alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2004180EN.01002101.xml

| 15.5.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 180/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.5.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 180/21

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 981/2004

of 14 May 2004

concerning tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender for the export of husked long grain B rice to the island of Réunion referred to in Regulation (EC) No 1878/2003

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 of 22 December 1995 on the common organisation of the market in rice (1), and in particular Article 10(1) thereof,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2692/89 of 6 September 1989 laying down detailed rules for exports of rice to Réunion (2), and in particular Article 9(1) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 1878/2003 (3) opens an invitation to tender for the subsidy on rice exported to Réunion. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1878/2003 (3) opens an invitation to tender for the subsidy on rice exported to Réunion.

| (2) | Article 9 of Regulation (EEC) No 2692/89 allows the Commission to decide, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 22 of Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 and on the basis of the tenders submitted, to make no award. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Article 9 of Regulation (EEC) No 2692/89 allows the Commission to decide, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 22 of Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 and on the basis of the tenders submitted, to make no award.

| (3) | On the basis of the criteria laid down in Articles 2 and 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 2692/89, a maximum subsidy should not be fixed. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

On the basis of the criteria laid down in Articles 2 and 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 2692/89, a maximum subsidy should not be fixed.

| (4) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

No action shall be taken on the tenders submitted from 10 to 13 May 2004 in response to the invitation to tender referred to in Regulation (EC) No 1878/2003 for the subsidy on exports to Réunion of husked long grain B rice falling within CN code 1006 20 98.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 15 May 2004.

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

Done at Brussels, 14 May 2004.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 329, 30.12.1995, p. 18. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 411/2002 (OJ L 62, 5.3.2002, p. 27).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 261, 7.9.1989, p. 8. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1453/1999 (OJ L 167, 2.7.1999, p. 19).

2

(3)  
  OJ L 275, 25.10.2003, p. 23.

3

---
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Timothy Decarlos Sims, Appellant

No. 06

- 19

- 00016

- CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee Appeal from the 6th District Court of Lamar County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 27895 ). Opinion delivered by Ch ief Justice Morriss, Justice Burgess and Justice Stevens participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court

below

. We affirm the judgment of the trial court

.

W e note that the appellant, Timothy Decarlos Sims, has adequately indicated his inability

to pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED JULY 31, 2019

BY ORDER OF THE COURT JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
EX-10.41



 





Exhibit 10.41




AMENDMENT TO THE

TOLLGRADE COMMUNICATIONS, INC.

1998 EMPLOYEE INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN




     WHEREAS, Tollgrade Communications, Inc. (the “Company”) sponsors the Tollgrade Communications,
Inc. 1998 Employee Incentive Compensation Plan (the “Plan”);



     WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 14.1 of the Plan, the board of directors of the Company has the
authority to amend the Plan; and



     WHEREAS, the Company wishes to amend the Plan to reflect the provisions of Section 409A of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.



     NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended effective as of January 1, 2005 as follows:


1.      Section 8.6 is deleted in its entirety and reserved.



2.      Section 9.4 is amended in its entirety to read as follows:





	 	9.4	 	Form and Timing of Payment of Performance Units/Shares. Payment of earned
Performance Units/Shares shall be made in a single lump sum within 2 1/2 months following
the close of the applicable Performance Period. Subject to the terms of this Plan, the
Committee, in its sole discretion, may pay earned Performance Units/Shares in the form
of cash or Shares (or in a combination thereof) which have an aggregate Fair Market
Value equal to the value of the earned Performance Units/Shares at the close of the
applicable Performance Period. Such Shares may be granted subject to any restrictions
deemed appropriate by the Committee.




3.      Article 11 is deleted in its entirety and reserved.




     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company’s duly authorized officer has caused this Amendment to be
executed this 13th day of December, 2007.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 	TOLLGRADE COMMUNICATIONS, INC.

 	 
	 	By:  	/s/ Sara M. Antol
 	 
	 	Title:  	General Counsel and Secretary
Exhibit 10.16



 





EXHIBIT
10.16









RÉGIME SUPPLÉMENTAIRE DE RETRAITE
 pour les cadres supérieurs désignés de Donohue Inc.



Le participant soussigné accuse réception du document ci-joint relatif au Régime supplémentaire de
retraite (RSR) pour les cadres supérieurs désignés de Donohue Inc., tel qu’amendé par le conseil
d’administration de Donohue Inc. le 21 juillet 1999.



