alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2019006EN.01000201.xml

| 9.1.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 6/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.1.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 6/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.9215 — Sumitomo Corporation/Toyota Motor Corporation/Kinto Corporation)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2019/C 6/03)

On 19 December 2018, 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 English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | 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 32018M9215. 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 32018M9215. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

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

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                             867
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           2,291
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 2,142
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                   979
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                      3,308
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                         23,541
<ALLOWANCE>                                        368
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  34,377
<DEPOSITS>                                      26,732
<SHORT-TERM>                                     2,637
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                809
<LONG-TERM>                                      1,446
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              400
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       2,353
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  34,377
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  1,379
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  163
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   189
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 1,731
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                 625
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 807
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                              924
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       68
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   7
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                    611
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    584
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       350
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.89
<LOANS-NON>                                        294
<LOANS-PAST>                                        23
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   380
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      104
<RECOVERIES>                                        24
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  368
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               143
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                 36
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            189


</TABLE>
# Estimate

&"Arial,Bold"&8Energy Information Administration2009 Residential Energy Consumption Survey:  Final Household Consumption and ExpenditturesTables	

# RSE
#### Deaver v. Board of Lyon County Comm’rs

110,547

09/14/2015

Denied.

Unpubhshed
##### 



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 Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a)
and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of
the Principal Accounting Officer and the Trustee of Marine Petroleum Trust (the
Company), does hereby certify, to such persons knowledge, that: The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004
(the Form 10-Q) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as
of, and for, the periods presented in the Form 10-Q. /s/ R. RAY BELLR. Ray BellPrincipal Accounting Officer
 Dated: November 12, 2004 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Marine Petroleum Trust and will be retained by Marine Petroleum
Trust and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request. The foregoing certification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Form 10-Q
pursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K and Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63
of Title 18, United States Code) and, accordingly, is not being filed as part
of the Form 10-Q for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, and is not incorporated by reference into any filing of the
Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any
general incorporation language in such filing.
Exhibit 99.2



                    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 Micronetics Wireless,
Inc. (the  Company") on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ending March 31,
2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the  Report"), Dennis Dow, Financial Consultant of the
Company certifies, 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 his knowledge:

      (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or Section 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.



November 26, 2002              /s/Dennis Dow
                               -----------------------------------
                               Name: Dennis Dow
                               Title: Vice President-Finance
                                      (Principal Financial Officer)





   This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the
extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by
the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended.
No. 12-6076.

#### Hughes v. Chevron Phillips Chemical Co. LP.

C. A. 5th Cir. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis*denied. Petitioner is allowed until November 19, 2012, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with Rule 33.1 of the Rules of this Court.

Justice Alito took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________ No. 12

- 16179 Non

- Argument Calendar

________________________ D.C. Docket No. 5:02

- cr - 00006

- MTT

- CHW

- 1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v ersus MEDRU MARCUS, a.k.a. Zeke, Defendant

- Appellant.

________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court f

or the Middle District of Georgia

________________________ (August 26, 2013) Before PRYOR , MARTIN and FAY , Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:

Case: 12-16179 Date Filed: 08/26/2013 Page: 1 of 22 Medru Marcus , a federal prisoner, appeals the denial of his motion to reduce his sentence , 18 U.S.C. § 3582, under Amendment 750 of the S entencing Guidelines

. Marcus argues that, under Freeman v. United States , 564 U.S. __, 131 S. Ct. 2685 (2011) , his sentence was “based on” a sentencing range that has been lowered by the Sentencing Commission and that he is subject to the new mandatory penalties under the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010. We affirm.
T he distri ct court correctly denied Marcus ’s motion . Marcus was sentenced

as a career offender , and Amendment 750 did not alter his sentencing range. See
Un ited States v. Lawson , 686 F.3d 1317, 1321 (11th Cir

. ), cert. denied 133 S. Ct. 568 (2012). And because t he F air Sentencing Act is not an amendment to the Guidelines, the Act cannot serve as a basis for a sentence reduction under section 3582(a)(2)

. See United States v. Berry , 701 F.3d 374, 377 (11th Cir. 2012)

. E ven if we were to assum e that Marcus could base his motion on the Fair Sentencing
Act , his motion would fail because he was sentenced before the effective date of the Act

. See United States v. Hippolyte , 712 F.3d 535, 542 (11th Cir. 2013)

. AFFIRMED. Case: 12-16179 Date Filed: 08/26/2013 Page: 2 of 2
Exhibit 32

The following statement is being made to the Securities and Exchange Commission solely for the purposes of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350), which carries with it
certain criminal penalties in the event of a knowing or willful misrepresentation.

