alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Stanley Furniture Company, Inc. (the "Company") Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jeffrey
R. Scheffer, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that, 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, 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 Company.


Date:  February 13, 2003                    By: /s/ Jeffrey R. Scheffer
                                                -----------------------
                                                Jeffrey R. Scheffer
                                                Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT
      32





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350











We, each hereby certify to the best of
our knowledge that the Quarterly Report of Form 10-Q of Gateway Tax Credit Fund
III, Ltd. for the period ended September 30, 2009 containing the financial
statements fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o (d)) and that information
contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of Gateway.








/s/ Ronald M. Diner
              Ronald
      M. Diner
              President
              Raymond
      James Tax Credit Funds, Inc.
              (the
      Managing General Partner)
              November
      13, 2009/s/ Toni S. Matthews
              Toni
      S. Matthews
              Vice
      President and Chief Financial Officer
              Raymond
      James Tax Credit Funds, Inc.
              (the
      Managing General Partner)
              November
      13, 2009
Exhibit




Exhibit 10(a)


Summary of CBS Corporation Compensation for Outside Directors
(As of May 21, 2015)
 


Directors of CBS Corporation (the “Company”) who are not employees of the Company or any of its subsidiaries (the “Outside Directors”) receive compensation for their service as follows:
 
CASH COMPENSATION
 
•                  An annual Board retainer of $100,000, payable in equal installments quarterly in advance; and
 
•                  The Chairs of the Audit, Compensation and Nominating and Governance Committees each receive an annual retainer of $20,000, payable in equal installments quarterly in advance, and the members of those Committees each receive a per meeting attendance fee of $2,000; members of any ad hoc committees of the Board that may exist from time to time shall be paid as determined by the Board. 




Outside Directors may elect to defer their cash compensation under the CBS Deferred Compensation Plan for Outside Directors.
 
EQUITY COMPENSATION
 
Effective May 21, 2015, equity based grants to Outside Directors are to be determined by the Board of Directors under the 2015 Equity Plan for Outside Directors. 


 OTHER
 
Expenses:
 
Outside Directors are reimbursed for expenses incurred in attending Board, committee and stockholder meetings (including travel and lodging) in accordance with the Company’s normal travel policies.
 
Matching Gifts Program for Directors:
 
All Directors, including Directors who are employees, are eligible to participate in the Company’s Matching Gifts Program for Directors. Under the program, the Company matches donations made by a Director to eligible tax-exempt organizations at the rate of one dollar for each dollar donated up to $7,500 for each fiscal year. The purpose of the program is to recognize the interest of the Company and its Directors in supporting eligible organizations.
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

WESTERN DIVISION

JANE ROE,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI, ET AL. 

Defendants

Case No. 1:18-cv-00312-TSB

 Judge BLACK

NOTICE OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41, Plaintiff Jane Roe respectfully submits this Notice of Dismissal 

This dismissal is made before the opposing party has served either an answer or a motion for summary 

judgment and is without prejudice.

Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ Joshua Adam Engel

Joshua Adam Engel (0075769)

Anne Tamashasky (0064393)

ENGEL AND MARTIN, LLC

4660 Duke Drive, Ste. 101

Mason, OH 45040

(513) 445-9600

(513) 492-8989 (Fax)

engel@engelandmartin.com 
2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing has been electronically served via the Court’s CM/ECF 

system this 12th day of September upon all counsel of record.

/s/ Joshua Adam Engel

Joshua Adam Engel (0075769)
Exhibit 12.4
                  TREESOURCE INDUSTRIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                COMPUTATION OF REGISTRANT'S AVERAGE STOCKHOLDERS'
                    EQUITY (DEFICIT) TO AVERAGE TOTAL ASSETS
                          (In Thousands, Except Ratios)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                          YEAR ENDED APRIL 30,
                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------

                                                     2000          1999          1998         1997          1996
                                                   ----------    ----------    ---------    ----------    ----------
<S>                                              <C>           <C>           <C>          <C>           <C>
AVERAGE STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY (DEFICIT)
  Beginning of period                            $   (7,816)   $    4,093    $   18,434   $    11,686   $    20,076
  End of period                                      (6,804)       (7,816)        4,093        18,434        11,686

