alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of Supplementary Proceedings: Frederick Wachter, Inc., Judgment Creditor, *v.*Marion Rogers, Judgment Debtor.

City Court of New York, Special Term, New York County,

October 26, 1936.

*881
      *Borowsky & Burrows,*for the judgment creditor.

*Marion Rogers,*judgment debtor, in person.

Ryan, J.

The facts as contained in the papers submitted on this motion are as follows: Judgment was recovered against the judgment debtor on July 11, 1934. On July 24, 1934, an examination in supplementary proceedings was had, and on August 3, 1934, the same was closed and a receiver appointed. The receiver did not qualify until June 30, 1936. On May 22, 1936, judgment debtor recovered a judgment against one Ruth Chamberlain Magor (the third party), which was entered on May 29, 1936. Two other judgment creditors have appeared to oppose this motion and show that one obtained a judgment against the judgment debtor on May 5, 1933, and the other on April 17, 1935. Each of said judgment creditors served a third-party subpoena on said third party on May 25, 1936. The moving judgment creditor seeks an order requiring the third party to pay over to the receiver the amount of the Magor judgment. There is no opposition to the motion on the part of Magor.

The question presented is whether or not the money should be turned over to the receiver or to the opposing judgment creditors appearing on this motion.

Prior to the enactment of article 45 of the Civil Practice Act (Laws of 1935, chap. 630), in effect September 1, 1935, a receivership did not extend to after-acquired property. Under the new statute (Civ. Prac. Act, §§ 807, 808) property of the judgment debtor, whether acquired before or after the appointment of a receiver, becomes vested in a receiver who had duly qualified from the time of the filing of the order appointing him. The rule is well established that priority in the distribution of personal property in the receiver’s possession is determined by the priority of the commencement of a supplementary proceeding and not by a priority of the entry of the judgment. *(Matter of First National Bank of Elmira*v. *Lowell,*139 Misc. 891.) The moving creditor had instituted supplementary proceedings prior in time to the opposing judgment creditors, and it seems to me his contention should prevail. Here the receiver, having duly qualified as such on June *88230, 1936, became entitled to receive the property of the judgment debtor, whether acquired before or after his appointment.

The motion is granted to the extent of directing payment by Ruth Chamberlain Magor to the receiver herein of the sum of $99.82, being the balance of the judgment payable on account of the judgment recovered by the moving creditor, it being conceded that the attorney for the judgment creditor in the action in which said judgment was recovered has a hen of $175.82 on said judgment for services rendered and disbursements incurred by her. Settle order on notice.
```

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 56 (Tuesday, March 24, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 15618]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-06652]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control Special 
Emphasis Panel (SEP): Initial Review

    The meeting announced below concerns Detection and Characterization 
of Emerging Vector-Borne Zoonotic Pathogens in Indonesia, CK15-001; 
Sentinel Enhanced Dengue Surveillance System (SEDSS) Sites to Evaluate 
the Epidemiology and Prevention of Dengue and other Acute Febrile 
Illnesses in Puerto Rico, CK15-002, and Capacity Building to Prevent, 
Detect, and Respond to Emerging Infectious Disease Threats and 
Strengthen Global Health Security in Uganda, CK15-003, Funding 
Opportunity Announcement (FOA), initial review.
    In accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention (CDC) announces the aforementioned meeting:
    Time And Date: 11:00 a.m.-3:00 p.m., April 21, 2015 (Closed).
    Place: Teleconference.
    Status: The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with 
provisions set forth in Section 552b(c) (4) and (6), Title 5 U.S.C., 
and the Determination of the Director, Management Analysis and Services 
Office, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92-463.
    Matters For Discussion: The meeting will include the initial 
review, discussion, and evaluation of applications received in response 
to ``Detection and Characterization of Emerging Vector-Borne Zoonotic 
Pathogens in Indonesia'', FOA CK15-001 and ``Sentinel Enhanced Dengue 
Surveillance System (SEDSS) Sites to Evaluate the Epidemiology and 
Prevention of Dengue and other Acute Febrile Illnesses in Puerto 
Rico'', FOA CK15-002, and ``Capacity Building to Prevent, Detect, and 
Respond to Emerging Infectious Disease Threats and Strengthen Global 
Health Security in Uganda'', FOA CK15-003.
    Contact Person For More Information: Gregory Anderson, M.S., 
M.P.H., Scientific Review Officer, CDC, 1600 Clifton Road NE., Mailstop 
E60, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, Telephone: (404) 718-8833
    The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been 
delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices pertaining to 
announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, 
for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Agency 
for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

Elaine L. Baker,
Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease 
Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2015-06652 Filed 3-23-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
```
# C_2015356EN.01001001.xml

| 28.10.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 356/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.10.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 356/10

---

Call for applications 2015

Third Programme of the Union’s action in the field of health (2014-2020)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2015/C 356/08)

A call for applications ‘Health — 2015’ is launched today within the framework of the third Programme of the Union’s action in the field of health (2014-2020) (1).

1

This call for applications consists of:

| — | a call for proposals for the award of a financial contribution to specific actions in the form of project grants in the area of: ‘Support Member States under particular migratory pressure in their response to health related challenges.’ |
| --- | --- |

—

a call for proposals for the award of a financial contribution to specific actions in the form of project grants in the area of: ‘Support Member States under particular migratory pressure in their response to health related challenges.’

The deadline for the online submission of proposals is 12 November 2015.

All the information, including the Commission Decision C(2015) 7414/2 of 28 October 2015 amending Decision C(2015) 3594 of 2 June 2015 concerning the work programme for 2015 in the framework of the third Programme of the Union’s action in the field of health (2014-2020), and on the selection, award and other criteria for financial contributions to the actions of this programme, are available on the website of the Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency (Chafea) at the following address:

http://ec.europa.eu/chafea/

---

(1)  Regulation (EU) No 282/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 on the establishment of a third Programme for the Union’s action in the field of health (2014-2020) and repealing Decision No 1350/2007/EC (OJ L 86, 21.3.2014, p. 1).

1

---
##### 



EXHIBIT 99.1

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 Annual Report of Brantley Capital Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert
P. Pinkas, Chief Executive Officer of Brantley Capital Corporation, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

(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/ Robert P. Pinkas   
|                       
|Robert P. Pinkas       
|Chief Executive Officer
|April 30, 2003         

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 and Exchange Act of 1934. A signed original of
this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Brantley
Capital Corporation and will be retained by Brantley Capital Corporation and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
CERTIFICATION OF
                             CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                                   PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I,  Rajesh  Raniga,  Chief  Financial  Officer  of  EYI  Industries,  Inc.  (the
"Company"),  hereby  certify  pursuant  to 18 U.S.C.  Section  1350,  as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of
my knowledge:

      (i)   the Quarterly  Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company,  for the fiscal
            quarter  ended March 31, 2006,  and to which this  certification  is
            attached as Exhibit  32.2 (the  "Report")  fully  complies  with the
            requirements  of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the  Securities  Exchange
            Act of 1934, as amended; and

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

                                  By:    /s/ Rajesh Raniga
                                         ------------------------
                                  Name:  Rajesh Raniga

                                  Title: Chief Financial Officer

                                  Date:  May 15, 2006

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  and Exchange  Commission or its
staff upon request.

This  certification  accompanies  the Form  10-QSB to which it  relates,  is not
deemed  filed  with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  and is not to be
incorporated  by reference  into any filing of the Company under the  Securities
Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made before or after
the date of the Form 10-QSB), irrespective of any general incorporation language
contained in such filing.
|   | EXHIBIT 32.1. |
|--------|---------------|

Certification of Principal Executive Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350

(Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

 

I, Ed Bailey, Chief Executive Officer of LightTouch Vein & Laser, Inc. (the "Registrant") do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge, based upon a review of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period September 30, 2007 of the Registrant, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"):

 

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

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

 

|   | By: /s/ Ed Bailey |
|--------|-------------------|

|   | ------------------------------- |
|--------|---------------------------------|

|   | Ed Bailey |
|--------|-----------|

|   | Chief Executive Officer |
|--------|-------------------------|

 

January 25, 2008

 

* A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to LightTouch Vein & Laser, Inc. and will be retained by LightTouch Vein & Laser, Inc. and furnished to the Securities Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# C_2016117EN.01000701.xml

| 2.4.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 117/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.4.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 117/7

---

Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations (1):

1

0,00 % on 1 April 2016

Euro exchange rates (2)

2

1 April 2016

(2016/C 117/03)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1432 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 128,07 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4503 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,79890 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,2413 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0946 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,4401 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,030 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 313,30 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,2440 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,4693 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 3,2285 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4884 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4894 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,8652 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6518 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5389 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 315,78 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 16,8758 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,3903 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5105 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 007,54 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,4382 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 52,615 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 77,5430 |
| THB | Thai baht | 40,115 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,1296 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 19,8996 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 75,8528 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1432

JPY

Japanese yen

128,07

DKK

Danish krone

7,4503

GBP

Pound sterling

0,79890

SEK

Swedish krona

9,2413

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0946

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,4401

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,030

HUF

Hungarian forint

313,30

PLN

Polish zloty

4,2440

RON

Romanian leu

4,4693

TRY

Turkish lira

3,2285

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4884

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4894

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,8652

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6518

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5389

KRW

South Korean won

1 315,78

ZAR

South African rand

16,8758

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,3903

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5105

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 007,54

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,4382

PHP

Philippine peso

52,615

RUB

Russian rouble

77,5430

THB

Thai baht

40,115

BRL

Brazilian real

4,1296

MXN

Mexican peso

19,8996

INR

Indian rupee

75,8528

---

(1)  Rate applied to the most recent operation carried out before the indicated day. In the case of a variable rate tender, the interest rate is the marginal rate.