Le participant reconnaît avoir pris connaissance de ses dispositions et accepte chacune d’elles,
plus particuliérement celles relatives à la définition du salaire final (avec ou sans le boni) pour
les fins :





	 	•	 	du calcul de la prestation de décès ou de cessation d’emploi;
	 
	 	•	 	du calcul de la prestation de retraite en cas de retraite avant la date
normale de la retraite, comportant des dispositions de non-concurrence et de
confidentialité




le tout tel que stipulé aux paragraphes i) et ii) de la section « Salaire, Non-concurrence et
Confidentialité ».



En foi de quoi, les parties ont signé, ce 27 January 2000.




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Par : Le participant au RSR

	 	 	 	Par : Donohue Inc.	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	/s/ Monsieur Yves Laflamme    01 Feb 2000
 

Monsieur Yves Laflamme

	 	 
	 	/s/ M. Michel Desbiens
 

M. Michel Desbiens
	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	Président et chef de la direction
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

MIAMI DIVISION

In re:

SOLANGEL M BELLO CASE NO. 19-20216-AJC

AKA SOLANGEL D BELLO CHAPTER 13

AKA SOLANGEL MERECDES BELLO

AKA SOLANGEL BELLO

Debtor.

_______________________________/

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR ORDER 

CONFIRMING THE AUTOMATIC STAY IS NOT IN EFFECT

THIS CASE came on for consideration on the Motion for Order Confirming the Automatic 

Stay is not in Effect (“Motion”) filed by Specialized Loan Servicing LLC, as servicing agent for 

MEB Loan Trust IV, U.S. Bank National Association, not in its individual capacity but solely as 

trustee (“Movant”) (Doc. No. 98). Movant, by submitting this form of order, represents that the 

Motion was served on all parties required by Local Rule 9013-1(D), that the 21-day response time 

provided by that rule has expired, that no one has filed, or served on the Movant, a response to the 

Motion, and the relief to be granted in this Order is the identical relief requested in the Motion.

A. Jay Cristol, Judge

United States Bankruptcy Court

_____________________________________________________________________________

ORDERED in the Southern District of Florida on November 9, 2020.

Case 19-20216-AJC Doc 100 Filed 11/09/20 Page 1 of 3
The Court, having reviewed the Motion and being otherwise fully advised on the premises, finds 

it appropriate to grant the requested relief. It is

ORDERED:

1. The Motion (Doc. No. 98) is granted.

2. The automatic stay arising by reason of 11 U.S.C. §362 of the Bankruptcy Code is 

confirmed to be terminated as to Movant’s interest in the following property:

ALL THAT CERTAIN LAND IN MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, TO-WIT:

LOT(S) 12, BLOCK 6 OF PRIMAVERA ADDITION 1 AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 

154, PAGE 20, ET SEQ., OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, 

FLORIDA.

SUBJECT TO RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS, EASEMENTS, COVENANTS, OIL, 

GAS OR MINERAL RIGHTS OF RECORD, IF ANY. 

AKA 1624 NW 77th Path, Miami Lakes, FL 33016 (“Property”).

3. Movant has complete in rem relief to take any and all steps necessary to exercise 

any and all rights it may have in the collateral, to gain possession of said collateral, to have such 

other and further in rem relief as is just. 

###

Submitted by:

Gavin N. Stewart, Esquire

P.O. Box 5703

Clearwater, FL 33758

P: (727) 565-2653

F: (727) 213-9022

E: bk@stewartlegalgroup.com

Counsel for Movant is directed to serve a copy of this order to the parties listed below and file a 

Certificate of Service with the Court.

Copies furnished to:

VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL

Solangel M Bello

16424 NW 77th Path

Miami Lakes, FL 33016

Case 19-20216-AJC Doc 100 Filed 11/09/20 Page 2 of 3
VIA CM/ECF NOTICE

Timothy S Kingcade, Esq

1370 Coral Way

Miami, FL 33145

Nancy K. Neidich

POB 279806

Miramar, FL 33027

Office of the US Trustee

51 S.W. 1st Ave.

Suite 1204

Miami, FL 33130

Case 19-20216-AJC Doc 100 Filed 11/09/20 Page 3 of 3
# L_2004235EN.01000401.xml

| 6.7.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 235/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.7.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 235/4

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1236/2004

of 5 July 2004

amending Regulation (EC) No 2771/1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 as regards intervention on the market in butter and cream

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products (1), and in particular Article 10 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Article 21 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2771/1999 (2) lays down that intervention butter placed on sale must have entered into storage before 1 September 1999. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Article 21 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2771/1999 (2) lays down that intervention butter placed on sale must have entered into storage before 1 September 1999.

| (2) | Given the situation on the butter market and the quantities of butter in intervention storage and considering that the reduction in the intervention price for butter as from 1 July 2004 should be reflected in reduced market prices it is appropriate that butter in storage before 1 April 2002 should be available for sale. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Given the situation on the butter market and the quantities of butter in intervention storage and considering that the reduction in the intervention price for butter as from 1 July 2004 should be reflected in reduced market prices it is appropriate that butter in storage before 1 April 2002 should be available for sale.

| (3) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

In Article 21 of Regulation (EC) No 2771/1999, ‘1 September 1999’ is replaced by ‘1 April 2002’.

Article 2

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

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

Done at Brussels, 5 July 2004.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 48. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 186/2004, (OJ L 29, 3.2.2004, p. 6).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 333, 24.12.1999, p. 11. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 318/2004 (OJ L 55, 24.2.2004, p. 44).

2

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





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of The Blackhawk Fund, a Nevada
corporation, (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30,
2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the “Report”), I, Frank Marshik, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify the following pursuant to Section 18, U.S.C.
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002:





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/ Frank
Marshik





Frank
Marshik,


President


(Chief
Executive Officer and


Chief
Financial Officer)


November
15, 2010
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3529 

To amend the Clean Air Act to clarify a certain provision relating to 

prevention of accidental releases. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 11, 2012 

Mr. ROBERTS introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

A BILL 

To amend the Clean Air Act to clarify a certain provision 

relating to prevention of accidental releases. 

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 ‘‘General Duty Clari5 fication Act of 2012’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PREVENTION OF ACCIDENTAL RELEASES. 

7 (a) PURPOSE AND GENERAL DUTY.—Paragraph (1) 

8 of section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7412(r)) 

9 is amended— 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3529 IS

1 (1) by striking ‘‘It shall be the objective’’ and 

2 inserting the following: 

3 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—It shall be the objec4 tive’’; and 

5 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

6 ‘‘(B) REGULATIONS.— 

7 ‘‘(i) LIMITATION.—No entity shall be 

8 found to be in violation of this paragraph 

9 until the Administrator— 

10 ‘‘(I) promulgates final regula11 tions under clause (ii); and 

12 ‘‘(II) issues internal enforcement 

13 guidelines under clause (iii). 

14 ‘‘(ii) REGULATIONS.—The Adminis15 trator shall promulgate regulations estab16 lishing criteria defining, for purposes of 

17 this paragraph, the terms ‘extremely haz18 ardous substance’, ‘appropriate hazard as19 sessment techniques’, and ‘design and 

20 maintain a safe facility’. 

21 ‘‘(iii) UNIFORMITY.—Subsequent to 

22 the promulgation of final regulations under 

23 clause (ii), the Administrator shall issue 

24 guidelines to ensure that enforcement of 

25 this paragraph is handled by the regional 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 3529 IS

1 offices of the Environmental Protection 

2 Agency in a uniform and appropriate man3 ner across all regions of the United 

4 States.’’. 

5 (b) DEFINITION OF ACCIDENTAL RELEASE.—Sub6 paragraph (A) of section 112(r)(2) of the Clean Air Act 

7 (42 U.S.C. 7412(r)(2)) is amended by inserting ‘‘, other 

8 than an emission resulting from an intentional act’’ before 

9 the period at the end. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
# C_2004299EN.01000301.xml

| 4.12.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 299/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.12.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 299/3

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.3569 — WENDEL/BUREAU VERITAS)

(2004/C 299/03)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 28 October 2004, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in French and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/) free of charge. This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/) free of charge. This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form in the ‘CFR’ version of the CELEX database, under document number 32004M3569. CELEX is the computerized documentation system of European Community law. (http://europa.eu.int/celex) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form in the ‘CFR’ version of the CELEX database, under document number 32004M3569. CELEX is the computerized documentation system of European Community law. (http://europa.eu.int/celex)

---
In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

______________________________

No. 06-10-00191-CR

______________________________

IN RE: REQUEST FOR COURT OF INQUIRY

 

On Appeal from the 402th Judicial District Court

Wood County, Texas

Trial Court No. 12,169

 

Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Moseley
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Ricky Williams attempts to appeal the ruling of the 402nd Judicial District Court of Wood 