    Average                                      $   (7,310)   $   (1,862)   $   11,264   $    15,060   $    15,881

                                                   ==========    ==========    =========    ==========    ==========


AVERAGE TOTAL ASSETS
  Beginning of period                            $   54,987    $   65,311    $   86,486   $    77,396   $    88,944
  End of period                                      57,363        54,987        65,311        86,486        77,396

    Average                                      $   56,175    $   60,149    $   75,899   $    81,941   $    83,170

                                                   ==========    ==========    =========    ==========    ==========

RATIO OF AVERAGE STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
  (DEFICIT) TO AVERAGE TOTAL ASSETS                   (13.0) %       (3.1) %       14.8 %        18.4 %        19.1 %

</TABLE>
#### Barrentine and Ives *v.*State.

Crim. 4048

Opinion delivered September 27, 1937.

*Gus Fulk*and *Milton McLees,*-for appellants.

*Jack Holt,*Attorney General, and *John P. Streepey,*Assistant, for appellee.

*502McíIaney, J.

Appellants were convicted of attempted bribery of a police officer in the municipal court of the city of Little Rock. On appeal to the circuit court, they were again convicted, fined $100 and sentenced to 30 days in jail, on the theory that the charge was a misdemeanor under the common law. The only question to be decided on this appeal, as stated by counsel for appellants, is: “Whether or not the common law offense of attempting to bribe a public officer has been abrogated by statutory law of the state of Arkansas.”

Appellants contend that, since at common law both bribery and attempt to bribe were misdemeanors, no distinction being made in the grade of the offense, our statute, § 25.69, Crawford & Moses’ Digest, takes up the whole subject anew, covering both the giving and offering to give a bribe, makes the offense a felony, and must be held to be in derogation of the common law. If so it is urged, no offense was charged against them, as there was no indictment or information under the statute. Said section provides: “If any persons shall * * ***promise or offer to give * * * any money ** * **to any member of the General Assembly * * * or to any officer of the state, or person holding any place of profit or trust, under any law of the state * * * with intent,” etc. We think a careful reading of this statute shows that it was not intended to repeal the common law offense, but merely supplementary or cumulative thereto, and that the prosecutor might proceed under either assuming, of course, that a police officer is a “person holding any place of profit or trust, under any law of the state.”

It has long been the rule in this state that “A statute will not be taken in derogation of the common law unless the act itself shows such to have been the intention and object of the legislature.” *Gray*v. *Nations, 1*Ark. 557; *State*v. *Pierson,*44 Ark. 265; *Wilks*v. *Slaughter,*49 Ark. 235, 4 S. W. 766; *Powell*v. *State,*133 Ark. 477, 203 S. W. 25; *State*v. *One Ford Automobile,*151 Ark. 29, 235 S. W. 378. A careful reading of the act fails *503to convince that such was the intention and object of the Legislature.

We must, therefore, conclude that appellants were, lawfully charged and convicted, and the judgment must be affirmed. It is so ordered.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

WESTERN DIVISION

THOMAS LEE MIDKIFF, JR., as Trustee :

of THE TLMJ REVOCABLE TRUST, : Case No. 1:18-cv-00191

both Directly and Derivatively on : Judge Timothy S. Black

behalf of HORSECO, INC., :

:

Plaintiffs, :

:

v. :

:

THOMAS LUDT, et al., :

:

Defendants. :

STIPULATED EXTENSION OF TIME

TO ANSWER, MOVE OR OTHERWISE PLEAD

By agreement of the parties, and pursuant to S.D. Ohio Civ. R. 6.1, it is hereby stipulated 

that defendant, Dustin Dixon, is granted an additional 21 days, to and including May 9, 2018, 

within which to answer, move or otherwise plead in response to plaintiff, Thomas Lee Midkiff, 

Jr.’s Verified Complaint (Doc. 1). No prior stipulated extension to this defendant, together with 

this stipulated extension, exceed a total of 21 days.

