alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# EUR-Lex - 32002R0652 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 32002R0652

**Commission Regulation (EC) No 652/2002 of 16 April 2002 fixing, for the 2001/02 marketing year, the amounts to be paid to producer organisations and associations thereof recognised under Regulation No 136/66/EEC **

*
Official Journal L 101 , 17/04/2002 P. 0005 - 0005 *

Commission Regulation (EC) No 652/2002

of 16 April 2002

fixing, for the 2001/02 marketing year, the amounts to be paid to producer organisations and associations thereof recognised under Regulation No 136/66/EEC

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation No 136/66/EEC of 22 September 1966 on the establishment of a common organisation of the market in oils and fats(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1513/2001(2), and in particular Article 20d(4) thereof,

Whereas:

(1) Article 20d(1) of Regulation No 136/66/EEC provides for a percentage of production aid to be withheld to help finance the work of recognised producer organisations and associations thereof. For the 1999/2000, 2000/01 and 2001/02 marketing years, the amount of production aid referred to in Article 20d(1) of Regulation No 136/66/EEC is 0,8 %.

(2) Article 21(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2366/98 of 30 October 1998 laying down detailed rules for the application of the system of production aid for olive oil for the 1998/99, 1999/2000 and 2000/01 marketing years(3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2070/2001(4), provides that the unit amounts to be paid to producer organisations and associations thereof are to be fixed on the basis of forecasts of the overall sum to be distributed. The funds that will become available in each Member State as a result of the amount withheld as referred to above must be suitably distributed among those eligible.

(3) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the Management Committee for Oils and Fats,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the 2001/02 marketing year, the amounts provided for in Article 21(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EC) No 2366/98 shall be as follows:

>TABLE>

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 16 April 2002.

For the Commission

Franz Fischler

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ 172, 30.9.1966, p. 3025/66.

(2) OJ L 201, 26.7.2001, p. 4.

(3) OJ L 293, 31.10.1998, p. 50.

(4) OJ L 280, 24.10.2001, p. 3.
Record of Contacts

Docket No. FAA-2012-0727 Directorate Identifier: 2012-NM-012-AD

With whom outside the FAA has this AD action been discussed (i.e., Design Approval 

Holder, manufacturer, ATA, NBAA, RAA, AOPA, ALPA, GAMA, etc)? 

ORGANIZATION PERSON 

CONTACTED

DATE RESPONSE

Boeing Bob Takara 11/8/2011 

A4A Mike Bianchi 01/10/2012 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other/Additional Information:
PowerCerv
        Corporation and Subsidiary
 Form
        10-QSB


EXHIBIT
      32.2




**CERTIFICATION**


**Pursuant
      to 18 United States Code Section 1350**








The
      undersigned hereby certifies that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the
      quarter ended March 31, 2005 of PowerCerv Corporation (the "Company") filed
      with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof fully complies with
      the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
      1934, as amended, and that the information contained in such report fairly
      presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.








/s/
      John
      D. Stanton


_________________________________


John
      D
      Stanton


Chief
      Financial Officer


February
      16, 2006





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      PowerCerv Corporation and will be retained by it and furnished to the Securities
      and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
AMERICAN AIRLINES

January 29, 2013

Esta Rosenberg, Chief 

U.S. Carrier Licensing Division 

Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Ave., S.E. 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

Re: American Airlines, Application for Allocation of Four 

Weekly Combination Frequencies (U.S.-Ecuador)(DOT-OST2009-0220)

Dear Ms. Rosenberg: 

We have completed our poll of the carrier parties served with the 

captioned application on January 22, 2013. There are no objections. 

Accordingly, we request favorable action on an expedited basis. 

Respectfully submitted, 

____________________________ 

Francis C. Heil 

Senior Attorney 

American Airlines, Inc. 

1101 17th Street, N.W. 

