alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2015198EN.01001301.xml

| 15.6.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 198/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.6.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 198/13

---

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 16 April 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Berlin-Brandenburg (Germany)) — TMK Europe GmbH v Hauptzollamt Frankfurt (Oder)

(Case C-143/14) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Dumping - Imports of certain pipes and tubes of iron or steel - Regulation (EC) No 384/96 - Article 3(7) - Damage to industry - Known factors - Causal link - Failure to take into account an investigation into anti-competitive practices by Community undertakings in the relevant sector - Regulation (EC) No 2320/97 - Validity))

(2015/C 198/16)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Finanzgericht Berlin-Brandenburg

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: TMK Europe GmbH

Applicant:

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Frankfurt (Oder)

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Consideration of the question raised has disclosed nothing to affect the validity of Council Regulation (EC) No 2320/97 of 17 November 1997, imposing definitive anti-dumping duties on imports of certain seamless pipes and tubes of iron or non-alloy steel originating in Hungary, Poland, Russia, the Czech Republic, Romania and the Slovak Republic, repealing Regulation (EEC) No 1189/93 and terminating the proceeding in respect of such imports originating in the Republic of Croatia.

---

(1)  OJ C 235, 21.7.2014.

1

---
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 Corinthian Colleges, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
David G. Moore, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



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



|(2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                 |  |  |  |                                                                                               
|---------------- |  |  |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                 |  | 
|November 8, 2004 |  |  |  | /s/    DAVID G. MOORE                                                                         
|                 |  |  |  | David G. Moore Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)



24
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3013 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3013

 To direct Federal departments and agencies to verify eligibility for 
  Federal benefits for individuals 105 years of age or older, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 23, 2019

  Mr. Steube introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                   Committee on Oversight and Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To direct Federal departments and agencies to verify eligibility for 
  Federal benefits for individuals 105 years of age or older, 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. VERIFICATION OF ELIGIBILITY FOR FEDERAL BENEFITS FOR CERTAIN 
              ELDERLY INDIVIDUALS.

    (a) In General.--The head of each Federal department or agency that 
provides Federal benefits to individuals who have attained 105 years of 
age or more shall take appropriate steps to ensure, on a semiannual 
basis, that each such individual remains eligible for such benefits.
    (b) Authority To Issue Regulations.--The head of each Federal 
department or agency specified in paragraph (1) may issue regulations 
to implement this section.
    (c) Effective Date.--This section shall apply with respect to 
payments of Federal benefits made on or after December 31, 2020.
                                 <all>
```
No. 10-11061.

#### Donald Sulecki, Petitioner v. Florida.

565 U.S. 864, 132 S. Ct. 208,

181 L. Ed. 2d 112,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 7133.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District, denied.

Same case below, 57 So. 3d 864.
**Exhibit      21**

**LIST      OF SUBSIDIARIES**

| **Name                  of Subsidiary**                  | **State                  of Incorporation** |
|----------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------|
|                                                     |                                        |
| AA                  DCAP Greenbrook Inc. (1)             | New                  Jersey                 |
| AARD-VARK                  Agency, Ltd.(2)               | New                  York                   |
| AIA-DCAP                  Corp.(3)                       | Pennsylvania                                |
| Baron                  Cycle, Inc.(4)                    | New                  York                   |
| Barry                  Scott Acquisition Corp.(4)        | New                  York                   |
| Barry                  Scott Agency Inc.(4)              | New                  York                   |
| Barry                  Scott Companies, Inc.(3)          | Delaware                                    |
| Blast                  Acquisition Corp.                 | Delaware                                    |
| DCAP                  Management Corp.                   | New                  York                   |
| Dealers                  Choice Automotive Planning Inc. | New                  York                   |
| Drive                  Insurance Agency, Inc.(4)         | Delaware                                    |
| IAH,                  Inc.                               | Delaware                                    |
| Intandem                  Corp.                          | New                  York                   |
| Payments                  Inc.                           | New                  York                   |

| (1)   | Company              owns 50% of outstanding Common Stock. |
|-----------------|------------------------------------------------------------|

| (2)   | A              wholly-owned subsidiary of Barry Scott Acquisition              Corp. |
|-----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (3)   | A              wholly-owned subsidiary of Blast Acquisition              Corp. |
|-----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (4)   | A              wholly-owned subsidiary of Barry Scott Companies,              Inc. |
|-----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
EMS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
 EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENT
 
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 NOW, THEREFORE,
 Maintenance of Insurance




---



##### 



2. Indemnification
 3. Limitations on Indemnity




---



##### 



4. Contribution
 5. Continuation of Obligations
 6. Notification and Defense of Claim




---



##### 



7. Advancement and Repayment of Expenses
 8. Enforcement
   9. Separability




---



##### 



10. Governing Law; Successors; Amendment and Termination
     IN WITNESS WHEREOF
 EMS TECHONOLGIES, INC.By:Officer
    
    
    
    
    
    Chief Executive Officer
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLAImages

# DLA Images

Search

Search

                                  - All Images 
                                  - Other 

                                  - Upload Date
                                  - Photo Date
                                  - Title

Share

----

Download Image: Small ()Medium ()Full Size (0.61 MB)

Tags:DLA L&M, Culture L&M, Mentee, Whitehall-Yearling High School, land and maritime, Mentor

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
#### People v Nunez

2d Dept: 139 AD3d 983 (Queens)

denied 8/24/16 (Abdus-Salaam, J.)
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-10674 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus FRANCISCO JAVIER MADRIZ-DIAZ, also known as Francisco José Madriz-Diaz, also known as Rolando, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:97-CR-258-1-T

- - - - - - - - - - April 19, 1999 Before JONES, SMITH, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Court-appointed counsel for Francisco Javier Madriz-Diaz, also known as Francisco José Madriz-Diaz, also known as Rolando, has filed a motion and brief as required by Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Madriz-Diaz has not filed a response to counsel’s motion. Our independent review of counsel’s brief and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused fromNo. -2- further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED.
See 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2.
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 Corinthian Colleges, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Kenneth S. Ord, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
§ 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



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



|(2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                 |  |  |  |  |  |                                                     
|---------------- |  |  |  |  |  | ----------------------------------------------------
|October 29, 2009 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ KENNETH S. ORD                                  
|                 |  |  |  |  |  | Kenneth S. Ord                                      
|                 |  |  |  |  |  | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|                 |  |  |  |  |  | (Principal Financial Officer)
##### 



Exhibit 31.2
 
      a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls
and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information
relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by
others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;b)
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal
control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation
of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles;c)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such
evaluation; andd)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the
registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control
over financial reporting; and
  a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect
the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;
and




---



##### 



b)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
 May 25, 2007
    
    
    /s/
    E. Bonnie SchaeferE. Bonnie SchaeferCo-Chief Executive Officer
No. 10-10666.

#### Vincent Brown, Petitioner v. William Kevin Massengill, et al.

565 U.S. 843, 132 S. Ct. 157,

181 L. Ed. 2d 72,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6199.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 425 Fed. Appx. 254.
### Exhibit 32.2

### 

### CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report of American Community Properties Trust (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Cynthia L. Hedrick, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify to my knowledge, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), 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.









|/s/ Cynthia L. Hedrick 
|-----------------------
|Cynthia L. Hedrick     
|Chief Financial Officer
|November 11, 2004
No. 10-1428.

#### Jose Valadez-Munoz, Petitioner v. Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General.

565 U.S. 821, 132 S. Ct. 106,

181 L. Ed. 2d 32,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6936.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

*33Same case below, 623 F.3d 1304.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 32.02
                              THE BANC CORPORATION
                   CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORT
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

      Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of The Banc Corporation
(the "Company") certifies that, to his knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q of the Company for the Quarter ended June 30, 2005, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

Dated: August 9, 2005                         /s/ David R. Carter
                                              -----------------------
                                              David R. Carter
                                              Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company and will be retained
by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 133 (Monday, July 13, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 37553]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18487]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP98-329-000]


Mobile Bay Pipeline Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC 
Gas Tariff

July 7, 1998.
    Take notice that on July 1, 1998, Mobile Bay Company (Mobile Bay) 
tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised 
Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, to become effective August 
1, 1998:

Third Revised Sheet No. 184
Third Revised Sheet No. 185
Fourth Revised Sheet No. 186
Second Revised Sheet No. 186A
Second Revised Sheet No. 187
Second Revised Sheet No. 188
First Revised Sheet No. 189
First Revised Sheet No. 366

    Mobile Bay states this filing is in compliance with the 
Commission's Order No. 587-G, issued April 16, 1998, at Docket No. 
RM96-1-007. The revised tariff sheets contain modifications reflecting 
Mobile Bay's compliance with the standards promulgated by the Gas 
Industry Standards Board, to become effective as of August 1, 1998.
    Mobile Bay states that copies of the filing have been served upon 
each person designated on the official service list.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed as 
provided in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests 
will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate 
action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to 
the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a 
motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-18487 Filed 7-10-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

No. 20

- 40074 Conference Calendar

**United States of America,**
Plaintiff

— Appellee **,**

versus

**Eric Eliel Pena**

**- Martinez,** 
Defendant

— Appellant

**.**

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:19

- CR

- 92

- 1

Before **King, Southwick,** and **Ho,** Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Eric Eliel Pena

Martinez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Pena

- Martinez has not filed a response.

* Pursuant to **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  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 **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED February 17, 2021 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 20-40074 Document: 00515746159 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/17/2021No. 20

- 40074

2 During the pendency of this appeal , Pena

- Martinez completed the sentence imposed on revocation of supervised release and was released from custody. Because Pena

- Martinez has not shown that he will suffer collateral consequences as a result of the revocation of his supervised release and b ecause no additional term of supervised release was imposed, the instant appeal does not present a case or controversy, and this court lacks jurisdiction. See Spencer v. Kemna , 523 U.S. 1, 7 (1998); United States

v. Clark , 193 F.3d 845, 847

- 48 (5th Cir. 1 999). Accordingly, the appeal is **DISMISSED AS MOOT** , and counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is **DENIED** as unnecessary. Case: 20-40074 Document: 00515746159 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/17/2021