alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2020035EN.01000101.xml

| 3.2.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 35/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.2.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 35/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.9612 — Central Group/SIGNA Prime/Mahis JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2020/C 35/01)

On 23 January 2020, 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 32020M9612. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32020M9612. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law.

---

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

---
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Declination

Filters

              - science_science(3)
              - products_publications(53)
              - multimedia_image(1)
              - multimedia_image-141771(1)
              - multimedia_video(2)
              - (-)multimedia_video-149194(1)
              - multimedia_video-149195(1)
              - news_news-149248(2)
              - news_news-149250(1)

## By Location

              - alaska(4)
              - arizona(3)
              - california(24)
              - florida(1)
              - hawaii(5)
              - idaho(1)
              - indiana(1)
              - iowa(1)
              - maine(1)
              - maryland(2)
              - massachusetts(1)
              - michigan(1)
              - minnesota(1)
              - (-)nevada(1)
              - north dakota(1)
              - oregon(3)
              - south dakota(2)
              - virginia(3)
              - washington(2)
              - wisconsin(3)

## By Year

Presentations and Events        June 10, 2013        A Mammal's Take on the 'Rapture Hypothesis' in Sierra Nevada
Jurriell WASHINGTON, Appellant, v. Misael RODRIGUEZ, Appellee.

No. 4D18-1454

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[August 16, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

*Affirmed.*
SERVED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 :^'H^^ntmrS 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION . . H OPERATiONS 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC ' m Ori -I A "^^ 32 

IN THE MATTER OF 

BRAVO AVIATION, INC. 

FAA DOCKET NO. CP10SO0006 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

DMS No. FAA 2010-0320 

AMENDED PROCEDURAL ORDER 

Paragraphs #2 and #3 of the Procedural Order are amended as follows : 

WHEREFORE, the parties be and are hereby ORDERED to adhere to the 

following procedural schedule: 

... On or before December 31, 2010, the parties shall conclude all discovery 

including, but not limited to, depositions, document production, responses to 

^ production requests and/or interrogatories. If the parties cannot resolve a 

discovery dispute they shall submit the dispute to the undersigned for resolution 

in a timely manner... 

... NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN the parties shall be prepared to present this case 

at a hearing on or after Januar::y'i^2(fifT, s^pf^ct^the availability of courtroom 

facilities... 

' Materials filed in the' FAA Hearing Docket (except for materials filed in security cases) are also available 

for viewing at http.V/www. regulations, gov. 

The Administrator's civil penalty decisions, along with indexes of the decisions, the Rules of Practice, as 

well as other materials relating to civil penalty cases, are available on the internet at: 

hllp://M'\\'w.faa.gov/ahoTH/ojfice_org/headquarters_offices/agc/pol adiiidicatiowagc40()/civil penalty/; see 

also: http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Titlel4/14tab_02.tpl. In 

addition, Thomson Reuters/West Publishing publishes Federal Aviation Decisions. Finally, the decisions 

are available through LEXIS (TRANS library) and WestLaw 9FTRAN-FAA database). For additional 

information, see the Web site. 

14 C.F.R. § 13.221 states: "The administrative law judge shall give each party at least 60 days notice of 

the date, time and location of the hearing." 
FAA Docket No. CP10SO0006 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000' 

ONE COPY 

Robert J. Cullen 

Bravo Aviation, Inc., Respondent 

7000 Merrill Avenue, Suite 31 

Chino,CA 91710 

TEL: 909-606-8605 

FAX: 909-606-8639 

Christopher R. Stevenson, Complainant's Counsel 

Office of Regional Counsel 

Southern Region, ASO-7 

Federal Aviation Administration 

P.O. Box 20636 

Atlanta, GA 30320 

TEL: 404-305-5200 

FAX: 404-305-5223 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor, Room El2-320 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2139 Attorney-Advisor 

202-366-5121 Legal Assistant 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

' Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
# C_2021056EN.01006201.xml

| 16.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 56/62 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 56/62

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council authorising the Commission to vote in favour of the capital increase of the European Investment Fund’

(COM(2020) 774 final — 2020/0343 (COD))

(2021/C 56/10)

| Referrals | European Parliament, 26.11.2020
  Council of the European Union, 30.11.2020 |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Articles 173(3) and 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union |
| Section responsible | Economic and Monetary Union and Economic and Social Cohesion |
| Adopted at plenary | 2.12.2020 |
| Plenary session No | 556 |
| Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions) | 207/1/8 |

Referrals

European Parliament, 26.11.2020

Council of the European Union, 30.11.2020

Legal basis

Articles 173(3) and 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Section responsible

Economic and Monetary Union and Economic and Social Cohesion

Adopted at plenary

2.12.2020

Plenary session No

556

Outcome of vote

(for/against/abstentions)

207/1/8

Since the Committee endorses the contents of the proposal and has already set out its views on the Proposal for a regulation establishing the InvestEU programme (1), adopted on 17 October 2018 and on its revision (2), adopted on 15 July 2020, it decided, at its 556th plenary session of 2 and 3 December 2020 (meeting of 2 December 2020), by 207 votes to 1 with 8 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text and to refer to the position it had taken in the above-mentioned document.

Brussels, 2 December 2020.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Christa SCHWENG

---

(1)  OJ C 62, 15.2.2019, p. 131.

1

(2)  OJ C 364, 28.10.2020, p. 139.

2

---
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Articles 

#           Wind erosion from a sagebrush steppe burned by wildfire: measurements of PM10 and total horizontal sediment flux      

      January 1, 2013    

Wind erosion and aeolian transport processes are under studied compared to rainfall-induced erosionand sediment transport on burned landscapes. Post-fire wind erosion studies have predominantlyfocused on near-surface sediment transport and associated impacts such as on-site soil loss and site fertility. Downwind impacts, including air quality degradation and deposition of dust or contaminants, are also likely post-fire effects; however, quantitative field measurements of post-fire dust emissions are needed for assessment of these downwind risks. A wind erosion monitoring system was installed immediately following a desert sagebrush and grass wildfire in southeastern Idaho, USA to measure wind erosion from the burned landscape. This paper presents measurements of horizontal sediment flux and PM10 vertical flux from the burned area. We determined threshold wind speeds and corresponding threshold friction velocities to be 6.0 and 20 m s-1, respectively, for the 4 months immediately following the fireand 10 and 0.55 m s-1 for the following spring months. Several major wind erosion events were measured in the months following the July 2010 Jefferson Fire. The largest wind erosion event occurred in early September 2010 and produced 1495 kg m-1 of horizontal sediment transport within the first 2 mabove the soil surface, had a maximum PM10 vertical flux of 100 mg m-2 s-1, and generated a large dust plume that was visible in satellite imagery. The peak PM10 concentration measured on-site at a height of 2 m in the downwind portion of the burned area was 690 mg m-3. Our results indicate that wildfire can convert a relatively stable landscape into one that is a major dust source.

## Citation Information

### Study Area

### Contact

####               Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center (FRESC) Headquarters          

777 NW 9th StSuite 400Corvallis, OR97330United States

fresc_outreach@usgs.gov

541-750-1030

541-750-1069

### Explore Search

                  - United States
                  - Idaho

View All **
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 231 (Monday, December 2, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 95213]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-28213]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION

[DOCKET NO. 24-28]

Baylink Shipping Inc., Complainant v. ZIM Integrated Shipping 
Services, Ltd., Respondent; Notice of Filing of Complaint and 
Assignment

