alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2022432EN.01002101.xml

| 14.11.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 432/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.11.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 432/21

---

Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — SŽ — Tovorni promet v Commission

(Case T-575/20) (1)

(Directive 2014/25/EU - Procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors - Implementing Decision on the applicability of Article 34 of Directive 2014/25 on railway freight transport in Slovenia - Direct exposure to competition - Product market definition - Geographic market definition - Assessment of direct exposure to competition - Principle of good administration - Obligation to state reasons)

(2022/C 432/23)

Language of the case: Slovenian

Parties

Applicant: SŽ — Tovorni promet d.o.o. (Ljubljana, Slovenia) (represented by: V. Cukrov, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Talabér-Ritz, L. Wildpanner and P. Ondrůšek, acting as Agents, and by M. Menard, lawyer)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2020/1025 of 13 July 2020 on the applicability of Article 34 of Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council to railway freight transport in Slovenia (OJ 2020 L 226, p. 5).

Operative part of the judgment

The General Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders SŽ — Tovorni promet d.o.o. to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders SŽ — Tovorni promet d.o.o. to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 433, 14.12.2020.

---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

ABILENE DIVISION

JIMMY D. MATHIAS, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, )

Commissioner of Social Security, )

) Civil Action No. 1:04-CV-127-C

Defendant. ) ECF

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

 THIS MATTER comes before the court on the Report and Recommendation filed March 6,

2006 (Doc. 26). Plaintiff filed objections to the Report and Recommendation on March 17, 2006

(Doc 27). The court has made a de novo determination of the Report and Recommendation after

consideration of Plaintiff’s objections, the submissions of the parties, and the transcript of the

administrative proceedings. 

The court finds the objections to be without merit. The court further finds that the ALJ

applied the correct legal standards and that substantial evidence supports his decision. The court

also finds that the Report and Recommendation applied the correct legal standards.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation is adopted by the

court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the decision of the Commissioner is affirmed and

Plaintiff’s complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

 

 Case 1:04-cv-00127-C Document 29 Filed 03/28/06 Page 1 of 2 PageID 107
2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a judgment in accordance with the terms of this order

shall be entered forthwith.

DATED this 28th day of March, 2006.

_________________________________

SAM R. CUMMINGS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 

 Case 1:04-cv-00127-C Document 29 Filed 03/28/06 Page 2 of 2 PageID 108
III 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 877 

Designating the week of October 6, 2024, through October 12, 2024, as 

‘‘National Community Policing Week’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 25, 2024 

Mrs. SHAHEEN (for herself, Mr. CORNYN, Ms. HASSAN, Mr. PETERS, and Ms. 

ROSEN) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and 

agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Designating the week of October 6, 2024, through October 

12, 2024, as ‘‘National Community Policing Week’’. 

Whereas police officers are indispensable members of the 

community who put their lives on the line to protect others; 

Whereas promoting strong relationships, founded in trust and 

mutual respect, between law enforcement officers and the 

communities they serve helps ensure the safe and effective execution of the law; 

Whereas relationships developed through community policing 

help protect both law enforcement officers and civilians; 

Whereas law enforcement officers and communities that work 

together to address public safety concerns can create lasting solutions to difficult challenges; 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 877 ATS 

Whereas community policing has helped produce reductions 

in both violent and property crime; 

Whereas events in recent years have sparked a nationwide 

call to improve the interactions between law enforcement 

officers and the communities they serve, particularly communities of color; 

Whereas community policing facilitates peaceful dialogue, capable of fostering understanding and trust, between law 

enforcement officers and civilians; 

Whereas community policing informs the public about the 

challenges that law enforcement officers face in executing 

their duties and provides law enforcement officers insight 

into the concerns of community members; 

Whereas a long-term commitment to community policing is 

necessary to eliminate the underlying causes of crime; 

Whereas the advancement of community policing should be 

supported to ensure that State and local law enforcement 

agencies have necessary resources; and 

Whereas community policing has been recognized as an important tool for improving the relationship between law 

enforcement officers and the communities they serve: 

Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) designates the week of October 6, 2024, 

3 through October 12, 2024, as ‘‘National Community 

4 Policing Week’’; and 

5 (2) supports community policing and encour6 ages the people of the United States, law enforce7 ment agencies, and elected officials to identify ways 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•SRES 877 ATS 

1 in which communities can improve public safety, 

2 strengthen relationships, and build trust. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
EX PARTE Jeffrey S. KHLEIF

(In re Jeffrey S. Khleif v. Millane Copeland Khleif)

2160838

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

August 1, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. denied.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION 

LUCIAN LEE SPANN, JR., §

PETITIONER, §

§

V. § NO. 3:03-CV-2849-D

§

DOUGLAS DRETKE, DIRECTOR, §

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL §

JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL §

INSTITUTIONS DIVISION, §

RESPONDENT. §

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

After conducting a de novo review, the Court finds that the Findings, Conclusions and

Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and they are adopted as the findings and

conclusions of the Court.