Suite 600 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

(202) 496-5642 

francis.heil@aa.com 

cc: Docket Branch 

Brian Hedberg 

Service list
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 I hereby certify that I have this day served the 

foregoing document by email on the following persons:

sascha.vanderbellen@delta.com

dan.weiss@united.com

urskr@state.gov

______________________

Francis C. Heil

Senior Attorney 

American Airlines, Inc.

January 29, 2013
#### Kenneth A. WEBB, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SECRETARY U.S. ARMY, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 16-55652

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 8, 2017 *

Filed May 17, 2017

Kenneth A. Webb, Pro Se

Jessica O. Cheh, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USLA — Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellee

Before: REINHARDT, LEAVY, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Kenneth A. Webb appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing his action against the Secretary of the United States Army. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). *Hebbe v. Pliler,*627 F.3d 338, 341 (9th Cir. 2010). We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.

The district court properly dismissed Webb’s action because Webb failed to allege facts sufficient to show that he had exhausted his administrative remedies or was excused from exhaustion. *See Muham*
      *1015
      *mad v. Sec’y of Army,*770 F.2d 1494, 1495 (9th Cir. 1985) (military personnel are required to exhaust available intraservice remedies before seeking judicial review); see *also Ashcroft v. Iqbal,*556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009) (complaint must offer more than “naked assertions devoid of further factual enhancement” (citation, internal quotation marks, and alterations omitted)). Because a dismissal for failure to exhaust administrative remedies should be without prejudice, see *O’Guinn v. Lovelock Corr. Ctr.,*502 F.3d 1056, 1063 (9th Cir. 2007), we vacate the judgment in part and remand for the district court to dismiss Webb’s action without prejudice.

The parties shall bear their own costs on appeal.

AFFIRMED in part, VACATED in part, and REMANDED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publi- . cation and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5804 

To amend section 412(a)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to 

require the Director of the Office of Refugee Resettlement to obtain 

the approval of the Governor of a State before placing or resettling 

a refugee with the State, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 14, 2016 

Mr. CULBERSON (for himself, Mr. SMITH of Texas, Mr. BRADY of Texas, Mr. 

WEBER of Texas, Mr. FARENTHOLD, and Mr. SESSIONS) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend section 412(a)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to require the Director of the Office of Refugee 

Resettlement to obtain the approval of the Governor 

of a State before placing or resettling a refugee with 

the State, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘No Resettlement With5 out Consent Act’’. 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5804 IH

1 SEC. 2. CONDITIONS ON DOMESTIC RESETTLEMENT OF 

2 REFUGEES. 

3 Section 412(a)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality 

4 Act (8 U.S.C. 1522(a)(2)) is amended by adding at the 

5 end the following: 

6 ‘‘(E) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in7 cluding the preceding provisions of this paragraph, begin8 ning on the date of the enactment of this subparagraph, 

9 the following limitations on programs for domestic reset10 tlement of refugees under this chapter shall apply: 

11 ‘‘(i) The Director shall not place or resettle a 

12 refugee within a State without the approval of the 

13 Governor of the State. 

14 ‘‘(ii) Notwithstanding any approval granted 

15 under clause (i), the Director shall not place or re16 settle a refugee in any locality within a State if the 

17 locality has in effect a law, or a policy with the ef18 fect of law, disapproving of refugee resettlement in 

19 that locality.’’. 

Æ 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
MITCHELL 006 Franklin Aff., Ex. 4

FILED: 2/23/2021 2:52 PM

Vermont Superior Court

Chittenden Unit

382-6-20 Cncv

OODO COCO

 APPENDIX 2:Ms. Mitchell's spreadsheet
MITCHELL 007 Franklin Aff., Ex. 4

OOO
MITCHELL 008 Franklin Aff., Ex. 4

COCO 0101010

COCO
MITCHELL 009 Franklin Aff., Ex. 4

OOOO COCO U100
MITCHELL 010 Franklin Aff., Ex. 4

DUI U'IU'IOU1
MITCHELL 011 Franklin Aff., Ex. 4

GOOD UIU'IOU'I
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes- Oxley
Act of 2002, I, Todd Noble, Chief Financial Officer of Advanced ID Corporation
(the "Company"), hereby certify, that to the
best of my knowledge, the Quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2004 (the "Report") fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: November 12, 2004