County denying his motion to convene a court of inquiry pursuant to Chapter 52 of the Texas Code 

of Criminal Procedure. Because the Legislature has not provided a right of appeal, we dismiss 

this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

A court of inquiry is a criminal proceeding authorized by and conducted according to 

Chapter 52 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 

52.01–.09 (Vernon 2006). When a district judge, acting in his capacity as magistrate, has 

probable cause to believe an offense has been committed against the laws of this state, he may 

request that the presiding judge of the administrative judicial district appoint a district judge to 

commence a court of inquiry. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 52.01(a). The appointed judge 

may summon and examine any witness in relation to the offense in accordance with the procedural 

rules established in Chapter 52. Id. If it appears from a court of inquiry an offense has been 

committed, the judge shall issue a warrant for the arrest of the offender as if the complaint had 

been made and filed. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 52.08. Implicit in the denial of a motion 

to convene a court of inquiry is a finding by the court presented with such a motion that no 

probable cause existed that the complained-of offense had been committed. Chapter 52 does not 

provide for an appeal from the judge’s determination. In re Court of Inquiry, 

No. 06-10-00171-CR, 2010 WL 3894220 (Tex. App.––Texarkana Oct. 6, 2010, no pet. h.); In re 
3

Court of Inquiry, 148 S.W.3d 554, 555 (Tex. App.––El Paso 2004, no pet.). A party may appeal 

only that which the Legislature has authorized. Olowosuko v. State, 826 S.W.2d 940, 941 (Tex. 

Crim. App. 1992); McCarver v. State, 257 S.W.3d 512 (Tex. App.––Texarkana 2008, no pet.).

In the absence of statutory authorization for an appeal from the magistrate’s determination 

made in connection with the court of inquiry, we conclude that Williams does not have a right of 

appeal. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

Bailey C. Moseley

Justice

Date Submitted: October 19, 2010

Date Decided: October 20, 2010

Do Not Publish
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3472 

To amend the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974 to provide 

improvements to such Act. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

AUGUST 1, 2012 

Ms. LANDRIEU (for herself, Mr. GRASSLEY, Mr. BEGICH, Mr. BLUNT, Mrs. 

BOXER, Mr. FRANKEN, and Ms. KLOBUCHAR) introduced the following 

bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To amend the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act 

of 1974 to provide improvements to such Act. 

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 ‘‘Uninterrupted Schol5 ars Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FAMILY EDUCATIONAL RIGHTS AND PRIVACY. 

7 Section 444(b) of the General Education Provisions 

8 Act (20 U.S.C. 1232g(b), commonly known as the ‘‘FamVerDate Mar 15 2010 16:28 Aug 02, 2012 Jkt 019200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S3472.IS S3472

sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3472 IS

1 ily Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974’’) is 

2 amended— 

3 (1) in paragraph (1)— 

4 (A) in subparagraph (F), by inserting ‘‘or 

5 for, or on behalf of, child welfare agencies for 

6 the purpose of assessing policies and practices 

7 intended to improve educational outcomes for 

8 students in foster care,’’ after ‘‘improving in9 struction,’’; 

10 (B) in subparagraph (J)(ii), by striking 

11 ‘‘and’’ after the semicolon at the end; 

12 (C) in subparagraph (K)(ii), by striking 

13 the period at the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; 

14 and 

15 (D) by inserting after subparagraph (K) 

16 the following: 

17 ‘‘(L) a State or local welfare agency or tribal 

18 organization (as defined in section 4 of the Indian 

19 Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act 

20 (25 U.S.C. 450b)) when such agency or organization 

21 has responsibility for the student’s placement and 

22 care, provided that the education records, or the per23 sonally identifiable information contained in such 

24 records, of the student will not be disclosed by the 

25 agency or organization except to an individual enVerDate Mar 15 2010 16:28 Aug 02, 2012 Jkt 019200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S3472.IS S3472

sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 3472 IS

1 gaged in addressing the student’s educational needs, 

2 and consistent with the confidentiality laws in the 

3 State applicable to an individual’s personal 

4 records.’’; and 

5 (2) in paragraph (2)(B), by inserting ‘‘, except 

6 when a parent is a party to a child welfare court 

7 proceeding, and the order is issued in the context of 

8 that proceeding, additional notice to the parent by 

9 the educational agency or institution is not re10 quired’’ after ‘‘educational institution or agency’’. 

Æ 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS