alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2016117EN.01000101.xml

| 2.4.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 117/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.4.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 117/1

---

Initiation of proceedings

(Case M.7758 — Hutchison 3G Italy/WIND/JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2016/C 117/01)

On 30 March 2016, the Commission decided to initiate proceedings in the abovementioned case after finding that the notified concentration raises serious doubts as to its compatibility with the internal market. The initiation of proceedings opens a second phase investigation with regard to the notified concentration, and is without prejudice to the final decision on the case. The decision is based on Article 6(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).

1

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their observations on the proposed concentration to the Commission.

In order to be fully taken into account in the procedure, observations should reach the Commission not later than 15 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference M.7758 — Hutchison 3G Italy/WIND/JV, to the following address:

| European Commission |
| --- |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

1

---
# C_2016121EN.01000101.xml

| 6.4.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 121/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.4.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 121/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7818 — McKesson/UDG Healthcare (pharmaceutical wholesale and associated businesses))

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2016/C 121/01)

On 3 March 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 32016M7818. 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 32016M7818. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

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

1

---
In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 16-584V

Filed: September 28, 2016

UNPUBLISHED

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

REBECCA SCHLEIF, *

*

Petitioner, * Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;

v. * Tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis;

* Tdap; Shoulder Injury: SIRVA;

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Special Processing Unit (“SPU”)

AND HUMAN SERVICES, *

*

Respondent. *

*

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Mark L. Krueger, Krueger & Hernandez, S.C., Baraboo, WI, for petitioner.

Christine Mary Becer, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

On May 17, 2016, petitioner filed a petition for compensation under the National 

Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.,

2 (the “Vaccine 

Act”). Petitioner alleges that she suffered a left shoulder injury caused-in-fact by her 

December 19, 2013 tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccination. Petition 

at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special 

Masters.

On September 26, 2016, respondent filed her Rule 4(c) report in which she 

concedes that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 

4(c) Report at 1. Specifically, respondent ” has concluded that a preponderance of 

evidence establishes that the injury to petitioner’s left shoulder was caused-in-fact by 

the administration of her December 19, 2013, Tdap vaccine, and that petitioner’s injury 

is not due to factors unrelated to the administration of the Tdap vaccine.” Id. at 3. 

 1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the 

undersigned intends to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with 

the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of 

Electronic Government Services). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to 

identify and move to redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an 

unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits 

within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access.

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for 

ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 

300aa (2012).
2

Respondent further agrees that the statutory six month sequela requirement has been 

satisfied and that petitioner. Id.

In view of respondent’s concession and the evidence before me, the

undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Nora Beth Dorsey

Nora Beth Dorsey

Chief Special Master
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997
AND SUCH 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-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           4,140
<SECURITIES>                                    64,010
<RECEIVABLES>                                  105,190<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    510,110
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               757,420
<PP&E>                                         337,390<F1>
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,151,220
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          276,910
<BONDS>                                        200,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     437,390
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,151,220
<SALES>                                      1,959,780
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,959,780
<CGS>                                        1,453,770
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,468,250
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                15,110
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              41,900
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 42,950
<INCOME-TAX>                                    13,750
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             29,200
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               (11,620)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    17,580
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Receivables and property and equipment are presented net of allowances for
doubtful accounts and accumulated depreciation and amortization, respectively.
</FN>
        


</TABLE>
Hello, this is [I NTERVIEWER NAME] calling from Abt Associates on behalf of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency . I am calling about the Pressed Wood Manufacturing Industry

Survey that EPA sent you. EPA sent a letter to you last week asking you to ple ase return the completed survey by October 8 th

. A. Have you received this letter? Yes__ No___ [I f no] The letter asked you to please return your survey by October 8 th , and asked you to complete only questions 9, 14, and 15 if you do not have time to complete the whole survey . Would you like me to send you a copy of this letter?

_______________________________________ ___________________________ B. Will you be able to return the completed survey by October 8 th ? Complete Survey

__ Partially Compl ete Survey

(9, 14, 15) ___ No___ [I f yes] Thank you for participating in EPA’s survey
. C. [If will not return] Can you answer 4 short questions about your facility over the phone

– it should only

take a few minutes? D. [I f no] Can you at least confirm the product that your facility manufacturers for me?**Questions**

1. Which of the following composite wood products are produced at your facility? (a) Particleboard (b) MDF (c) Stock HWPW Panels (d) Products defined as Laminated Products under CARB (e) O ther Composite wood products exempt from CARB requirements: Please list:_______________________________________________________. 2 . In the 5
- year period from 2005 through 2009, what was the average annual total production for each product ? (Please specify the basis)

______________________________________________________

______________________________________________________

______________________________________________________

______________________________________________________ 2 CBI. Would you li ke us to consider your average annual production to be TSCA confidential business information? ___ Yes ___ No 3
. {Only PB, MDF, and HWPW} If Congress had not passed the federal standards for formaldehyde in composite wood products this past July, onc e CARB Phase 2 went into effect would you have produced : (a) only product that is certified with CARB, (b) only product that is not certified with CARB, or (c) some CARB certified product and some product that is not certified with CARB? 4. (If c) What would you have expected the percentage of your production that is compliant with CARB Phase 2 to be?

3&4 CBI. Would you like us to consider your responses about CARB compliance to be TSCA confidential business information? ___ Yes ___ No That’s all the questions I have. Thank you for participating in EPA’s survey.
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2628 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2628

To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act with respect to safe 
 disposal packaging and safe disposal system requirements for certain 
                                 drugs.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             August 5, 2021

 Ms. Hassan (for herself and Mr. Braun) introduced the following bill; 
     which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, 
                     Education, Labor, and Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act with respect to safe 
 disposal packaging and safe disposal system requirements for certain 
                                 drugs.

    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 ``Better Options for Drug Disposal 
Systems To Reduce Diversion Act of 2021'' or the ``Better ODDS To 
Reduce Diversion Act of 2021''.

SEC. 2. SAFETY-ENHANCING PACKAGING AND DISPOSAL FEATURES.

    Section 505-1(e)(4)(B) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 
(21 U.S.C. 355-1(e)(4)(B)) is amended by striking ``for purposes of 
rendering drugs nonretrievable (as defined in section 1300.05 of title 
21, Code of Federal Regulations (or any successor regulation))''.
                                 <all>
```
InThe Matter Of: MIAMI TECH 

### SERVED: OCTOBER 14, 2015 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS WASHINGTON, DC

DocketNo. FAA-2014-0682 AIRCRAFTMAINTENANCE, INC. ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 2010S0190295 Respondent ORDERDISMISSING PROCEEDING OnJanuary 15, 2015, an Order Setting Litigation Dates and Procedures was filed. Among other things, this Order set atelephone motion conference for November 4, 2015, andthe Hearing for February 23-26, 2016, inthe Fort Lauderdale, Florida area. On October 5, 2015, the Respondent filed aNotice ofSettlement stating that the "parties have reached a negotiated resolution of[FAA's] claims against Respondent inthe above referenced matter." After having reviewed the case file, all pleadings and motions, all relevant caselaw, statutes, regulations, rules, and authority, and being fully advised; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. The telephone motion conference set for November 4, 2015, is cancelled. 2. The Hearing set for February 23-26, 2016, is cancelled. 3. Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.215, the Respondent has withdrawn its Request for Hearing, andthis proceeding is dismissed withprejudice.

Attachment: Service ListSERVICE LIST- BYU.S. MAIL ORIGINAL & ONE COPY Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite2W10001

Mr. William Vines 

### Complainant's Counsel Federal Aviation Administration Office ofthe Regional Counsel, AS0-7 Southern Region 1701 ColumbiaAvenue College Park, GA 30337 TEL: 404-305-5200 FPC{: 404-305-5223 Mr. Juan R. Serrano 

### Respondent's Counsel Griffin & Serrano, P.A. Blackstone Building, SixthFloor 707 Southeast 3rd Avenue FortLauderdale, FL 33316 TEL: 954-462-4002 FAX: 954-462-4009 Judge J.E. Sullivan 

### US Administrative LawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-6941 FPC{: 202-366-7536 ONE COPY DocketNo. FAA-2014-0682 (Civil Penalty Action)

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person orby expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
EXHIBIT 15.1




CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM




We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 Nos. 333-101990 and 333-125064 pertaining to Top Image Systems Ltd. employee stock option plans, and Form F-3 No. 333-119885) of our report dated March 31, 2011 with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Top Image Systems Ltd. as of December 31, 2010, included in this Annual Report on Form 20-F of Top Image Systems Ltd. for the year ended December 31, 2010.


/S/ KOST FORER GABBAY & KASIERERTel-Aviv, Israel

March 31, 2011
Kost Forer Gabbay & Kasierer

A Member of Ernst & Young Global
# C_2016131EN.01000401.xml

| 14.4.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 131/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.4.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 131/4

---

Special Report No 3/2016

‘Combatting eutrophication in the Baltic Sea: further and more effective action needed’

(2016/C 131/05)

The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report No 3/2016 ‘Combatting eutrophication in the Baltic Sea: further and more effective action needed’ 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

---
### Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA

- 2011

- 0913 Directorate Identifier: 2011

-NM

- 031

- AD

**Special considerations for Economic Analysis** (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty c osts) 

### : **Executive Order 12866:** Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”? YES * NO

* Explanation: **DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:** Is the AD significant? YES * NO **Estimated Costs:** 
Action (e.g., Inspection, replacement) Costs per **Product** (e.g., aircraft, engine,

propeller, appliance) Work

- h ours (include access, testing, and c lose

- up) Labor

cost ( @ $8 5 /h our) Part s Cost Total Costs ( labor + parts) Number of

**U.S. Registered**  **Products** Total Cost

for U

. S

. Fleet

To add diodes to the fuel crossfeed wiring. 4.0 $340.00 $40 $380.00 198 $75 ,240.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.0 0 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 

### The known number of products in compliance: 0 

### Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $75,240 

### Costs cover ed under warranty ( if known ) $

### * Explanation:

**Regulatory Flexibility Act:** Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? E xplain for either a Yes or No answer. YES NO Explanation: **Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:** This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation? YES NO Explanation:
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed November 30, 2016.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D16-176

Lower Tribunal No. 94-21101

________________

David Lee Brown,

Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida,

Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Teresa Mary

Pooler, Judge.

David Lee Brown, in proper person.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Linda S. Katz, Assistant Attorney

General, for appellee.

Before SUAREZ, C.J., and LAGOA and SALTER, JJ.

PER CURIAM.
We affirm without discussion the trial court’s order prohibiting David Lee

Brown from filing further pro se pleadings, motions, or petitions challenging his

conviction and sentence in case number F94-21101.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Further, David Lee Brown has filed numerous postconviction appeals

regarding his conviction and sentence in lower tribunal case number F94-21101. 

Our preliminary review of those prior postconviction proceedings evidences that

David Lee Brown has engaged in the filing of appeals on claims that were

successive, time-barred, or otherwise wholly without merit. We therefore order

David Lee Brown, within thirty (30) days from the date of this order, to file a

response and to show cause why this court should not prohibit him from

submitting further pro se appeals, petitions, motions or other pleadings regarding

case number F94-21101, unless such pleadings are signed by an attorney who is a

duly licensed member of The Florida Bar in good standing.

2
**Exhibit 23**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRMWe consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements listed below of ourreports dated March 13, 2008, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule ofMidway Games Inc. and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of MidwayGames Inc., included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2007.(1) Registration Statement No. 333-140206 on Form S-8,(2) Registration Statement No. 333-136272 on Form S-3,(3) Registration Statement No. 333-130130 on Form S-3,(4) Registration Statement No. 333-130131 on Form S-3,(5) Registration Statement No. 333-130132 on Form S-3,(5) Registration Statement No. 333-130133 on Form S-3,(6) Registration Statement No. 333-130134 on Form S-3,(7) Registration Statement No. 333-127796 on Form S-3,(8) Registration Statement No. 333-127795 on Form S-3,(9) Registration Statement No. 333-125830 on Form S-8,(10) Registration Statement No. 333-121523 on Form S-3,(11) Registration Statement No. 333-120952 on Form S-3,(12) Registration Statement No. 333-120347 on Form S-8,(13) Registration Statement No. 333-115098 on Form S-8,(14) Registration Statement No. 333-115055 on Form S-3,(15) Registration Statement No. 333-98745 on Form S-8,(16) Registration Statement No. 333-46618 on Form S-8,(17) Registration Statement No. 333-73451 on Form S-8,(18) Registration Statement No. 333-68373 on Form S-8,(19) Registration Statement No. 333-57583 on Form S-8, and(20) Registration Statement No. 333-25757 on Form S-8.Chicago, Illinois
EXHIBIT 32.1

              SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

                            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 (the "Report") of China
Biopharmaceuticals Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter
ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof, I, Chris Peng Mao, Chief Executive 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 to 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
espects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


Date: May 15, 2007                        By: /s/ Chris Peng Mao
                                          -----------------------------------
                                                  Chris Peng Mao
                                                  Chief Executive Officer



<PAGE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 18-0415

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

CHELSEY L. FLESHER, 

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion to voluntarily dismiss 

appeal and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant’s appeal in the above 

matter is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

December 8 2020

12/08/2020

Case Number: DA 18-0415