alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2015068EN.01000201.xml

| 26.2.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 68/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.2.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 68/2

---

Notice of Open Competitions

(2015/C 68/02)

The European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) is organising the following open competitions:

EPSO/AD/295-300/15

ADMINISTRATORS (AD 5/AD 7)

SPECIALISING IN LEGAL RESEARCH

| | EPSO/AD/295/15 — Lawyers with Bulgarian legal training (BG) |
| --- | --- |

EPSO/AD/295/15 — Lawyers with Bulgarian legal training (BG)

| | EPSO/AD/296/15 — Lawyers with German legal training (DE) |
| --- | --- |

EPSO/AD/296/15 — Lawyers with German legal training (DE)

| | EPSO/AD/297/15 — Lawyers with Croatian legal training (HR) |
| --- | --- |

EPSO/AD/297/15 — Lawyers with Croatian legal training (HR)

| | EPSO/AD/298/15 — Lawyers with Irish legal training (IE) |
| --- | --- |

EPSO/AD/298/15 — Lawyers with Irish legal training (IE)

| | EPSO/AD/299/15 — Lawyers with Lithuanian legal training (LT) |
| --- | --- |

EPSO/AD/299/15 — Lawyers with Lithuanian legal training (LT)

| | EPSO/AD/300/15 — Lawyers with Slovak legal training (SK) |
| --- | --- |

EPSO/AD/300/15 — Lawyers with Slovak legal training (SK)

The competition notice is published in 24 languages in Official Journal C 68 A of 26 February 2015.

C 68 A of 26 February 2015.

For more information, please go to the EPSO website: http://blogs.ec.europa.eu/eu-careers.info/

---
EXHIBIT
      32.1





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-QSB for the period ending March
      31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission by LaserLock
      Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”) on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Normal
      A. Gardner, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officers of the Company,
      certify, pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
      the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





1.  The
      Report fully complied 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 operation of the Company.





May
      15,
      2007





/s/
      Norman Gardner





Norman
      A.
      Gardner


Chief
      Executive Officer


Chief
      Financial Officer





This
      certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 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
      Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company
      and furnished to the Securities Exchange Commission or its staff upon
      request.





Explanatory
      Note: The same individual serves as chief executive (principal) officer and
      principal financial officer. Accordingly, there are no other individuals who
      are
“other certifying officers” referred to in this certification.
```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 194 (Tuesday, October 7, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 60568]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-23926]

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 8905]

In the Matter of the Designation of Muhannad al-Najdi, Also Known 
as `Ali Manahi `Ali al-Mahaydali al-`Utaybi, Also Known as Ghassan al-
Tajiki as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist Pursuant to Section 
1(b) of Executive Order 13224, as Amended

    Acting under the authority of and in accordance with section 1(b) 
of Executive Order 13224 of September 23, 2001, as amended by Executive 
Order 13268 of July 2, 2002, and Executive Order 13284 of January 23, 
2003, I hereby determine that the individual known as Muhannad al-
Najdi, also known as `Ali Manahi `Ali al-Mahaydali al-`Utaybi, also 
known as Ghassan al-Tajiki, committed, or poses a significant risk of 
committing, acts of terrorism that threaten the security of U.S. 
nationals or the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the 
United States.
    Consistent with the determination in section 10 of Executive Order 
13224 that ``prior notice to persons determined to be subject to the 
Order who might have a constitutional presence in the United States 
would render ineffectual the blocking and other measures authorized in 
the Order because of the ability to transfer funds instantaneously,'' I 
determine that no prior notice needs to be provided to any person 
subject to this determination who might have a constitutional presence 
in the United States, because to do so would render ineffectual the 
measures authorized in the Order.
    This notice shall be published in the Federal Register.

    Dated: September 23, 2014.
John F. Kerry,
Secretary of State.
[FR Doc. 2014-23926 Filed 10-6-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-10-P
```
# C_2014219EN.01000302.xml

| 11.7.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 219/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.7.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 219/3

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7254 — LetterOne/RWE Dea)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2014/C 219/06

On 3 July 2014, 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 the 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 32014M7254. 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 32014M7254. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

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

1

---
#### Butts vs. Fenelon.

*Practice in Supreme Qoiwt.*

This cause not having "been submitted for the defendant in error, and no counsel appearing for him when it was reached in its order, the court declines to hear argument for the plaintiff in error, or to consider the merits at the request of his counsel, but reverses the judgment below as of course, under Rule 6 of July 2,1875.

ERROR to the Circuit Court for *Dodge*County.

The writ of error in this case was taken to review a judgment of the circuit court affirming an order of a court commissioner, upon a writ of *habeas*corpus, directing the discharge of *Margaret Fenelon*from imprisonment.

*BU*Hooker, for plaintiff in error.

Per Curiam.

When this cause was reached in its order, counsel appeared to argue it for the plaintiff in error; but no one appeared, and no brief had been submitted, for the defendant in error. The plaintiff in error is therefore entitled, under the rule, to judgment of reversal. But his counsel insisted on *665being beard, and that the court should pass judgment on the merits. This the court declines to do. It is dangerous to pass upon grave questions, such as are presumably involved in eases brought here, upon *ex parte*argument; and the court is unwilling to do so when it can be avoided. Hence the present rule. And when either party fails to argue or submit a case, according to the rule, the court will not hear the other side on the merits, but will reverse or affirm under the rule, without argument. The prevailing party gets all that he has a right to ask, and the court is saved the risks of *ex parte*judgments.

The judgment of the court below is reversed under the rule.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM JCC HOLDING
COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARIES CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT
OF OPERATIONS AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1999
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.

</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          34,687
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,405
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (228)
<INVENTORY>                                        354
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                45,809
<PP&E>                                         360,052
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (4,179)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 506,402
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           50,424
<BONDS>                                        368,222
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           101
<OTHER-SE>                                      45,453
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   506,402
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                41,156
<CGS>                                           39,088
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   95,401
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,869
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (59,140)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (59,140)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (59,140)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (5.88)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (5.88)


</TABLE>
#### COE *vs.*STRAUS et al.

ERROR TO circuit COURT, OZAUKEE C0UNTV.

Heard January 14.]

[Decided May 4, *1860.*

*J11 tachment*— Frivolousness—Pleadings.

A complaint for a breach of an undertaking given in an attachment suit to obtain possession of the goods attached, which sets out the undertaking in *lime verba,*and avers that judgment was recovered against the defendant in the attachment suit, and execution returned unsatisfied, *&<s.f*will be held good upon general demurrer.

An undertaking given by the defendant in an attachment suit, to obtain possession of the goods attached, may be declared on as *“*an instrument for the payment of money only." And in such a suit, after the demurrer has been declared frivolous, the plaintiff may assess damages and enter judgment without notice to the defendant.

The facts in this case will sufficiently appear by the opinion of the court.

*G. W. Foster,*for the plaintiff in error.

*H. Cummings, and S. Crawford,*for the defendants in error.

*73*By the Court,*

Cole, J.

We think the complaint in this case unquestionably sets forth a good cause of action. It is objected that the complaint is defective because it does not contain an averment that a warrant of attachment was issued in the suit mentioned in the complaint, as having theretofore been instituted against Rcedel and Morgan; or aver that proceedings were had to obtain one; The suit is upon an undertaking given by Rinde!, Coe and Decoudres. And as matter of inducement the complaint states, *“*that on or about the thirtieth day of December, 1857, an action was commenced in the circuit court of said county by this plaintiff against Chas. F. Roedel and L. C. Morgan, and their property attached to satisfy the demand of the plaintiff amounting,” &c.

The complaint then further states that Coe and Decoudres became bail for the defendants in that action, and entered into an undertaking which is set forth in *heec verba*in the complaint; that upon the execution of the undertaking the property attached was returned to the defendants Roedel and Morgan; that judgment was afterwards obtained ■ against the defendants; an execution issued thereon which was returned unsatisfied, whereby Coe and Decoudres became indebted to to pay the judgment recovered.

This is the substance of the complaint, and we think it unobjectionable in form or substance, or at all events, that it is good upon general demurrer. The court therefore very properly overruled the demurrer taken to it.

It is further objected, that the undertaking was not *“*an instrument for the payment of money only,” but we think otherwise. It is also insisted, that when the demurrer was struck off the files for frivolousness, the plaintiffs in error were only in default and should have had leave to answer or have had notice of the assessment of damages. As the action was one arising on an instrument for the payment of money only, and the complaint was sworn to, and personal service of the *74summons and complaint having been had, the defendant in error brought his case within the provisions of sec. 27, chap, 132, R. S.

The judgment must be affirmed.
# STATEOFLOUISIANA

COURTOFAPPEAL,FIRSTCIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 

### 2023 KW 0665 VERSUS 

### WILLIE MACK CAULEY, JR. 

### SEPTEMBER 25, 2023

In Re: Willie Mack 

### Cauley, Jr., applying for 

### supervisory writs, 22nd Judicial District Court, Parish of St. 

## Tammany, No. 

### 593185. BEFORE: GUIDRY, C. J., 

### CHUTZ AND LANIER, JJ.



### WRIT DENIED. 

### Relator does not seek review of a 

## ruling by the lower court or request mandamus relief for the court' s 

### failure to act. Thus, 

## this writ presents nothing forthis court to review. JMG WRC WIL
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-1998
<CASH>                                      10,763,795
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                6,328,056
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,566,705
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            22,372,739
<PP&E>                                      13,731,191
<DEPRECIATION>                               6,923,854
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              33,558,925
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        8,134,354
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       268,074
<OTHER-SE>                                  23,676,354
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                33,558,925
<SALES>                                     37,072,095
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            42,622,632
<CGS>                                        5,367,240
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               11,054,203
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            49,390,254
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             141,686
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (17,694,632)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 2,034,152
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (19,728,784)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (19,728,784)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  ($0.76)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  ($0.76)
        

</TABLE>
* Pursuant to 5 TH 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 June 14, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-60624 Summary Calendar
MAURICIO ALBERTO MELENDEZ-PARADA, Petitioner,

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

Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

(A97 831 423) Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Mauricio Alberto Melendez-Parada, a citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming, without a written opinion, the decision of the Immigration Judge (IJ) denying his application for asylum and withholding of removal. Although we ordinarily have authority to review only the BIA’s decision, we review the IJ’s decision where,
as here, the BIA affirms the IJ’s decision without an opinion. E.g. , Mikhael v. INS , 115 F.3d 299, 302 (5th Cir. 1997).2

Melendez-Parada concedes the IJ correctly found his past
mistreatment by the MS gang in El Salvador did not rise to the level of persecution. He contends the IJ erred, however, by failing to consider the probability of, and possible motivations for, future persecution
. Melendez-Parada does not meet his burden of showing, or even allege, fear of persecution based on his race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion, as is required to obtain asylum. See Majd v. Gonzales , 446 F.3d 590, 595 (5th Cir. 2006). Rather, he seeks relief based
on his past encounters with a criminal gang and his fear of future such encounters. The record indicates Melendez-Parada’s fear of persecution is based solely on gang violence in his college town in El Salvador. “[A]n applicant’s fear of persecution cannot be based solely on general violence and civil disorder.” Id. (quoting Eduard v. Ashcroft , 379 F.3d 182, 188 (5th Cir. 2004)) (alteration in original). Moreover, because the standard of proof required to establish eligibility for withholding of removal is higher than that required for asylum, “failure to establish eligibility for asylum is dispositive of claims for withholding of removal”. Id. PETITION DENIED
# C_2015437EN.01000301.xml

| 29.12.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 437/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.12.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 437/3

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

24 December 2015

(2015/C 437/04)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,0947 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 131,83 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4628 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,73420 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,1900 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0806 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,5120 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,028 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 315,91 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,2412 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,5285 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 3,1990 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5074 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5183 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,4849 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6052 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5396 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 279,40 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 16,6252 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,0880 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,6425 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 14 922,54 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,6943 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 51,504 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 76,9500 |
| THB | Thai baht | 39,442 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,3142 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 18,9109 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 72,4801 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,0947

JPY

Japanese yen

131,83

DKK

Danish krone

7,4628

GBP

Pound sterling

0,73420

SEK

Swedish krona

9,1900

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0806

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,5120

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,028

HUF

Hungarian forint

315,91

PLN

Polish zloty

4,2412

RON

Romanian leu

4,5285

TRY

Turkish lira

3,1990

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5074

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5183

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,4849

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6052

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5396

KRW

South Korean won

1 279,40

ZAR

South African rand

16,6252

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,0880

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,6425

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

14 922,54

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,6943

PHP

Philippine peso

51,504

RUB

Russian rouble

76,9500

THB

Thai baht

39,442

BRL

Brazilian real

4,3142

MXN

Mexican peso

18,9109

INR

Indian rupee

72,4801

---

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

1

Source

---
# C_2015297EN.01000201.xml

| 9.9.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 297/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.9.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 297/2

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

8 September 2015

(2015/C 297/02)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1162 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 133,82 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4615 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,72440 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,4188 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0920 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,2245 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,047 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 314,22 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,2268 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,4263 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 3,3633 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5976 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4757 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,6514 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7747 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5847 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 334,07 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 15,4210 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,1075 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5605 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 934,91 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,8435 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 52,335 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 76,0808 |
| THB | Thai baht | 40,285 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,2346 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 18,8117 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 74,2300 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1162

JPY

Japanese yen

133,82

DKK

Danish krone

7,4615

GBP

Pound sterling

0,72440

SEK

Swedish krona

9,4188

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0920

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,2245

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,047

HUF

Hungarian forint

314,22

PLN

Polish zloty

4,2268

RON

Romanian leu

4,4263

TRY

Turkish lira

3,3633

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5976

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4757

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,6514

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7747

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5847

KRW

South Korean won

1 334,07

ZAR

South African rand

15,4210

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,1075

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5605

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 934,91

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,8435

PHP

Philippine peso

52,335

RUB

Russian rouble

76,0808

THB

Thai baht

40,285

BRL

Brazilian real

4,2346

MXN

Mexican peso

18,8117

INR

Indian rupee

74,2300

---

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

1

Source

---