alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,392
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,273,273
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               196,895
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (196,895)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (196,895)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (196,895)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.06)


</TABLE>
# C_2021338EN.01003401.xml

| 23.8.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 338/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.8.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 338/34

---

Action brought on 7 July 2021 — Société générale and Others v SRB

(Case T-387/21)

(2021/C 338/43)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Société générale (Paris, France), Crédit du Nord (Lille, France) and SG Option Europe (Puteaux, France) (represented by: A. Gosset-Grainville, M. Trabucchi and M. Dalon, lawyers)

Defendant: Single Resolution Board

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:

| — | pursuant to Article 263 TFEU, annul Decision SRB/ES/2021/22 of 14 April 2021 on the calculation of the 2021 ex-ante contributions to the SRF in so far as it concerns the applicants; |
| --- | --- |

—

pursuant to Article 263 TFEU, annul Decision SRB/ES/2021/22 of 14 April 2021 on the calculation of the 2021 ex-ante contributions to the SRF in so far as it concerns the applicants;

| — | pursuant to Article 277 TFEU, declare the following provisions of the SRM Regulation, the Implementing Regulation and the Delegated Regulation inapplicable:






  — | Articles 69(1), 69(2), 70(1) and 70(2)(a) and (b) of the SRM Regulation; |
| --- | --- | --- |

—

pursuant to Article 277 TFEU, declare the following provisions of the SRM Regulation, the Implementing Regulation and the Delegated Regulation inapplicable:

—

Articles 69(1), 69(2), 70(1) and 70(2)(a) and (b) of the SRM Regulation;

| — | Article 4(2) and Articles 6 and 7 of the Delegated Regulation, and Annex I thereto; |
| --- | --- |

—

Article 4(2) and Articles 6 and 7 of the Delegated Regulation, and Annex I thereto;

| — | Article 4 of the Implementing Regulation; |
| --- | --- |

—

Article 4 of the Implementing Regulation;

| — | order the defendant to pay all the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay all the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants rely on eight pleas in law which are, in essence, identical or similar to those put forward in Case T-383/21, Banque postale v SRB.

---
#### UNITED STATES of America Plaintiff-Appellee v. George H. ROCK Defendant-Appellant

No. 17-2310

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted February 6, 2018

Filed February 8, 2018

*714Alison D. Dunning, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Kansas City, MO, for Plaintiff-Appellee

John Jenab, Jenab Law Firm, Olathe, KS, for Defendant-Appellant

George H. Rock, Pro Se

Before GRUENDER, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

George Rock appeals the above-guidelines sentence the district court1 imposed after he pleaded guilty to a felon-in-possession offense. His counsel has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief under *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), presenting as an issue whether Rock’s sentence is unreasonable.

Upon careful review, we conclude that Rock’s sentence is not unreasonable. *See United States v. Feemster,*572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (reviewing sentence under deferential abuse-of-discretion standard); *United States v. Mangum,*625 F.3d 466, 469-70 (8th Cir. 2010) (holding that upward variance was reasonable where court made individualized assessment of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors based on facts presented and considered defendant’s proffered information). In addition, having independently reviewed the record pursuant to *Penson v. Ohio,*488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. “We remind counsel, however, of their obligation in filing an *Anders*brief. Such a brief must be done as an advocate for the appellant, not the government, and should refer to anything in the record that might arguably support the appeal.” *See United States v. Frazier,*133 F.3d 923, 923 (8th Cir. 1997) (per curiam) (citing *Evans v. Clarke,*868 F.2d 267, 268 (8th Cir. 1989)).

Accordingly, we grant counsel leave to withdraw, and we affirm.

1

. The Honorable Greg Kays, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri.
No. 11-10103.

#### Baker *v.*Florida.

Dist. Ct. App. Fla., 1st Dist. Certiorari denied.
No. 11-10072.

#### Hamby *v.*Montana.

Sup. Ct. Mont. Certio-rari denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-1-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                            863,703
<SECURITIES>                                            0                                  
<RECEIVABLES>                                     366,777
<ALLOWANCES>                                       16,600
<INVENTORY>                                        84,762
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                1,615,939
<PP&E>                                          6,741,391
<DEPRECIATION>                                    820,387
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 44,330,138
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          10,136,964
<BONDS>                                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                           139
<COMMON>                                           24,218
<OTHER-SE>                                              0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   44,330,138
<SALES>                                           516,092
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  516,092
<CGS>                                             182,873
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   1,662,657
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  652,581
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                460,370
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,799,146)
<INCOME-TAX>                                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,799,146)
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,799,146)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       (0.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       (0.08)
        

</TABLE>
STATE OF CONNECTICUT 

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

HEARING CERTIFICATION 

This certifies in accordance with the provisions of Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 

51 .102 that the following actions were taken regarding the proposed amendment of RCSA 

sections 22a-174-20, 22a-174-32(b)(3) and 22a-174-33(f)(6) : 

1) The public hearing was held on May 28, 2009 as announced in the notice of 

hearing (copy attached); 

2) In accordance with the notice, materials were available for review in each Air 

Quality Control Region (AQCR) in Connecticut; 

3) Copies of the notice were mailed to the directors of the air pollution control 

agencies in New York, New Jersey, Rhode Island and Massachusetts along with a 

copy to the Director of the Air Management Division of Region I of the U.S . 

Environmental Protection Agency; and 

4) The notice of hearing was published in four area newspapers as follows: 

Newspaper AQCR 

Connecticut Post 43 

Hartford Courant 42 

New London Day 41 

The Register Citizen 44 

April 28, 2010 

Date 

April 21, 2009 

April 21, 2009 

April 21, 2009 

April 21, 2009 

Date Me 

B 

(Printed on Recycled Paper) 

79 Elm Street " Hartford, CT 06106-5127 

www.ct .gov/dep 

An Equal Opportunity Employer
EAC Decision on Request for Interpretation 2015-05

(Touchscreen Technology)

VVSG 1.0 Volume 1: 3.2.3.c Dexterity

VVSG 1.1 Volume 1: 3.3.4.d Enhanced input and control characteristics

Date: 

December 11, 2015

Question: 

Is it acceptable to use capacitive screen technology requiring human touch if 

assistive devices are provided to activate the screen?

Section of Guidelines:

VVSG 1.0 V1: 3.2.3.c

3.2.3.c Dexterity

The voting process shall be accessible to voters who lack fine motor control or use 

of their hands. 

The accessible voting station controls shall not require direct bodily contact or for 

the body to be part of any electrical circuit. 

Discussion: This requirement ensures that controls are operable by individuals 

using prosthetic devices

VVSG 1.1 V1: 3.3.4.d 

3.3.4.d Enhanced input and control characteristics

These requirements specify the features of the Accessible Voting Station (Acc-VS)

designed to assist voters who lack fine motor control or use of their hands.
The Acc-VS controls shall not require direct bodily contact or for the body to be part 

of any electrical circuit.

Discussion: This requirement ensures that controls are operable by individuals 

using prosthetic devices.

Discussion: 

There are two forms of touchscreen technology: capacitive and resistive. 

Capacitive touchscreen displays rely on contact with a conductive object, such as 

human contact. Resistive touchscreen displays rely on pressure applied by any 

source. Legacy voting systems have mostly, if not entirely, used resistive 

touchscreen technology. Capacitive touchscreens are found on most consumer 

products and do not work without human body contact. Devices are now 

commercially available with built-in permanent tips to activate capacitive screens in 

place of human contact to accommodate all users with or without a disability. Such 

devices, a stylus for example, are commonly used with commercial tablets, cellular 

devices, and other technologies.

Conclusion: 

Today’s technology utilizes capacitive screens with tools to accommodate all users.

In order to support all voters, manufacturers can incorporate the use of capacitive 

screens if they supply a stylus or other device with built-in permanent tips that 

activate capacitive screens. Such devices must be supplied alongside the voting 

equipment and all device specifications must be included in the Technical Data 

Package with enough information for the jurisdiction to order and use devices as 

needed. The EAC will review manufacturer materials to ensure enough information 

is provided to properly utilize given devices.

Applicability:

Effective upon final publication.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF CHILDREN'S COMPREHENSIVE SERVICES, INC. FOR THE SIX
MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                           1,793
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   33,031
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,558
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                36,912
<PP&E>                                          62,278
<DEPRECIATION>                                  11,103
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 101,902
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           13,712
<BONDS>                                         28,825
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               72
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      57,394
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   101,902
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                61,301
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                57,171
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,058
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,022
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,269
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,753
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.24
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.24


</TABLE>
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1 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 Quarterly Report of UST Liquidating Corporation. (the
Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Marc. A. Weisman, Co-Chairman of Board of Directors of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  (1)
    
    The Report 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 result of operations of
the Company. /s/ Marc A. WeismanMarc A. WeismanMay 14, 2004
    Co-Chairman of Board of Directors
# C_2021263EN.01002901.xml

| 5.7.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 263/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.7.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 263/29

---

Action brought on 11 May 2021 — Hrebenyuk v EUIPO (Shape of a stand-up collar)

(Case T-252/21)

(2021/C 263/38)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Anna Hrebenyuk (Griesheim, Germany) (represented by: H.-J. Ruhl, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Trade mark at issue: Registration of a three-dimensional EU trade mark (Shape of a stand-up collar) — Application No 17 975 716

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 February 2021 in Case R 1902/2020-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision as well as the first-instance decision of the Office of 3 March 2020; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision as well as the first-instance decision of the Office of 3 March 2020;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 6 in conjunction with Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 6 in conjunction with Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-40486

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

PATRICIO ROGELIO AGUILERA,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. C-96-CR-21-1

- - - - - - - - - -

April 15, 1997

Before REAVLEY, DAVIS, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Patricio Rogelio Aguilera appeals his conviction for being a

felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition, in violation of

18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) and 924(e). His contention that

§ 922(g)(1) is unconstitutional lacks merit. United States v.

Rawls, 85 F.3d 240 (5th Cir. 1996). 

AFFIRMED.
R307. Environmental Quality, Air Quality.

R307-210. Stationary Sources.

R307-210-1. Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources 

(NSPS).

 The provisions of 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 60, 

effective on July 1, 2006, except for Subparts Cb, Cc, Cd, Ce, BBBB, 

DDDD, and HHHH, are incorporated by reference into these rules with 

the exception that references in 40 CFR to "Administrator" shall mean 

"executive secretary" unless by federal law the authority referenced 

is specific to the Administrator and cannot be delegated. 

KEY: air pollution, stationary sources, new source review

Date of Enactment or Last Substantive Amendment: March 15, 2007

Notice of Continuation: June 16, 2006

Authorizing, and Implemented or Interpreted Law: 19-2-104(3)(q); 

19-2-108
# Official Journal C 184/2018

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 184 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6129 May 2018 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 184

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6129 May 2018

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | III   Preparatory acts |
| | COUNCIL |
| 2018/C 184/01 | Position (EU) No 1/2018 of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Union and Regulation (EU) 2016/1037 on protection against subsidised imports from countries not members of the European UnionAdopted by the Council on 16 April 2018 | 1 |
| 2018/C 184/02 | Statement of the Council’s reasons: Position (EU) No 1/2018 of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Union and Regulation (EU) 2016/1037 on protection against subsidised imports from countries not members of the European Union | 19 |

Contents

page

III   Preparatory acts

COUNCIL

2018/C 184/01

Position (EU) No 1/2018 of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Union and Regulation (EU) 2016/1037 on protection against subsidised imports from countries not members of the European UnionAdopted by the Council on 16 April 2018

1

2018/C 184/02

Statement of the Council’s reasons: Position (EU) No 1/2018 of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Union and Regulation (EU) 2016/1037 on protection against subsidised imports from countries not members of the European Union

19

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
Exhibit 31

Certifications

I, Richard Simpson, certify that:

1.I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Trust 2015-GC27 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);

2.Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

4.Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement(s) required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreements in all material respects; and

5.All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report.  Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: Wells Fargo Bank, National Association; Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC; Park Bridge Lender Services LLC; Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas; CoreLogic Commercial Real Estate Services, Inc.; National Tax Search, LLC; and Northmarq Capital, LLC.

Date:March 30, 2020

|  | /s/ Richard Simpson ___________________Richard SimpsonPresident, Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Securities Inc.(senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor) |
|--|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

CGCMT 2015-GC27 Certifications