alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2017409EN.01000102.xml

| 1.12.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 409/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.12.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 409/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8667 — Deutsche Alternative Asset Management/M&G Alternatives Investment Management/JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2017/C 409/02)

On 24 November 2017, 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:

1

| — | 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 32017M8667. 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 32017M8667. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

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

1

---
No. 09-9596.

#### Earl L. Diehl, Petitioner v. Deirdre A. Morgan, Warden.

559 U.S. 1081, 130 S. Ct. 2124,

176 L. Ed. 2d 747,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3199.

April 19, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.

Same case below, 352 Fed. Appx. 99.
No. 09-850.

#### Wrench Transportation Systems, Inc., et al., Petitioners v. John F. Kennedy, et al.

559 U.S. 1007, 130 S. Ct. 1896,

176 L. Ed. 2d 365,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2632.

March 22, 2010.

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

*366Same case below, 340 Fed. Appx. 812.
No. 09-8207.

#### Donald L. Palmer, Petitioner v. Margaret A. Bagley, Warden.

559 U.S. 993, 130 S. Ct. 1737,

176 L. Ed. 2d 215,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2222.

March 8, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 330 Fed. Appx. 92.
##### 



EXHIBIT 31.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
FOR THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER I, John M. Hughes, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Alion Science and Technology
Corporation; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does 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, the financial statements, and other financial information included
in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:  e)
    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;f)
    [Reserved]g)
    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; andh)
    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 5. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and
the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):  c)
    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; andd)
    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. Date: May 13, 2005 By:
    
    /s/ John M. HughesName: John M. HughesTitle: Chief Financial Officer
No. 09-9303.

#### Raymond DeLeon, Jr., Petitioner v. Rick Thaler, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

559 U.S. 1077, 130 S. Ct. 2113,

176 L. Ed. 2d 739,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3441.

April 19, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
1 From: Seidel, Teresa (DNRE) [SEIDELT@michigan.gov] Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2011 8:55 AM To: Adams, Lucy H. Attachments: lacks barden 8-21-08.pdf; lacks barden 2-1-11.pdf
Exhibit 32.2

NOVELLUS SYSTEMS, INC.

CERTIFICATION

In connection
with the annual report of Novellus Systems, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Jeffrey C. Benzing, Executive Vice President
and Chief Administrative Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:

(1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and
for the periods indicated.

This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.



|                        |  |     |  |                                                          
|----------------------- |  | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------
|Date: February 27, 2009 |  | By: |  | /s/ Jeffrey C. Benzing                                   
|                        |  |     |  | Jeffrey C. Benzing                                       
|                        |  |     |  | Executive Vice President and Chief Administrative
Officer
What is Behavior-Based Interviewing (BBI)?

Behavior-based interviewing is a technique used in which the job candidate has the opportunity 

to demonstrate their potential for succeeding in the new job by providing specific examples of 

how they handled similar situations based on their past experience.

The main difference between this type of interviewing and a regular interview is that rather 

than merely sharing your opinions or ideas about what you would do in a situation, as in a 

regular interview, in a behavior-based interview you must describe, in detail, how you handled 

a situation in the past.

Why does DLA use Behavior-Based Interviewing (BBI)?

DLA has used the behavior-based interviewing approach since October, 2005, because it is a 

best practice that has proven to be far more reliable at predicting a candidate's future job 

performance than a traditional interview. Finding the best qualified candidates who fit both the 

job and the organization ensures that we continue to provide the worldwide logistics support 

our warfighters need.

How can I prepare for a Behavior-Based Interview (BBI)? 

Interviewers will ask questions targeted at the behaviors or qualifications you need to be 

successful in the job. The following steps will help you prepare to answer these questions.

1. Determine and list the competencies that the interviewer might be looking for by 

reviewing the duties and qualifications listed in the job announcement. 

2. Compare the competencies to your past job history or personal experiences and list 

examples of how you have previously demonstrated those competencies. 

3. Prepare a story with a beginning, middle, and end. 

4. Outline some examples, or stories, to show how you demonstrated the 

competencies in the past.

- Think not only of examples with positive outcomes, but those with negative 

outcomes as well. Interviewers may ask you about situations that you could not 

resolve favorably and what you learned from those experiences.

- Using the below STAR format will help you provide the specifics the interviewer 

needs to fully assess your level of experience.

5. Practice telling your stories. For each example you identified, describe what 

problem occurred, who was involved, what you did to help resolve it, and what the 

outcome was. 
What is the STAR Format? 

S –

Situation

Describe a specific situation that addresses the 

question. 

T – Task Describe the tasks associated with the situation.

A – Action Describe the actions you took to address the 

situation. 

R – Result Describe the outcome of your action. 

Where can I find additional information about Behavior-Based Interviews (BBI)? 

There is an abundance of information on the Internet. Some search options include: behaviorbased interviews, behavioral interviews, competency-based interviews.
1
    
    The Middlefield Banking Company (MBC), an Ohio-chartered commercial bank that began
operations in 1901. MBC engages in a general commercial banking business in northeastern
Ohio. The principal executive office is located at 15985 East High Street, Middlefield,
Ohio 44062-0035.
 2
    
    Emerald Bank (EB), an Ohio-chartered commercial bank headquartered in Dublin, Ohio.
EB engages in a general commercial banking business in central Ohio. The principal
executive office is located at 6215 Perimeter Drive, Dublin Ohio 43017.
 3
    
    On October 23, 2009 Middlefield received from the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland
approval to establish an asset resolution subsidiary. Organized as an Ohio corporation
under the name EMORECO, Inc. and wholly owned by Middlefield Banc Corp, the purpose of the
asset resolution subsidiary is to maintain, manage, and ultimately dispose of nonperforming
loans and real estate acquired by subsidiary banks as the result of borrower default on
real-estate-secured loans.
No. 09-8867.

#### Archie R. Kenerson, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 997, 130 S. Ct. 1749,

176 L. Ed. 2d 221,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2304.

March 8, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.

Same case below, 585 F.3d 389.
EX-10.2



 Exhibit 10.2 
 Memorandum on the payment of royalty 
 Nanophase Technologies Corporation
(“NTC”) and CIK NanoTek Corporation (“CIKN”) agree as follows with respect to the License Agreement made and entered into as of December 30th, 1997, Amendment No.l to License Agreement 2004.7.13, Amendment No.2 to License Agreement 2008.4.2 by and between C.I.
Kasei Co., Ltd. (“CIK”) and NTC, and the Sublicense Agreement made and entered into as of
April 1st, 2009 by CIK and CIKN (jointly
“License Agreements”). 
 In consideration of the payment under the License Agreements, the royalties CIKN shall pay to NTC are as
follows: 
 (1) The remaining balance of minimum royalty due in April of 2012: $271,053.33(USD) 

(2) The minimum royalty due in April of 2013: $300,000 (USD) 
 For the payments above, NTC and CIKN agree as follows: 
 NTC shall give CIKN 7% discount against
the minimum royalty due in April of 2013, provided that CIKN advances the payment in April of 2012. 
 NOW THEREFORE, CIKN shall pay the
remaining balance of minimum royalty due in April of 2012 and the discounted minimum royalty due in April of 2013 by the end of April, 2012. 

Upon the payments by CIKN as provided herein, all obligations for the payments provided in License Agreements shall be completed. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties made the Memorandum in duplicate and each party shall retain one copy after affixing its signature. 

Date: March 31, 2012 
  

									
	Nanophase Technologies Corporation	 		 	CIK NanoTek Corporation
			
	 1319 Marquette Drive

Romeoville, IL 60446 USA
	 		 	 18-1, 1-Chome, Kyobashi, Chuo-ku, Tokyo
 JAPAN

					
	By:	 	 Jess Jankowski, President and Chief
 Executive Officer
	 		 	By:	 	Akihiro Onishi, President
		 	 		 		 	
			
	/s/ Jess Jankowski	 		 	/s/ Akihiro Onishi
Exhibit 10.28

 

The undersigned executive and BioProtection Systems Corporation (the “Company”) hereby acknowledge and agree that the description below is true and correct in all respects.

 

In 2006, Dr. Charles Link borrowed $75,000.00 from the Company, at an interest rate of 5.01% per annum. On March 3, 2010 and May 11, 2010, the Company forgave a total of $30,000.00 of the principal amount of the loan plus $13,517.00 of interest accrued on the loan.  On March 3, 2010, the Company paid Dr. Link a cash bonus of $15,000.00 to cover the resulting tax liability. On October 31, 2010, the Company paid Dr. Link a bonus of $50,000.00 gross, of which $33,775.00 was net and was applied to the principal due on the loan and $0 was applied to the interest.  On November 17, 2010, Dr. Link repaid the remainder of the loan with a $12,466.52 payment, of which $11,225.00 was applied to the principal and $1,241.52 was applied to the interest.

 

 

	
EXECUTIVE
    	
 
    	
BIOPROTECTION   SYSTEMS CORPORATION
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
/s/   Charles Link
    	
 
    	
/s/   Gordon Link
    
	
Charles   Link
    	
 
    	
Print   Name:
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
Title:
    	
 
    
	
Date: 
    	
11/24/10
    	
 
    	
Date:
No. 09-8406.

#### Jon Patton, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 956, 130 S. Ct. 1550,

176 L. Ed. 2d 140,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 1189.

February 22, 2010.

