alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2016008EN.01000101.xml

| 12.1.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 8/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.1.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 8/1

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

11 January 2016

(2016/C 8/01)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,0888 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 128,33 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4603 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,74705 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,2720 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0863 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,6770 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,021 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 317,32 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,3646 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,5305 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 3,2872 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5516 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5336 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,4471 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6577 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5607 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 309,12 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 18,0474 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,1554 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,6455 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 076,42 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,7655 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 51,326 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 81,9975 |
| THB | Thai baht | 39,491 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,3786 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 19,4182 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 72,7413 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,0888

JPY

Japanese yen

128,33

DKK

Danish krone

7,4603

GBP

Pound sterling

0,74705

SEK

Swedish krona

9,2720

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0863

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,6770

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,021

HUF

Hungarian forint

317,32

PLN

Polish zloty

4,3646

RON

Romanian leu

4,5305

TRY

Turkish lira

3,2872

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5516

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5336

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,4471

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6577

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5607

KRW

South Korean won

1 309,12

ZAR

South African rand

18,0474

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,1554

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,6455

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 076,42

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,7655

PHP

Philippine peso

51,326

RUB

Russian rouble

81,9975

THB

Thai baht

39,491

BRL

Brazilian real

4,3786

MXN

Mexican peso

19,4182

INR

Indian rupee

72,7413

---

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

1

Source

---
# C_2016282EN.01000201.xml

| 4.8.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 282/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.8.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 282/2

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

3 August 2016

(2016/C 282/02)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1200 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 113,22 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4387 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,83910 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,5146 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0845 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,4236 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,034 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 311,00 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,3130 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,4550 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 3,3742 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4750 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4672 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,6898 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,5577 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5020 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 251,34 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 15,6581 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,4234 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,4963 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 14 738,64 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,5413 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 52,737 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 74,5458 |
| THB | Thai baht | 39,127 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 3,6606 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 21,1797 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 74,9224 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1200

JPY

Japanese yen

113,22

DKK

Danish krone

7,4387

GBP

Pound sterling

0,83910

SEK

Swedish krona

9,5146

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0845

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,4236

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,034

HUF

Hungarian forint

311,00

PLN

Polish zloty

4,3130

RON

Romanian leu

4,4550

TRY

Turkish lira

3,3742

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4750

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4672

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,6898

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,5577

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5020

KRW

South Korean won

1 251,34

ZAR

South African rand

15,6581

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,4234

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,4963

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

14 738,64

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,5413

PHP

Philippine peso

52,737

RUB

Russian rouble

74,5458

THB

Thai baht

39,127

BRL

Brazilian real

3,6606

MXN

Mexican peso

21,1797

INR

Indian rupee

74,9224

---

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

1

Source

---
# C_2016140EN.01000401.xml

| 21.4.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 140/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.4.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 140/4

---

Special Report No 10/2016

‘Further improvements needed to ensure effective implementation of the excessive deficit procedure’

(2016/C 140/03)

The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report No 10/2016 ‘Further improvements needed to ensure effective implementation of the excessive deficit procedure’ has just been published.

The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors’ website: http://eca.europa.eu or on EU Bookshop: https://bookshop.europa.eu

---
# C_2016254EN.01000101.xml

| 13.7.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 254/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.7.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 254/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8065 — Verizon Communications/Hearst Corporation/Complex Media Holdings)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2016/C 254/01)

On 4 July 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 32016M8065. 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 32016M8065. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

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

1

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1953

In re: YAHYA MUQUIT, a/k/a Yahya Muqit; DAVID DUREN; 

ANTHONY COOK; LAWRENCE CRAWFORD, a/k/a Jonah Gabriel, a/k/a 

Jahjah T. Tishbite,

Petitioners.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (8:14-cv-03555-RBH; 0:16-cv00992-TMC-PJG)

Submitted: November 22, 2016 Decided: November 29, 2016

Before DIAZ and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Yahya Muquit, David Duren, Anthony Cook, Lawrence Crawford, 

Petitioners Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Petitioners seek several forms of mandamus relief, 

including a writ of mandamus against United States District 

Court Judge R. Bryan Harwell. Petitioners have also filed 

motions to supplement their mandamus petition and for ruling of 

law and recusal, as well as applications to proceed in forma 

pauperis.

Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only 

in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Court, 426 

U.S. 394, 402 (1976); United States v. Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 

516-17 (4th Cir. 2003). Further, mandamus relief is available 

only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. 

In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 

1988).

We have reviewed Petitioners’ filings and conclude that 

Petitioners have not established that extraordinary 

circumstances exist warranting mandamus relief. To the extent 

Petitioners challenge the district court’s rulings in their 

respective district court actions, mandamus may not be used as a 

substitute for appeal. In re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 

351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007). And to the extent Petitioners ask 

that Judge Harwell be ordered to recuse himself from their 

respective district court actions, Petitioners have not 
3

established extra-judicial bias. See In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 

826-27 (4th Cir. 1987).

Accordingly, although we grant Petitioners’ applications to 

proceed in forma pauperis and their motion to supplement their 

mandamus petition, we deny the motion for ruling of law and 

recusal, and deny mandamus relief. 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.

PETITION DENIED
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

December 1, 2016

No. 04-16-00660-CV

IN RE Salatiel POLANCO d/b/a D&C Trucking

Original Mandamus Proceeding1

ORDER

Sitting: Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Jason Pulliam, Justice

Relator Salatiel Polanco d/b/a D&C Trucking filed a petition for writ of mandamus on 

October 10, 2016. The court has considered the petition and is of the opinion Relator is not 

entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED. See 

TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a). The court’s opinion will issue at a later date.

It is so ORDERED on December 1, 2016.

_________________________________

Jason Pulliam, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 1st day of December, 2016.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle, Clerk

 

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 14-12-30420-MCV, styled Margarita Trevino, Individually and as 

Representative of the Estate of Melissa Trevino v. Salatiel Polanco d/b/a D & C Trucking, Highway Barricades and 

Services, L.L.C., Anderson Columbia Co., Inc., and Flasher Equipment Co., pending in the 293rd Judicial District 

Court, Maverick County, Texas, the Honorable Cynthia L. Muniz presiding.
# C_2016007EN.01000702.xml

| 11.1.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 7/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.1.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 7/7

---

Designation of the Chamber responsible for cases of the kind referred to in Article 193 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court

(2016/C 007/11)

At its General Meeting on 12 October 2015, the Court designated the Fifth Chamber as the Chamber that is, in accordance with Article 11(2) of the Rules of Procedure, responsible for cases of the kind referred to in Article 193 of those Rules, for the period from 12 October 2015 to 6 October 2016.

---
# C_2016201EN.01000102.xml

| 7.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 201/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 201/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7987 — Towerbrook Capital Partners/Infopro Digital)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2016/C 201/02)

On 13 May 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 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 32016M7987. 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 32016M7987. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

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

1

---
OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE



I, Joseph  Candelario,  hereby certify that I am the First Vice President,  Loan
Administration  of  Countrywide  Home  Loans,  Inc.,  fka,  Countrywide  Funding
Corporation,  and further  certify  with  respect to the  Pooling and  Servicing
Agreements for  Conventional  Residential  Fixed Rate & Adjustable Rate Mortgage
Loans (Inv. 977) by and among Norwest Bank of Minnesota and Countrywide  Funding
Corporation, as Servicer, as follows:



I have reviewed the activities and performance of the Servicer during the fiscal
year  ended  February  28,  1997  under  the  Agreement  and,  to the best of my
knowledge,  based on my review,  the Servicer has  fulfilled  all of its duties,
responsibilities or obligations under the Agreement through the fiscal year.


                                                /s/Joseph Candelario     5-23-97
                                                   Joseph Candelario     Date
                                                   First Vice President
                                                   Loan Administration







                                                                        Inv. 977
### THE SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590

The Honorable Mary L. Landrieu United States Senate Washington, DC 2051 0 DearSenatorLandrieu: August 22, 2013