1

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

2

Source

---
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

HILDEBRANDO VARGAS,

Petitioner-Appellant,

v.

R. M. DIAZ,

Respondent-Appellee.

No. 15-15676

D.C. No. 3:13-cv-01584-VC

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

Vince G. Chhabria, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted November 17, 2016**

San Francisco, California

Before: SCHROEDER, WARDLAW, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.

Hildebrando Vargas (“Vargas”) appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 

U.S.C. § 2254(d) petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Vargas contends that the 

 

* 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).

FILED

NOV 23 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2

state court unreasonably applied clearly established federal law when it: (1) held 

that the Sixth Amendment’s speedy trial provision did not attach upon the filing of 

a criminal complaint, (certified issue); and (2) denied Vargas an evidentiary 

hearing to show that his attorney failed to warn him of the immigration 

consequences of his plea, (uncertified issue).

1. The state court reasonably applied clearly established federal law when it 

held that the Sixth Amendment’s speedy trial provision did not attach upon the 

filing of a criminal complaint. The Supreme Court has held that the Sixth 

Amendment’s speedy trial provision attaches upon the filing of a “formal 

indictment or information” or by “arrest and holding to answer a criminal 

charge[.]” United States v. Marion, 404 U.S. 307, 320 (1971) (alteration in 

original). The Court has not addressed whether, like an indictment or information, 

a criminal complaint also triggers the speedy trial provision. “If Supreme Court 

cases give no clear answer to the question presented, . . . it cannot be said that the 

state court unreasonably applied clearly established Federal law.” Hedlund v. 

Ryan, 815 F.3d 1233, 1239–40 (9th Cir. 2016) (citation and internal quotation 

marks omitted). 

Accordingly, because it was not clearly established that the Sixth 

Amendment’s speedy trial provision attaches upon the filing of a criminal 
3

complaint, the state court did not unreasonably apply clearly established federal 

law in holding that it did not.

2. We deny Vargas’s motion to expand the Certificate of Appealability to 

encompass the uncertified issue because he has not made a “substantial showing of 

the denial of a constitutional right.” See Hiivala v. Wood, 195 F.3d 1098, 1104 

(9th Cir. 1999) (per curiam) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). The 

state court’s holding that Vargas could not show prejudice from his attorney’s 

allegedly deficient performance was not unreasonable. See Strickland v. 

Washington, 466 U.S 668, 694 (1984).

AFFIRMED.
# C_2015206EN.01000101.xml

| 23.6.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 206/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.6.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 206/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7629 — PSP/OTTP/Tonopah Solar Investments/Tonopah Solar Energy)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2015/C 206/01)

On 17 June 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 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 32015M7629. 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 32015M7629. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

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

1

---
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2213 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2213

    To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to require the 
 Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to give priority 
consideration to selecting Pensacola and Perdido Bays as an estuary of 
             national significance, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 24, 2021

    Mr. Rubio (for himself and Mr. Scott of Florida) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                      Environment and Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to require the 
 Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to give priority 
consideration to selecting Pensacola and Perdido Bays as an estuary of 
             national significance, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Pensacola and Perdido Bays Estuary 
of National Significance Act of 2021''.

SEC. 2. PENSACOLA AND PERDIDO BAYS.

    Section 320(a)(2)(B) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 
U.S.C. 1330(a)(2)(B)) is amended by striking ``and Lower Columbia 
River, Oregon and Washington'' and inserting ``Lower Columbia River, 
Oregon and Washington; and Pensacola and Perdido Bays, Florida and 
Alabama''.
                                 <all>
```
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

November 22, 2016

No. 04-16-00620-CV

Kathy WELCH,

Appellant

v.

Gerardo Javier ALONSO,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 3, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2016CV04591

Honorable Karen Crouch, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

Luz Elena Chapa, Justice

Jason Pulliam, Justice

Appellant, Kathy Lea Welch, has filed a notice of bankruptcy. The notice reflects that 

Welch filed a petition in bankruptcy under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code on November 16, 

2016. The case was filed in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of 

Texas and was assigned case number 16-52630-rbk. 

We order the appeal abated and removed from the court’s active docket. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 8.2. The appeal will be reinstated only upon proper motion and proof. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 8.3; 4th TEX. APP. (SAN ANTONIO) LOC. R. 4. 

We further order the clerk of this court to send copies of this order to the clerk of the trial 

court, the court reporter, and the attorneys of record.

_________________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

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

court on this 22nd day of November, 2016.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court