/s/Todd D. Noble
----------------------------------------
Todd D. Noble, Chief Financial Officer
Prepared by R.R. Donnelley Financial -- Specimen certificate for shares--common stock



 







  
  MTC TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 
   
  THE POWERS, DESIGNATIONS, PREFERENCES, AND RELATIVE, PARTICIPATING, OPTIONAL, OR OTHER SPECIAL RIGHTS OF THE SHARES OF COMMON STOCK OF MTC TECHNOLOGIES,
INC., AND THE QUALIFICATIONS, LIMITATIONS, OR RESTRICTIONS OF SUCH PREFERENCES AND/OR RIGHTS ARE SET FORTH IN THE CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION OF MTC TECHNOLOGIES, INC., A COPY OF WHICH MAY BE OBTAINED FREE OF CHARGE FROM MTC TECHNOLOGIES, INC., AT
ITS PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICES. 
   
  The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face
of this certificate, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: 
   
  
	 TEN COM
 	  	 —
 	  	 as tenants in common
 	  	 UNIF GIFT MIN ACT  —
 	 	                      
 	 	  Custodian
 	 	                      
 
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	 	 (Cust)
 	 	  	 	 (Minor)
 
	 TEN ENT
 	  	 —
 	  	 as tenants by the entireties
 	  	  	 	 under Uniform Gifts to Minors Act
 
	 
	 JT TEN
 	  	 —
 	  	 as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common
 	  	  	 	                                      
                        
 (State)
 

 
   
  Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above
list 
   
  For value received,
                                        
                                        
                     hereby sell, assign and transfer unto 
   
  
	 PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE
 	  	  
	
	 	 
	  	  	  
	
	
	


 
   
 
 (Please print or
typewrite name and address including postal zip code of assignee) 
   
 
 
 
 
                                       
                                        
                                        
                                        
             Shares of the capital stock represented by the within Certificate, and do hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint 
   
 
 
 
 
  Attorney to transfer the said Shares on the books of the within-named Corporation with full power of substitution in the premises. 
   
  Dated:                                    
                                        
               
   
                                       
                                        
                           
   Signature 
   
                                       
                                        
                           
   NOTICE: The signature to this assignment must correspond with the name as written upon the face of the Certificate, in every particular, without alteration or enlargement, or any change whatever. 
   
                                       
                                        
                 
   
  THE SIGNATURE(S) SHOULD BE
GUARANTEED BY AN ELIGIBLE GUARANTOR INSTITUTION (BANKS, STOCKBROKERS, SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS AND CREDIT UNIONS WITH MEMBERSHIP IN AN APPROVED SIGNATURE GUARANTEE MEDALLION PROGRAM), PURSUANT TO S.E.C. RULE 17Ad-15. 



 2
#### Dorian D. BAILEY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Greg LEWIS, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 15-15955

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 14, 2017 * San Francisco, California

Filed March 21, 2017

Mark Eibert, Esquire, Attorney, Half Moon Bay, CA, for Petitioner-Appellant

Sean M. McCoy, Deputy Attorney General, AGCA-Office of the California Attorney General, Sacramento, CA, for Respondent-Appellee

Before: TROTT, WARDLAW, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Convicted by a jury in California state court of multiple felony crimes including kidnapping, forcible rape, and robbery, Bailey now appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Citing Drope v. Missouri, 420 U.S. 162, 171-75, 95 S.Ct. 896, 43 L.Ed.2d 103 (1975), he claims that the state trial court deprived him of his federal constitutional right to due process of law by failing to order sua sponte a competency hearing to determine his mental competence to stand trial. See also Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402, 80 S.Ct. 788, 4 L.Ed.2d 824 (1960) (per curiam). The California Court of Appeal rejected this claim in a reasoned opinion, and the California Supreme Court affirmed Bailey’s conviction.