Thankyou for your letter supporting the application submitted by the Shreveport Airport Authority for a grant under the U.S. Department ofTransportation's Small Community Air Service Development Program. The Small Comm1mity Air Service DevelopmentProgran1 was established to help smaller communities address air service deficiencies, particularly issues related to high airfares or insufficient service. Underthe statute, the Department may make amaximum of40 grant awards eachyear, although no more than four awards may be to communities in the same State. In orderto provide communities with latitude in developing solutions to their air service deficiencies, the statute provides flexibility in the types ofprojects that can be funded. On June 24, the Department issued an order setting a deadline ofJuly 26 for applications. As these grant requests are pending before the Department, I cannot comment on the merits ofany particularproposal. I assure you that the Department will give full and fair consideration to all proposals that have been properly filed. As is our standardpractice, I am placing a copy ofyour letter and this response in Docket DOT-OST-2013-0120 as a contact outside the record ofthis matter. I appreciate your interest in this program. Sincerely,

Anthony R. Foxx

## ianitro**~tattB**

### j;matt WASiliNGTON. 00**~051().,**11104 July24, 2013**Tiu~** Honoraple Anthony Foxl< Secretary, U.S. DepartmentofTransponation 1200New Jersey Ave, SE WuhingtonDC2ll59CI DearSeeretm:y Fon: r t is my pleasure to support the endeavor of the Shreveport Airport Authority in its propo5lll for the Small Community Air Service Development grant. A successful application gives the Shreveport Airport Authority the abilily to augment airline.service through the addition of

aroute to either the Midwest orAtlantic region. As Northwest Louisinna, east**Te~**Md southwest Arltrulsas continue to srow, the need for such a route el<ponentially**heightet~S.** These growing economies Sl.llnd m benefit**iTnmet~Sely** with the expansion of airline routes, as**connee~ions** to the continental United States and internationally provide tl)c· Shreveport Regional Airport the opportunity to gain more air traffic. A new route is essential to the region this nirport serves nnd could potentially boost the Shreveport Regional Airport into**~1e** eompotitive natUre ofair travel. Please give your consideration to the Shreveport Airport Authority as 1firmly malota.in their legitimacy as well as their pmfuund mission. Should you have any questions reaarding this matter, please do nothesitata to contact my New Orlesns office at(504)589·2427. With kind regard, I am,

MLL:klc

24
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

 v.

KORY ANTHONY JOSEPH HALL, a.k.a.

Kory AJ Hall, 

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 15-30283

D.C. No. 

2:14-cr-00021-RMP-3

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Washington

Rosanna Malouf Peterson, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 2, 2017** 

Before: HUG, FARRIS, and CANBY, Circuit Judges.

Kory Anthony Joseph Hall appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges his 100-month sentence for conspiracy to distribute oxycodone

hydrochloride, in violation 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846. Pursuant to Anders v.

FILED

FEB 06 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

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

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Hall’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there

are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. 

No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed. 

Hall has waived his right to appeal his sentence. Because the record

discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the appeal waiver, we dismiss the

appeal. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir. 2009).

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

DISMISSED.

2
Exhibit 4.2


 


Consent of Independent Registered Public
Accounting Firm


We have issued our report
dated October 13, 2021, with respect to the financial statement of Advisors Disciplined Trust 2091 contained in Amendment No. 1 to the
Registration Statement on Form S-6 (File No. 333-259194) and related Prospectus. We consent to the use of the aforementioned report in
the Registration Statement and Prospectus, and to the use of our name as it appears under the caption “Experts”.


 


/s/ Grant
Thornton LLP


 


Chicago, Illinois


October 13, 2021
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-6344

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

RANDALL LEE CONRAD,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle

District of North Carolina, at Durham. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr.,

District Judge. (1:04-cr-00297-NCT-1; 1:07-cv-00313-NCT-WWD)

Submitted: April 24, 2008 Decided: April 30, 2008

Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit

Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Randall Lee Conrad, Appellant Pro Se. Angela Hewlett Miller,

Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Randall Lee Conrad seeks to appeal the district court’s

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The order is

not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A

certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any

assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is

debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by

the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell,

537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Conrad has not

made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
December 1, 2016

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

IN THE MATTER OF J.C., A JUVENILE

NO. 14-15-00696-CV

________________________________

This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. 

Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the 

judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
Exhibit 32.2





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 Quarterly Report of ASIA CORK INC. on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Yi Tong, Principal Accounting Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





1. The Report 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 result of operations of the Company.





May 23, 2011




By:
/s/ Yi TongYi Tong, CFO and Principal Accounting Officer