Securities and Exchange Commission

450 Fifth Street NW

Washington, D.C. 20549



| | Re: | Perrigo Company
| | --- | ---------------

Ladies and Gentlemen:

In accordance with the requirements of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 USC 1350), each of the
undersigned hereby certifies that:



| | (i) | this Form 10-Q 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
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (ii) | the information contained in this report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Perrigo Company.
| | ---- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated as of this 2nd day of February, 2010.



|                                                |  |  |  |                                                     
|----------------------------------------------- |  |  |  | ----------------------------------------------------
|                                                |  | 
|/s/ Joseph C. Papa                              |  |  |  | /s/ Judy L. Brown                                   
|Joseph C. Papa                                  |  |  |  | Judy L. Brown                                       
|Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer |  |  |  | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer



- 54 -
FILE COPY itooof^tv

IT OF APPEALS

Appeals District

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

NO. 12-0421

J. MARK SWINNEA

v.

ERI CONSULTING ENGINEERS,

INC. AND LARRY G. SNODGRASS

§

L

US*

Smith County,"

12th District.

January 18, 2013

Petitioner's petition for review, filed herein in the above numbered and styled case,

having been duly considered, is ordered, and hereby is, denied.

*••••••*••

I, BLAKE A. HAWTHORNE, Clerk of the Supreme Court of Texas, do hereby certify

that the above and attached is a true and correct copy of the orders of the Supreme Court of

Texas in the case numbered and styled as above, as the same appear of record in the minutes of

said Court under the date shown.

It is further ordered that petitioner, J. MARK SWINNEA, pay all costs incurred on this

petition.

WITNESS my hand and seal of the Supreme Court of Texas, at the City of Austin, this

the 13th day of March, 2013.

Blake A. Hawthorne, Clerk

By Kathy Sandoval, Deputy Clerk
FILE COPY

The Twelfth Court of Appeals

Tyler, Texas

Supreme Court No. 12-0421

Court of Appeals No. 12-05-00428-CV

Please note Rule 18.5 Tex. R. App. P.: If the Supreme Court declines to

grant review, any unpaid Supreme Court costs must be included in the court

of appeals' mandate. If any fees remain outstanding in the above case, a fee

list will accompany this receipt.

Certified Copy of order in the above case received in the Court of

Appeals on .

By.

Deputy Clerk
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2009-3089

CETRIC D. FLETCHER, SR.,

Petitioner,

V.

UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE,

Respondent.

Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection Board in

SF0353080383-I-1.

ON MOTION

Before GAJARSA, LINN, and PROST, Circuit Judqes.

PER CURIAM.

ORDER

Cetric D. Fletcher, Sr. moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and for

reconsideration of the court's previous rejection of his petition for review.

The Merit Systems Protection Board issued its final order on September 24,

2008. Fletcher received a copy of the Board's order the next day. Fletcher's petition

was received by this court on December 9, 2008, 76 days after Fletcher received the

Board's final order.

Our review of a Board decision or order is governed by 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(1),

which provides that "[n]otwithstanding any other provision of law, any petition for review

must be filed within 60 days after the date the petitioner received notice of the final

order or decision of the board." This filing period is "statutory, mandatory, [and]
jurisdictional." Monzo v. Dept of Transportation, 735 F.2d 1335, 1336 (Fed. Cir. 1984);

see also Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205 (2007) (the timely filing of a notice of appeal

in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement that cannot be waived).

Because Fletcher's petition was not received within 60 days of the date he

received the Board's decision, we must dismiss his petition as untimely.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

Fletcher's petition is dismissed.

Fletcher's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted.

(3)	All sides shall bear their own costs.

FOR THE COURT

FEB	6 2009

/s/ Jan Horbaly

Date	

Jan Horbaly

Clerk	

U.S. COURT OF O		FOR

THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

cc:	Cetric D. Fletcher, Sr.	 FEB n 6 2009

Maame A.F. Ewusi-Mensah, Esq.

s19	

r;

FEB 6 2009

ISSUED AS A MANDATE: 	

2009-3089	 2
906 Certification C.F.O




 Exhibit 10.2 
  
 STATEMENT REQUIRED BY 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, 
 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 
  
 In connection with the Annual Report on Form 20-F of Stora Enso Corporation (the “Company”) for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Esko Mäkeläinen, Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 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 results of operations of the Company. 

  
 Date: June 25, 2003 
  

	 
		
	 	 	 /s/    ESKO
MÄKELÄINEN    


	 	 	 Esko Mäkeläinen
 Senior Executive Vice President,
 Finance, Accounting and Legal
Affairs,
 and Chief Financial Officer



  
 A SIGNED ORIGINAL OF THIS
WRITTEN STATEMENT REQUIRED BY SECTION 906 HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO STORA ENSO CORPORATION AND WILL BE RETAINED BY STORA ENSO CORPORATION AND FURNISHED TO THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION OR ITS STAFF UPON REQUEST. 
  

 1
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 71 (Monday, April 14, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 18040]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-9415]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 96-AEA-12]


Amendment to Class E Airspace; Hudson, NY; Correction

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: This action corrects an error in the geographic coordinates of 
a final rule that was published in the Federal Register on February 13, 
1997 (62 FR 6710), Airspace Docket No. 96-AEA-12. The final rule 
amended Class E airspace at Hudson, NY.

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 14, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael J. Sammartino, Air Traffic Division, Operations Branch, AEA-
530, Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Building #111, John F. 
Kennedy Int'l Airport, Jamaica, NY 11430; telephone: (718) 553-4530.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    Federal Register Document 97-3670, Airspace Docket 96-AEA-12, 
published on February 13, 1997 (62 FR 6710) amended the Class E 
airspace at Hudson, NY. An error was discovered in the geographic 
coordinates for Philmont NDB. This action corrects that error.

Correction to Final Rule

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the 
geographic coordinates for the Philmont NDB for the Class E airspace at 
Hudson, NY, incorporated by reference in Sec. 71.1, as published in the 
Federal Register on February 13, 1997 (61 FR 6710), (Federal Register 
Document (97-3670) is corrected as follows:


Sec. 71.1  [Corrected]

AEA NY E5  Hudson, NY [Corrected]

On page 6710 in column 3, under Philmont NDB, first line, correct
    (Lat. 42 deg.15'10'' N, long. 73 deg.43'37'' W)'' to read
    (Lat. 42 deg.15'10'' N, long. 73 deg.43'23'' W)''.

    Issued in Jamaica, New York on April 2, 1997.
John S. Walker,
Manager, Air Traffic Division, Eastern Region.
[FR Doc. 97-9415 Filed 4-11-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
#### WALLACE, S. v. COMMUNITY EDUCATION CENTERS

2352 EDA 2016

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

07/10/2017

15-009332 (Delaware)

Affirmed
#### State v. Copenhaver

107,632

10/07/2015

Denied.

Unpublished
EXHIBIT 32.2

                           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 Longview Fibre Company (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended July 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Form 10-Q"), I,
L. J. McLaughlin, Sr. Vice President-Finance, Secretary and Treasurer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)      The Form 10-Q 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

(2)      The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
         of the Company.

Dated:  September 12, 2003


L. J. MCLAUGHLIN
L. J. MCLAUGHLIN
Sr. Vice President-Finance,
Secretary and Treasurer
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A24A1216. CHARLIE SHY v. GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN

SERVICES, EX REL. CAIRO SHY.

Defendant Charlie Shy filed this direct appeal from a superior court order

establishing his paternity to a minor child and requiring him to pay child support. We

lack jurisdiction.

“Appeals from judgments or orders in divorce, alimony, and other domestic

relations cases” must be initiated by filing an application for discretionary review.

OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (2), (b). Because this case involves paternity and the collection of

child support, it is a domestic relations case within the meaning of the statute. See

Booker v. Ga. Dept.of Human Resources, 317 Ga. App. 426, 427 (731 SE2d 110) (2012)

(an action in which the “underlying subject matter is a father’s obligation to provide

child support” is “a domestic relations case subject to review only by application”);

Brown v. Dept. of Human Resources, 204 Ga. App. 27, 27 (418 SE2d 404) (1992)

(“Appeals arising out ofpaternity petitions are domestic relations cases which require

compliance with the discretionary appeal procedure of OCGA § 5-6-35.”).

“Compliance with the discretionary appeals procedure is jurisdictional.” Smoak v.

Dept.of Human Resources, 221 Ga. App. 257, 257 (471 SE2d 60) (1996). Accordingly,

Shy was required to comply with the discretionary appeal procedure to obtain review

of the superior court’s order. His failure to do so deprives us of jurisdiction over this

direct appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED. See Booker, 317 Ga. App. at 427; Brown,

204 Ga. App. at 27.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

May 01, 2024

05/01/2024