April 17, 2018 Respectfully submitted,

s/ Jean Geoppinger McCoy

_______________________________________

David P. Kamp (OH 0020665)

Jean Geoppinger McCoy (OH 0046881)

WHITE, GETGEY & MEYER CO., L.P.A.

1700 Fourth & Vine Tower

One West Fourth Street

Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

dkamp@wgmlpa.com

jmccoy@wgmlpa.com

(513) 241-3685

Attorneys for Defendant, Dustin Dixon

Case: 1:18-cv-00191-TSB Doc #: 24 Filed: 04/17/18 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: 591
2

Per Email Authorization 

of April 17, 2018

s/ Erin E. Rhinehart

_______________________________________

D. Jeffrey Ireland (0010443)

Erin E. Rhinehart (0078298)

Christopher C. Hollon (0086480)

FARUKI, IRELAND, COX, 

RHINEHART & DUSING, PLL

110 North Main Street, Suite 1600

Dayton, Ohio 45402

djireland@ficlaw.com

erhinehart@ficlaw.com

chollon@ficlaw.com

(937) 227-3710

Attorneys for Plaintiff,

Thomas Lee Midkiff, Jr., as 

Trustee of the TLMJ Revocable Trust

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that the foregoing pleading was served, via the Court’s CM/ECF system, 

on: 

James E. Burke, Esq.

Bruce J. Yoder, Esq.

Jacob D. Rhode, Esq.

Melissa A. Schaub, Esq.

KEATING MUETHING & KLEKAMP, PLL

One East Fourth Street, Suite 1400

Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Attorneys for Defendants,

Thomas Ludt, James LaMonica, 

Stuart Aikman , Kin Hui, Dom Fuda,

David Keys and Brett Setzer

this 17th day of April, 2018. 

s/ Jean Geoppinger McCoy

_______________________________________

Jean Geoppinger McCoy

Case: 1:18-cv-00191-TSB Doc #: 24 Filed: 04/17/18 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: 592
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 16 (Tuesday, January 25, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3833-3834]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-01420]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Dental & Craniofacial Research; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: NIDCR Special Grants Review Committee.
    Date: February 24-25, 2022.
    Time: 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

[[Page 3834]]

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Democracy Boulevard, 
Bethesda, MD 20892, (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Nisan Bhattacharyya, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Officer, Scientific Review Branch, NIDCR, NIH, 6701 Democracy 
Boulevard, Suite 668, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-451-2405, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#36585f45575818545e57424257555e57444f4f5776585f5e18515940"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d8b6b1abb9b6f6bab0b9acacb9bbb0b9aaa1a1b998b6b1b0f6bfb7ae">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 93.121, Oral 
Diseases and Disorders Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: January 20, 2022.
Melanie J. Pantoja,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-01420 Filed 1-24-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Jeremie D. Elliott

209 S. Stephanie St. B

- 118

Henderson, NV 89012

January 4, 2016

U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Washington DC 20590



## Docket No. FAA−2015−483 0 request for additional information

Dear Sir or Madam:

H ere is the A dditional information requested that was miss ing from the initial peti tion. The UAS platforms for

proposed operations are as follow s:

1. Make

- DJI

M odel

- Phantom3 Advanced

Type

- Quadrotor

Weight including Payload camera, battery and Propellers

- 1280grams



### 2. Make DJI

Model

- Phantom2 FC40

Weight including payload camera, battery a nd propellers

- 1000 grams

Please disregard the request for the Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual (MPTOM) which

is required b y Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 8, Section 1

. I wish to proceed without this manual and

rem ove closed

- set filming from my proposed operation.

Sincerely,

Jeremie D. Elliott
AO 450 (Rev. 11/11) Judgment in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL ACTION

The court has ordered that (check one):

u the plaintiff (name) recover from the

defendant (name) the amount of

dollars ($ ), which includes prejudgment

interest at the rate of %, plus post judgment interest at the rate of % per annum, along with costs.

u the plaintiff recover nothing, the action be dismissed on the merits, and the defendant (name)

recover costs from the plaintiff (name)

.

u other:

This action was (check one):

u tried by a jury with Judge presiding, and the jury has

rendered a verdict.

u tried by Judge without a jury and the above decision

was reached.

u decided by Judge on a motion for

.