We have jurisdiction over this timely appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2253.

Section 2254(d) requires us to uphold a state court’s decision on a federal constitutional claim unless that decision was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law as determined by the Supreme Court of *607the United States; or the state court’s decision was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the state court proceedings. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d); Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86, 97-98, 131 S.Ct. 770, 178 L.Ed.2d 624 (2011).

On this record, we conclude that the California Court of Appeal’s decision was free of legal error. Moreover, its determination and understanding of the relevant facts was fully supported by the record. As the district court correctly observed,

> [I]t was reasonable [for the Court of Appeal] to find that the evidence before the trial judge did not raise a “bona fide doubt” about petitioner’s competency to stand trial.'While petitioner had a history of mental illness, likely exacerbated by drug and alcohol use, none of the psychiatric reports before the trial judge suggested that petitioner could not understand what was happening at trial or assist his own attorney.

AFFIRMED,

**

 xhiS disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Figure a

Page 1 of 6

FIGURE a 

Selected Photographs of Invertebrates Captured by Trawl during the Spring and Fall 2010 Jacksonville Surveys; 

Phyla Porifera, Mollusca, and Annelida

(Photos with black backgrounds courtesy of Amanda Bemis and Jenna Moore, Florida Museum of Natural History)

Carijoa sp. from JAX-Sp10-S04-EPI-A Leptogorgia sp. from JAX-Sp10-S03-EPI-A

Leptogorgia sp. (close-up) from JAX-Sp10-S03-EPI-A

Renilla reniformis from JAX-Sp10-N06-EPI-A
Figure a

Page 2 of 6

FIGURE a (continued)

Selected Photographs of Invertebrates Captured by Trawl during the Spring and Fall 2010 Jacksonville Surveys; 

Phyla Porifera, Mollusca and Annelida

(Photos with black backgrounds courtesy of Amanda Bemis and Jenna Moore, Florida Museum of Natural History)

Renilla reniformis from JAX-Sp10-N06-EPI-A

Virgularia presbytes from JAX-Sp10-N08-EPI-B

Oculina cf. varicosa from JAX-Sp10-S03-EPI-B Noetia ponderosa from JAX-Sp10-S04-EPI-B
Figure a

Page 3 of 6

FIGURE a (continued)

Selected Photographs of Invertebrates Captured by Trawl during the Spring and Fall 2010 Jacksonville Surveys; 

Phyla Porifera, Mollusca and Annelida

(Photos with black backgrounds courtesy of Amanda Bemis and Jenna Moore, Florida Museum of Natural History)

Ostreola (Ostrea) equestris (after drying) from JAX-Sp10-

S03-EPI-A

Ensis sp. from JAX-Sp10-S13-EPI-A

Pleuroploca gigantea from JAX-Sp10-S05-Epi-B

Armina wattla from JAX-Sp10-S12-EPI-A
Figure a

Page 4 of 6

FIGURE a (continued)

Selected Photographs of Invertebrates Captured by Trawl during the Spring and Fall 2010 Jacksonville Surveys; 

Phyla Porifera, Mollusca and Annelida

(Photos with black backgrounds courtesy of Amanda Bemis and Jenna Moore, Florida Museum of Natural History)

Armina wattla (ventral view) from JAX-Sp10-S12-EPI-A

Aeolidia sp. from JAX-Sp10-S03-EPI-B

Loligo sp. from JAX-Sp10-N08-EPI-A

Loligo sp. (head and tentacles) from JAX-Sp10-N08-EPI-A
Figure a

Page 5 of 6

FIGURE a (continued)

Selected Photographs of Invertebrates Captured by Trawl during the Spring and Fall 2010 Jacksonville Surveys; 

Phyla Porifera, Mollusca and Annelida

(Photos with black backgrounds courtesy of Amanda Bemis and Jenna Moore, Florida Museum of Natural History)

Stramonita haemostoma from JAX-Sp10-N04-EPI-B

Stramonita haemostoma (ventral view) from 

JAX-Sp10-N04-EPI-B

Chloeia viridis from JAX-Sp10-N04-EPI-B Chloeia viridis (ventral view) from JAX-Sp10-N04-EPI-B
Figure a

Page 6 of 6

FIGURE a (continued)

Selected Photographs of Invertebrates Captured by Trawl during the Spring and Fall 2010 Jacksonville Surveys; 

Phyla Porifera, Mollusca and Annelida

(Photos with black backgrounds courtesy of Amanda Bemis and Jenna Moore, Florida Museum of Natural History)

Owenia fusiformis from JAX-Sp10-S04-EPI-B Owenia fusiformis (anterior end) from JAX-Sp10-S04-

EPI-B
#### Wendle V. LEHNERD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC.; Bank of New York Mellon Corp., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 15-16641

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 11, 2017 *

Filed April 24, 2017

Wendle V. Lehnerd, Pro Se

Eric L. Cook, Attorney, Law Offices of Les Zieve, Phoenix, AZ, Sean Keenan McElenney, Esquire, Attorney, Eric M. Moores, Esquire, Attorney, Bryan Cave LLP, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendants-Appel-lees

Before: GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Wendle V. Lehnerd appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his diversity action arising from foreclosure proceedings. We review de novo questions of our own jurisdiction. *Hunt v. Imperial Merchant Servs., Inc.,*560 F.3d 1137, 1140 (9th Cir. 2009). We dismiss the appeal.

Lehnerd failed to obtain injunctive relief before the trustee’s sale of the property, and he therefore waived any defenses and objections to the sale. *See*Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 33-811(C) (defenses and objections to a trustee’s sale are waived if they are not raised in an action resulting in injunctive relief before the sale); *BT Capital, LLC v. TD Serv. Co. of Ariz.,*229 Ariz. 299, 275 P.3d 598, 600 (2012) (en banc) (once a trustee’s sale is completed, “a person subject to § 33-811(C) cannot later challenge the sale based on pre-sale defenses or objections”). Because the foreclosure sale has been completed, we cannot grant Leh-nerd any effective relief and dismiss Leh-nerd’s appeal as moot. *See Am. Cas. Co. of Reading, Pa. v. Baker,*22 F.3d 880, 896 (9th Cir. 1994) (a case is moot when there is no longer a present controversy as to which effective relief can be granted).

*876We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief. *See Padgett v. Wright,*587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

DISMISSED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 734 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 734

 To designate the United States courthouse and Federal building to be 
 constructed at the southeastern corner of Liberty and South Virginia 
   Streets in Reno, Nevada, as the ``Bruce R. Thompson United States 
       Courthouse and Federal Building'', and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

               April 27 (legislative day, April 24), 1995

  Mr. Reid (for himself and Mr. Bryan) introduced the following bill; 
 which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 
                              Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the United States courthouse and Federal building to be 
 constructed at the southeastern corner of Liberty and South Virginia 
   Streets in Reno, Nevada, as the ``Bruce R. Thompson United States 
       Courthouse and Federal Building'', 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. DESIGNATION OF BRUCE R. THOMPSON UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE 
              AND FEDERAL BUILDING.

    The United States courthouse and Federal building to be constructed 
at the southeastern corner of Liberty and South Virginia Streets in 
Reno, Nevada, shall be known and designated as the ``Bruce R. Thompson 
United States Courthouse and Federal Building''.

SEC. 2. LEGAL REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, regulation, document, record, map, or other 
paper of the United States to the courthouse and Federal building 
referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the 
``Bruce R. Thompson United States Courthouse and Federal Building''.
                                 <all>
```