RULES DOCKET

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 30th day of November, 2016, John P. Delaney, Jr., Esquire, 

Philadelphia, and Brian W. Perry, Esquire, Dauphin County, are hereby reappointed as

members of the Criminal Procedural Rules Committee for a term of three years

commencing January 1, 2017.
# C_2015425EN.01000701.xml

| 18.12.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 425/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.12.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 425/7

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

17 December 2015

(2015/C 425/05)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,0841 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 132,82 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4612 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,72660 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,3022 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0807 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,5110 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,031 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 315,96 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,2959 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,5048 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 3,1674 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5097 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4995 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,4050 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6078 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5351 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 285,85 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 16,2600 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,0330 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,6530 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 204,89 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,6780 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 51,434 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 76,5023 |
| THB | Thai baht | 39,125 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,2031 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 18,3649 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 71,8400 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,0841

JPY

Japanese yen

132,82

DKK

Danish krone

7,4612

GBP

Pound sterling

0,72660

SEK

Swedish krona

9,3022

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0807

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,5110

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,031

HUF

Hungarian forint

315,96

PLN

Polish zloty

4,2959

RON

Romanian leu

4,5048

TRY

Turkish lira

3,1674

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5097

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4995

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,4050

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6078

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5351

KRW

South Korean won

1 285,85

ZAR

South African rand

16,2600

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,0330

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,6530

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 204,89

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,6780

PHP

Philippine peso

51,434

RUB

Russian rouble

76,5023

THB

Thai baht

39,125

BRL

Brazilian real

4,2031

MXN

Mexican peso

18,3649

INR

Indian rupee

71,8400

---

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

1

Source

---