Date: CLERK OF COURT

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

$9,587.00 in attorneys' fees.

3/15/2019

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Cl

 Southern District of Ohio

MEGAN MILLER

1:18-cv-266

ABILITY RECOVERY SERVICES, LLC

✔ Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. 7) and supplemental memorandum (Doc. 8) are GRANTED;

Plaintiff is awarded $22,287.00, representing $1,000.00 in statutory damages for violation of the FDCPA;

$10,500.00 in damages for violation of the TCPA; $1,200.00 in statutory damages under OCSPA; and

✔ Timothy S. Black, United States District Judge

Default Judgment

Case: 1:18-cv-00266-TSB Doc #: 10 Filed: 03/15/19 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: 193
FILED

May 25, 1999

Cecil Crowson, Jr.

Appellate Court Clerk

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT JACKSON

GARY BERNARD SANDERS, )

)

Petitioner, ) C. C. A. NO. 02C01-9902-CC-00045

)

 vs. ) LAUDERDALE COUNTY

)

STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) No. 5071

)

Respondent. )

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court upon the state’s motion, pursuant to Rule

20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals, to affirm the judgment of the trial court in

this case by order rather than formal opinion. The above-captioned case represents an

appeal from the trial court’s denial of the petitioner’s petition for writ of habeas corpus. 

The petitioner is currently serving a life sentence for 1975 convictions of felony murder

and armed robbery. In his present petition, the petitioner contends: 1) he could not

have been convicted of murder and robbery after the state sought to nolle prosequi

prior similar charges; 2) his constitutional rights were violated when he was not present

at the hearing on the commutation of his death sentence; 3) the robbery statute under

which he was convicted is void because he did not receive notice of an amendment to

the statute; and 4) he was not afforded an opportunity to be heard at his sentencing

hearing.

Having reviewed the state’s motion in light of the petitioner’s brief and

response, and the record as a whole, we conclude that the motion is well-taken and

should be granted. In denying the petition, the trial court found that the petitioner had

failed to show upon the face of the judgment or the record that the proceedings upon

which the judgment was rendered that the convicting court was without jurisdiction or

authority to sentence the petitioner or that the petitioner’s sentence of imprisonment or

other restraint has expired. See State v. Archer, 851 S.W.2d 157 (Tenn. 1993). 
2

We agree with the trial court’s ruling. The convicting court in this case

had jurisdiction over both the subject matter and person, and nothing in the record

before us demonstrates that the convicting court’s actions were unauthorized. Nor has

the petitioner shown that his sentence has expired. Accordingly, even if the petitioner’s

claim has merit, such claim renders the judgment voidable, not void, and it may not be

collaterally attacked in a suit for habeas corpus relief. Passarella v. State, 891 S.W.2d

619, 627 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1994). The court below therefore correctly denied the

petitioner the requested habeas corpus relief. 

Accordingly, having reviewed the entire record in light of the petitioner’s

claims, we cannot find any error committed by the trial court in denying the petition. It is

therefore ORDERED that the state’s motion is granted. P u r suant t o R u l e 20 of t h e

R u l es of t he C our t of C r i m i nal A ppeal s , w e af f i r m t he t r i a l cour t ’ s deni a l of t h e

pet i t i oner ’ s pet i t i on f o r w r i t of habeas c o r pus. Costs of this appeal shall be assessed

against the state.

______________________________

DAVID G. HAYES, JUDGE

______________________________

JOE G. RILEY, JUDGE

______________________________

JOHN EVERETT WILLIAMS, JUDGE
Exhibit 32.2 

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 

18 U.S.C. SECTION1350, 

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO 

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Da-Lite Screen Company, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ending April 1, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Jerry C. Young, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to and for purposes of 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

 

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

 

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

 

 

May 3, 2005 

 

21
# Официален вестник C 15I/2016

| | ISSN 1977-0855 |
| --- | --- |
| Официален вестник
  на Европейския съюз | C 015I |
| | |
| Издание на български език | Информация и известия | Година 5916 януари 2016 г. |

ISSN 1977-0855

Официален вестник

на Европейския съюз

C 015I

Издание на български език

Информация и известия

Година 5916 януари 2016 г.

---

| Известие No | Съдържание | Страница |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV   Информация |
| | ИНФОРМАЦИЯ ОТ ИНСТИТУЦИИТЕ, ОРГАНИТЕ, СЛУЖБИТЕ И АГЕНЦИИТЕ НА ЕВРОПЕЙСКИЯ СЪЮЗ |
| | Съвет |
| 2016/C 015I/01 | Информация относно датата на прилагане на Регламент (ЕС) 2015/1861 на Съвета за изменение на Регламент (ЕС) No 267/2012 относно ограничителни мерки срещу Иран и Регламент за изпълнение (ЕС) 2015/1862 на Съвета за прилагане на Регламент (ЕС) No 267/2012 относно ограничителни мерки срещу Иран | 1 |

Известие No

Съдържание

Страница

IV   Информация

ИНФОРМАЦИЯ ОТ ИНСТИТУЦИИТЕ, ОРГАНИТЕ, СЛУЖБИТЕ И АГЕНЦИИТЕ НА ЕВРОПЕЙСКИЯ СЪЮЗ

Съвет

2016/C 015I/01

Информация относно датата на прилагане на Регламент (ЕС) 2015/1861 на Съвета за изменение на Регламент (ЕС) No 267/2012 относно ограничителни мерки срещу Иран и Регламент за изпълнение (ЕС) 2015/1862 на Съвета за прилагане на Регламент (ЕС) No 267/2012 относно ограничителни мерки срещу Иран

1

---

| BG | |
| --- | --- |

BG

---

IV Информация

ИНФОРМАЦИЯ ОТ ИНСТИТУЦИИТЕ, ОРГАНИТЕ, СЛУЖБИТЕ И АГЕНЦИИТЕ НА ЕВРОПЕЙСКИЯ СЪЮЗ

Съвет

| 16.1.2016 | BG | Официален вестник на Европейския съюз | CI 15/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.1.2016

BG

Официален вестник на Европейския съюз

CI 15/1

---

Информация относно датата на прилагане на Регламент (ЕС) 2015/1861 на Съвета за изменение на Регламент (ЕС) No 267/2012 относно ограничителни мерки срещу Иран и Регламент за изпълнение (ЕС) 2015/1862 на Съвета за прилагане на Регламент (ЕС) No 267/2012 относно ограничителни мерки срещу Иран

(2016/C 15 I/01)

Регламент (ЕС) 2015/1861 на Съвета (1) и Регламент за изпълнение (ЕС) 2015/1862 на Съвета (2) влязоха в сила на 19 октомври 2015 г.

В съответствие с член 2, втора алинея съответно от Регламент (ЕС) 2015/1861 и Регламент за изпълнение (ЕС) 2015/1862, тези регламенти се прилагат от датата, посочена в член 2, втора алинея от Решение (ОВППС) 2015/1863 на Съвета (3), т.е. от датата на прилагане на Решение (ОВППС) 2015/1863.

В Решение (ОВППС) 2016/37 (4) Съветът отбеляза, че условието за прилагане на Решение (ОВППС) 2015/1863 е изпълнено, и съответно реши Решение (ОВППС) 2015/1863 да се прилага от 16 януари 2016 г. Следователно Регламент (ЕС) 2015/1861 и Регламент за изпълнение (ЕС) 2015/1862 също се прилагат от 16 януари 2016 г.

---

(1)  ОВ L 274, 18.10.2015 г., стр. 1.

(2)  ОВ L 274, 18.10.2015 г., стр. 161.

(3)  Решение (ОВППС) 2015/1863 на Съвета от 18 октомври 2015 г. за изменение на Решение 2010/413/ОВППС относно ограничителни мерки срещу Иран (ОВ L 274, 18.10.2015 г., стр. 174).

(4)  Решение (ОВППС) 2016/37 на Съвета от 16 януари 2016 г. относно датата на прилагане на Решение (ОВППС) 2015/1863 за изменение на Решение 2010/413/ОВППС относно ограничителни мерки срещу Иран (ОВ L 11 I, 16.1.2016 г., стр. 1).

---