Served: November 25, 2024.
    Notice is given that a complaint has been filed with the Federal 
Maritime Commission (the ``Commission'') by Baylink Shipping Inc. (the 
``Complainant'') against ZIM Integrated Shipping Services, Ltd. (the 
``Respondent''). Complainant states that the Commission has subject-
matter jurisdiction over the complaint pursuant to the Shipping Act of 
1984, as amended, 46 U.S.C. 40101 et seq. and personal jurisdiction 
over Respondent as a common carrier, as defined in 46 U.S.C. 40102(7).
    Complainant is a corporation organized and existing under the laws 
of the State of New York with its principal place of business in Floral 
Park, New York.
    Complainant identifies Respondent as a global ocean carrier with a 
United States office located in Norfolk, Virginia.
    Complainant alleges that Respondent violated 46 U.S.C. 41102(c); 
41104(a)(14), (a)(15), and (d)(2); and 46 CFR 545.4 and 545.5. 
Complainant alleges these violations arose from the release of a 
container to a party other than the named consignee in the bill of 
lading, the assessment of detention charges on this container, and 
other acts and omissions of Respondent.
    An answer to the complaint must be filed with the Commission within 
25 days after the date of service.
    The full text of the complaint can be found in the Commission's 
electronic Reading Room at https://www2.fmc.gov/readingroom/proceeding/24-28/. This proceeding has been assigned to the Office of 
Administrative Law Judges. The initial decision of the presiding judge 
shall be issued by November 25, 2025, and the final decision of the 
Commission shall be issued by June 8, 2026.

David Eng,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024-28213 Filed 11-29-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-02-P
```
Franklin Rodnny MUNOZ, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-1020

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed July 31, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 35.3



|     |  |                                         
|---- |  | ----------------------------------------
|LOGO |  | 15000 Capital One Dr. Richmond, VA 23238

SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT

CAPITAL ONE MULTI-ASSET EXECUTION TRUST

Capital One Multi-asset Execution Trust

c/o Capital One Bank (USA), National Association

140 East Shore Drive

Room 1071-B

Glen Allen, Virginia 23060

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Capital One Multi-asset Execution Trust for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2013 (the Report), the undersigned, a duly authorized
officer of Capital One, National Association (the Servicer), does hereby certify and represent that:



| | 1. | A review of the activities and performance of the Servicer under the Services Agreement dated as of March 16, 2006, by and between Capital One Bank (USA), National
Association and the Servicer (the Agreement) during the period that is the subject of the Report has been made under my supervision.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the period
that is the subject of the Report.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Servicer
Compliance Statement this 28thday of March 2014.



|                                  |  |                        
|--------------------------------- |  | -----------------------
|CAPITAL ONE, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
|                                  | 
|By:                               |  | /s/ Colin Ruh          
|Name:                             |  | Colin Ruh              
|Title:                            |  | Chief Financial Officer



|           |  |         |  |            |  |              |  |                    |  |            |  |                |  |         |  |               
|---------- |  | ------- |  | ---------- |  | ------------ |  | ------------------ |  | ---------- |  | -------------- |  | ------- |  | --------------
|Auto Loans |  | Banking |  | Commercial |  | Credit Cards |  | Healthcare Finance |  | Home Loans |  | Personal Loans |  | Savings |  | Small Business
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

November 19, 2009 

p1112 

Order 

 

November 19, 2009 

139131 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 139131 

 COA: 289552 

Crawford CC: 06-002406-FC 

RALPH EDWARD PARISH, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 5, 2009 order of 

the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that 

the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

KELLY, C.J., and CAVANAGH, J., would grant leave to appeal.
ALLIED WORLD ASSURANCE COMPANY HOLDINGS, LTD
SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED 2004 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN
RSU AWARD AGREEMENT
 RSU Agreement  Award  RSUs  Plan
 The Plan
 Award Share Shares THIS AWARD IS SUBJECT TO ALL TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF THE PLAN AND THIS AWARD
AGREEMENT, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE CHOICE OF FORUM PROVISIONS SET FORTH IN PARAGRAPH 15.
 Vesting and Delivery
 Vesting Vesting
Date
 Delivery




---



##### 



Death or Termination Due to Disability
 Delay in Delivery Code
 Termination of RSUs and Non-Delivery of Shares
      -2-




---



##### 



Repayment
 Retirement
  -3-




---



##### 



Non-transferability
 Withholding, Consent and Legends
    Rights of Offset
 -4-




---



##### 



No Rights to Continued Employment
 Successors and Assigns of Allied World
 Committee Discretion
 Amendment provided, that
 Adjustment
 Governing Law; Venue
 Headings
 -5-




---



##### 



ALLIED WORLD ASSURANCE COMPANY HOLDINGS, LTDBy:Name:Title:   
   ReceiptAcknowledge:Address:StreetCity,
    
    State
    
    Zip CodeSocial Security No./Local I.D. No.
 -6-




---



##### 



Glossary of Terms
  Cause nolo
contendere Cause.
 Client
 Competitive Enterprise
 Delivery Date
 Disability




---



##### 



Fair Market Value
 Retirement
 Retirement Eligibility Date
 Solicit
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARABANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly report of GeoPharma, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the three months ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Carol Dore-Falcone, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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



/s/ Carol Dore-FalconeCarol Dore-FalconeVice President and Chief Financial OfficerNovember 14, 2007
Savalas CIGAR, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D18-0832

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed August 29, 2018.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
**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 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned officers of Puda Coal,
      Inc.
      (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge,
      that:




The
      Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 (the
      Form
      10-K of the Company fully complies with the requirement of section 13(a) or
      15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained
      in
      the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
      and results of operations of the Company.




Dated:
                April 10, 2008
            
            /s/
                Ming ZhaoMing
                ZhaoChief
                Executive Officer





Dated:
                April 10, 2008
            
            /s/
                Jin XiaJin
                XiaChief
                Financial Officer
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


C\_2020051EN.01004501.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 14.2.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 51/45 |

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.9700 — Dnata/Alpha LSG)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2020/C 51/14)

1.

On 7 February 2020, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [(1)](#ntr1-C_2020051EN.01004501-E0001).

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | Dnata (United Arab Emirates), ultimately controlled by the Government of Dubai (United Arab Emirates), |

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | Alpha LSG Limited (‘Alpha LSG’, United Kingdom). |

Dnata acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of Alpha LSG.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | for Dnata: provision of airline services, including in-flight catering, passenger handling, cargo handling, maintenance and other technical services for airlines in a number of countries worldwide. Dnata is controlled by the Government of Dubai, which also controls Emirates Airlines, |

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | for Alpha LSG: in-flight catering services in the United Kingdom. |

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [(2)](#ntr2-C_2020051EN.01004501-E0002) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

4.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.9700 — Dnata/Alpha LSG

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax +32 22964301

Postal address:

| |
| --- |
| European Commission |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

---

[(1)](#ntc1-C_2020051EN.01004501-E0001)  [OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOL_2004_024_R_TOC) (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

[(2)](#ntc2-C_2020051EN.01004501-E0002)  [OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOC_2013_366_R_TOC).

---
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Atmospheres

Filters

              - science_science(2)
              - (-)products_data(1)
              - products_maps(1)
              - products_publications(21)
              - products_web_tools(2)
              - multimedia_image(2)
              - multimedia_image-141771(1)
              - multimedia_image-141776(1)
              - news_news-149250(1)
              - news_other_news(1)
              - connect_staff_profiles(1)

## By Location

              - alaska(2)
              - california(4)
              - colorado(2)
              - connecticut(1)
              - hawaii(1)
              - maine(1)
              - massachusetts(2)
              - minnesota(1)
              - new hampshire(1)
              - new jersey(2)
              - new york(1)
              - north dakota(1)
              - (-)oregon(1)
              - rhode island(1)
              - vermont(1)
              - wisconsin(1)

## By Year

Data Release        August 20, 2021        Composite multibeam bathymetry surface and data sources of the southern Cascadia Margin offshore Oregon and northern California