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

Same case below, 346 Fed. Appx. 532.
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 338 

To allow Federal employees excepted from furlough during the lapse in 

appropriations beginning on or around December 22, 2018, to make 

withdrawals from their Thrift Savings Plan accounts, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 8, 2019 

Mr. MEADOWS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Reform, and in addition to the Committee on 

Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 

Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within 

the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To allow Federal employees excepted from furlough during 

the lapse in appropriations beginning on or around December 22, 2018, to make withdrawals from their Thrift 

Savings Plan accounts, 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 ‘‘Essential Employees 

5 Pay Certainty Act’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 338 IH

1 SEC. 2. TSP WITHDRAWALS FOR FEDERAL EMPLOYEES EX2 CEPTED FROM FURLOUGH DURING GOVERN3 MENT SHUTDOWN. 

4 (a) WITHDRAWAL.— 

5 (1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other 

6 provision of law, any Federal employee excepted 

7 from furlough resulting from a lapse in discretionary 

8 appropriations occurring on or around December 22, 

9 2018, may, during such lapse, make a withdrawal 

10 from the employee’s account within the Thrift Sav11 ings Plan, without penalty and without being treated 

12 as violating any requirement of the Internal Revenue 

13 Code of 1986. 

14 (2) AMOUNT.—The amount of a withdrawal 

15 under paragraph (1) may not be greater than the 

16 total amount of annual salary that the employee 

17 would have received for the period beginning on the 

18 date the employee would have received pay but for 

19 such lapse and ending on the date on which the 

20 withdrawal is made. 

21 (b) CATCH-UP CONTRIBUTIONS.—Any employee who 

22 makes a withdrawal under subsection (a) may, beginning 

23 on the date that the lapse in appropriations with respect 

24 to the employing agency ends, make 1 or more contribu25 tions in an aggregate amount not to exceed the amount 

26 of such withdrawal to the employee’s account within the 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 338 IH

1 Thrift Savings Plans. In the case of any such contribution, 

2 but only to the extent of the amount thereof, the with3 drawal shall be treated in the same manner as having been 

4 received in an eligible rollover distribution (as defined in 

5 section 402(c)(4) of such Code) and the contribution as 

6 having been transferred in a direct trustee to trustee 

7 transfer within 60 days of an eligible rollover distribution. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
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 Falcon Natural Gas Corp. (the
"Company")  on Form  10-QSB/A for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Fred B. Zaziski,  Principal Executive Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant
to  18  U.S.C.  Section  1350,  as  adopted  pursuant  to  Section  906  of  the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that;

      (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.

      A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906 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.

/s/ Fred B. Zaziski
-----------------------------------
Name:   Fred B. Zaziski
Title:  Principal Executive Officer
Date:   January 23, 2006
No. 09-8441.

#### Fernando Jackson, Petitioner v. Florida.

559 U.S. 1010, 130 S. Ct. 1886,

176 L. Ed. 2d 371,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2746.

March 22, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Florida denied.

Same case below, 22 So. 3d 68.
No. 11-7720.

#### Paul Conrad Sowden, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 1138, 132 S. Ct. 1071,

181 L. Ed. 2d 785,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 497.

January 9, 2012.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
* 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. 95-40294 

Summary Calendar

__________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

HECTOR GOMEZ MARULANDA,

 Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 6:94-CR-44-2

- - - - - - - - - -

March 1, 1996

Before DAVIS, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Fed. R. App. P. 4(b) allows the district court to grant a

party who files an untimely notice of appeal an additional 30

days in which to file a notice of appeal upon a showing of

excusable neglect. This court remanded the case to the district

court for a determination whether Marulanda's untimely filing of

the notice of appeal was due to excusable neglect. The district

court determined that Marulanda's untimely filing of her notice
No. 95-40294

-2-

of appeal was not due to excusable neglect and that therefore her

time for filing a notice of appeal should not be extended. 

Without a finding of excusable neglect, Marulanda's notice of

appeal is untimely and this court is without jurisdiction over

her appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED.
No. 09-8393.

#### Clarence Randle, Jr., Petitioner v. California.

559 U.S. 995, 130 S. Ct. 1743,

176 L. Ed. 2d 217,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2256,

March 8, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, Third Appellate District, denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4786 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4786

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
   at 535 Wood Street in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, as the ``H. Gordon 
                     Payrow Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 16, 2006

   Mr. Dent (for himself, Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania, Mr. Fattah, Mr. 
 English of Pennsylvania, Ms. Hart, Mr. Peterson of Pennsylvania, Mr. 
 Gerlach, Mr. Weldon of Pennsylvania, Mr. Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, 
 Mr. Shuster, Mr. Sherwood, Mr. Kanjorski, Mr. Murtha, Ms. Schwartz of 
  Pennsylvania, Mr. Doyle, Mr. Pitts, Mr. Holden, Mr. Murphy, and Mr. 
   Platts) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
   at 535 Wood Street in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, as the ``H. Gordon 
                     Payrow Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. H. GORDON PAYROW POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 535 Wood Street in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, shall be known 
and designated as the ``H. Gordon Payrow Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``H. Gordon 
Payrow Post Office Building''.
                                 <all>
```