Signed June 30, 2005.

_________________________________

SIDNEY A. FITZWATER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 Case 3:03-cv-02849-D Document 12 Filed 06/30/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 61
Exhibit 12.2 CERTIFICATION  I, Christopher Cherry, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of MAX Resource Corp.;  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 company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4. The Companys other certifying officer 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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the company and have:  (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 Company, 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 Company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; and  (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the Companys internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the companys internal control over financial reporting; and  5. The Companys other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Companys auditors and the audit committee of the Companys board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):  (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 Company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 Companys internal control over financial reporting.  Date: April 21, 2009  / s / Christopher CherryChristopher Cherry, CFO (Principal Accounting Officer)
Certification of Principal Executive Officer
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Calamos Asset Management, Inc.;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 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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
     5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer 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):
    /s/ John P. Calamos, Sr.John P. Calamos, Sr.Chairman, Chief Executive Officer
and
Co-Chief Investment Officer
STATE of Louisiana v. Robert Latroy WHITE

No. 2018-KH-0616

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 18, 2019

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE TWENTY-FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF TANGIPAHOA**

PER CURIAM:

*758Denied. Applicant's sentencing claim is not cognizable on collateral review. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.3 ; *State ex rel. Melinie v. State* , 93-1380 (La. 1/12/96), 665 So.2d 1172. *State v. Cotton* , 09-2397 (La. 10/15/10), 45 So.3d 1030. The application is also repetitive. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4

Applicant has now fully litigated his application for post-conviction relief in state court. Similar to federal habeas relief, *see*28 U.S.C. § 2244, Louisiana post-conviction procedure envisions the filing of a second or successive application only under the narrow circumstances provided in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4 and within the limitations period as set out in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8. Notably, the Legislature in 2013 La. Acts 251 amended that article to make the procedural bars against successive filings mandatory. Applicant's claims have now been fully litigated in accord with La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.6, and this denial is final. Hereafter, unless he can show that one of the narrow exceptions authorizing the filing of a successive application applies, applicant has exhausted his right to state collateral review. The district court is ordered to record a minute entry consistent with this per curiam.

WEIMER, J., recused.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA F OURTH D ISTRICT

SHARA COOPER , Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA , Appellee

.

No. 4D 19

- 3012

[ November 21, 2019 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County ; Jeffrey Colbath , Judge; L.T. Case No. 50

- 2006

- CF

- 004008

- AXXX

- MB

.
Shara Cooper, Ocala, pro se.

No appearance for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.
Affirmed

.

L EVINE , C.J., D AMOORGIAN an d F ORST , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
ex10a.htm












Exhibit (10)(a)

















Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm












We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Post-Effective Amendment No. 52 to the 1933 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 033-25990) and Amendment No. 146 to the 1940 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 811-03214), and to the use therein of our reports dated (a) March 31, 2016, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of The Lincoln National Life Insurance Company and (b) April 20, 2016, with respect to the financial statements of Lincoln National Variable Annuity Account C for the interests in a separate account under individual flexible payment deferred variable annuity contracts.







/s/ Ernst & Young LLP







Philadelphia, Pennsylvania


September 29, 2016
Case 3:04-cv-00677-B Document 1 Filed 04/01/04 Page 1 of 13 PageID 1
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00677-B Document 1 Filed 04/01/04 Page 2 of 13 PageID 2
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00677-B Document 1 Filed 04/01/04 Page 3 of 13 PageID 3
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00677-B Document 1 Filed 04/01/04 Page 4 of 13 PageID 4
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00677-B Document 1 Filed 04/01/04 Page 5 of 13 PageID 5
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00677-B Document 1 Filed 04/01/04 Page 6 of 13 PageID 6
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00677-B Document 1 Filed 04/01/04 Page 7 of 13 PageID 7
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00677-B Document 1 Filed 04/01/04 Page 8 of 13 PageID 8
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00677-B Document 1 Filed 04/01/04 Page 9 of 13 PageID 9
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00677-B Document 1 Filed 04/01/04 Page 10 of 13 PageID 10
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00677-B Document 1 Filed 04/01/04 Page 11 of 13 PageID 11
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00677-B Document 1 Filed 04/01/04 Page 12 of 13 PageID 12
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00677-B Document 1 Filed 04/01/04 Page 13 of 13 PageID 13
Oshane LAWSON, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 1D18-5287

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 11, 2019

OShane Lawson, pro se, Petitioner.

Ashley B. Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.

DISMISSED . *See**Baker v. State* , 878 So.2d 1236 (Fla. 2004).

Lewis, Rowe, and Makar, JJ., concur.
# C_2016118EN.01003801.xml

| 4.4.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 118/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.4.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 118/38

---

Appeal brought on 18 February 2016 by Carlo de Nicola against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 18 December 2015 in Case F-37/12 De Nicola v EIB

(Case T-73/16 P)

(2016/C 118/44)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Carlo de Nicola (Strassen, Luxembourg) (represented by: G. Ferabecoli, lawyer)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Investment Bank

Other party to the proceedings:

Form of order sought by the appellant

Form of order sought by the appellant

The appellant claims that the Court should:

| — | Uphold the present appeal and, partially reversing the judgment under appeal, annul point 2 of the operative part, together with paragraphs 59 to 61, 63 to 69 and 71 of the judgment itself; |
| --- | --- |

—

Uphold the present appeal and, partially reversing the judgment under appeal, annul point 2 of the operative part, together with paragraphs 59 to 61, 63 to 69 and 71 of the judgment itself;

| — | Consequently, declare that bullying was committed by the EIB against Dr De Nicola, and order the EIB to compensate Dr De Nicola for the damage suffered or, in the alternative, refer the case to another Chamber of the Civil Service Tribunal in order that it may, in a different formation, give a fresh decision on the annulled paragraphs. Subject to completion of the requested medical examination; |
| --- | --- |

—

Consequently, declare that bullying was committed by the EIB against Dr De Nicola, and order the EIB to compensate Dr De Nicola for the damage suffered or, in the alternative, refer the case to another Chamber of the Civil Service Tribunal in order that it may, in a different formation, give a fresh decision on the annulled paragraphs. Subject to completion of the requested medical examination;

| — | Order the European Investment Bank to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the European Investment Bank to pay the costs.

Grounds of appeal and main arguments

Grounds of appeal and main arguments

The present appeal is brought against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (single Judge) of 18 December 2015 in De Nicola v European Investment Bank (F-37/12).

De Nicola

European Investment Bank

The grounds of appeal and main arguments are similar to those relied on in Case T-70/16 P De Nicola v EIB.

De Nicola

EIB

---
EXHIBIT 10.5(vi)

                           LEASE TERMINATION AGREEMENT

         WHEREAS, the undersigned are the parties to that certain Business Lease
dated July 1, 1998, as amended; and

         WHEREAS, OraLabs, Inc. has relocated its business into another facility
and the Landlord has agreed to a mutual termination of the Business Lease.

         NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and for other good
and valuable consideration, the adequacy and sufficiency of which is
acknowledged by the parties, the parties agree that the Business Lease is
terminated effective May 31, 2004, and that from and after that date, the
parties are fully released from all obligations to each other.





-------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------
TENANT:                                LANDLORD:

ORALABS, INC., a Colorado corporation  2780 SOUTH RARITAN,  LLC, a Colorado
                                       limited liability company

By:/s/ Emile Jordan                    By:   /s/ Gary H. Schlatter
   -----------------------------------    ----------------------------------
                                                 Gary H. Schlatter, Manager
-------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------
**EXHIBIT        32.1**

| (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. |
|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                                 |                                           |                                     |
|------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------|
|                                                 | **OCCULOGIX,                  INC.**           |
|                                            |                                      |                                |
| Date:   May                  10, 2006 | By:                                  | /s/ Elias                  Vamvakas |
|                                                 |  Chief                  Executive Officer |
|                                                 |                                           |
IA 

119TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 9 

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States prohibiting 

the United States Government from increasing its debt except for a 

specific purpose by law adopted by three-fourths of the membership 

of each House of Congress. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 3, 2025 

Mr. MCCLINTOCK (for himself and Mr. WEBER of Texas) submitted the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United 

States prohibiting the United States Government from 

increasing its debt except for a specific purpose by law 

adopted by three-fourths of the membership of each 

House of Congress. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives 

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two3 thirds of each House concurring therein), That the fol4 lowing article is proposed as an amendment to the Con5 stitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all 

6 intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 

7 ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HJ 9 IH 

1 States within seven years after the date of its submission 

2 for ratification: 

3 ‘‘ARTICLE— 

4 ‘‘SECTION 1. The United States Government may not 

5 increase its debt except for a specific purpose by law 

6 adopted by three-fourths of the membership of each House 

7 of Congress. 

8 ‘‘SECTION 2. This article shall take effect beginning 

9 ten years after its ratification.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB