alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2017249EN.01001402.xml

| 31.7.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 249/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.7.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 249/14

---

Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 May 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék — Hungary) — Bericap Záródástechnikai Cikkeket Gyártó Bt. v Nemzetgazdasági Minisztérium

(Case C-53/17) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Aid granted by Member States - Derogations from the prohibition of aid - Aid capable of being regarded as compatible with the internal market - Regulation (EC) No 800/2008 - Definition of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises - Linked enterprises - Enterprises exercising their activities on the same market and forming part of a global group of enterprises owned by the members of one single family - Concept of ‘group of natural persons acting jointly’))

(2017/C 249/21)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Fővárosi Törvényszék

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Bericap Záródástechnikai Cikkeket Gyártó Bt.

Defendant: Nemzetgazdasági Minisztérium

Operative part of the order

Article 3(3) of Annex I to Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/2008 of 6 August 2008 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the common market in application of Articles [107 TFEU and 108 TFEU] (General block exemption Regulation) must be interpreted as meaning that enterprises may be regarded as ‘linked’, within the meaning of that provision, where it is clear from the analysis of both the legal and economic relations existing between them that they constitute, through a natural person or a group of natural persons acting jointly, a single economic unit, even though they do not formally feature any of the relationships referred to in the first subparagraph of Article 3(3) of that annex. Natural persons who work together in order to influence the commercial decisions of the enterprises concerned, with the result that those enterprises cannot be regarded as being economically independent of one another, are to be regarded as acting jointly for the purposes of the fourth subparagraph of Article 3(3) of that annex. Whether such a condition is satisfied will depend on the circumstances of the individual case and is not necessarily conditional on the existence of contractual relations between those persons or even on a finding that they intended to circumvent the definition of micro, small or medium-sized enterprises within the meaning of Annex I to Regulation No 800/2008.

---

(1)  
  OJ C 144, 8.5.2017.

---
H. Res. 44 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

January 15, 2025. 

Resolved, That the following named Members be, and are 

hereby, elected to the following standing committees of the 

House of Representatives: 

(1) COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE.—Mr. David 

Scott of Georgia, Mr. Costa, Mr. McGovern, Ms. Adams, 

Mrs. Hayes, Ms. Brown, Ms. Davids of Kansas, Ms. Salinas, Mr. Davis of North Carolina, Ms. Tokuda, Ms. 

Budzinski, Mr. Sorensen, Mr. Vasquez, Mr. Jackson of 

Illinois, Mr. Thanedar, Mr. Gray, Ms. McDonald Rivet, 

Mr. Figures, Mr. Vindman, Mr. Riley of New York, Mr. 

Mannion, Mrs. McClain Delaney. 

(2) COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS.—Mr. Sherman, Mr. Connolly, Mr. Keating, Mr. Bera, Mr. Castro 

of Texas, Ms. Titus, Mr. Lieu, Ms. Jacobs, Mrs. 

Cherfilus-McCormick, Mr. Stanton, Mr. Moskowitz, Mr. 

Jackson of Illinois, Ms. Kamlager-Dove, Mr. Costa, Mr. 

Amo, Mr. Mfume, Ms. Jayapal, Mr. Latimer, Mr. 

Olszewski, Ms. Johnson of Texas, Ms. McBride. 
2 

•HRES 44 EH 

(3) COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES.—Mr. 

Grijalva, Mr. Neguse, Ms. Leger Fernandez, Ms. 

Stansbury, Ms. Hoyle of Oregon, Mr. Magaziner, Mr. 

Golden of Maine, Mr. Min, Ms. Dexter, Mr. Herna ́ndez, 

Ms. Randall, Ms. Ansari, Ms. Elfreth, Mr. Gray, Ms. 

Rivas. 

(4) COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY.—Ms. Bonamici, Ms. Stevens, Ms. Ross, Ms. 

Salinas, Mrs. Foushee, Mrs. Sykes, Mr. Frost, Mr. Amo, 

Mr. Subramanyam, Ms. Rivas, Mr. Turner of Texas, Ms. 

McBride, Ms. Gillen, Mr. Whitesides, Ms. Friedman, 

Mrs. McClain Delaney, Mr. Riley of New York. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
Mary Katherine DAY-PETRANO, Appellant, v. Charles D. HALL; and Astrid Hall, Appellees.

No. 1D17-3215

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

January 28, 2019 Rehearing Denied March 15, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUTPUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

DAVID CONNIE MORGAN §

§

Plaintiff, §

§

VS. § NO. 3-04-CV-2172-D

§ 

DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF §

DEPARTMENT, ET AL. §

§

Defendants. §

ORDER

After conducting a review of the pleadings, files and records in this case, and the Findings

and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §

636(b)(1), I am of the opinion that the Findings and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge are

correct and they are hereby accepted as the Findings of the Court. 

SO ORDERED.

August 26, 2005.

_________________________________

SIDNEY A. FITZWATER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 Case 3:04-cv-02172-D Document 12 Filed 08/26/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 39
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

GILBERTO CONSUEGRA-BARRETO,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D19-3578

[February 27, 2020]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.800 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County; Gary L. Sweet, Judge; 

L.T. Case No. 56-2018-CF-002416-A.

Gilberto Consuegra-Barreto, Milton, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GROSS, GERBER and FORST, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
BTXN 182 (rev. 04/06)

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

In Re: §

§

§

§

KaRhonda Jewell Bray Case No.: 24−40606−mxm13

 Chapter No.: 13

Debtor(s)

ORDER DISMISSING CASE FOR FAILURE TO OBTAIN CREDIT COUNSELING DURING

THE 180−DAY PERIOD PRECEDING THE DATE OF FILING OF THE PETITION

 The Court, after review of the docket and related pleadings filed in the above entitled and numbered case, finds that

the petition was filed on 2/22/2024. The Court further finds that a certificate was filed on 2/23/2024, indicating that

the debtor(s) obtained credit counseling on 2/23/2024.

 Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §109(h)(1), an individual may not be a debtor under this title unless they have received credit

counseling from an approved credit counseling service "during the 180−day period preceding the date of filing of the

petition".

 The Court finds that the debtor(s)' credit counseling took place after the filing of the petition and there has been

no satisfactory certificate or explanation as required pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §109(h)(2), (3) or (4); therefore, it is

 The Court finds that the debtor(s)' credit counseling took place more than 180 days prior to the filing of the

petition. As required pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §109(h)(1), credit counseling must take place during the 180−day period

preceding the date of filing of the petition; therefore it is

 ORDERED that the above entitled and number case be and is hereby dismissed.

The above styled and numbered case will be closed 21 days after the entry of this order provided that it is a single

debtor case or a joint debtor case and both debtors are dismissed.

# # # End of Order # # #

The following constitutes the ruling of the court and has the force and effect therein described.

Signed February 26, 2024

_____________________________________________________________________

____________________________

United States Bankruptcy Judge

Case 24-40606-mxm13 Doc 17 Filed 02/26/24 Entered 02/26/24 09:48:56 Desc

Page 1 of 1
# C_2019155EN.01001102.xml

| 6.5.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 155/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.5.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 155/11

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 14 March 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein oikeus — Finland) — Vantaan kaupunki v Skanska Industrial Solutions Oy, NCC Industry Oy, Asfaltmix Oy

(Case C-724/17) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Competition - Article 101 TFEU - Compensation for the damage caused by a cartel prohibited by that article - Determination of the undertakings liable to provide compensation - Succession of legal entities - Concept of ‘undertaking’ - Economic continuity test)

(2019/C 155/14)

Language of the case: Finnish

Referring court

Korkein oikeus

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Vantaan kaupunki

Respondents: Skanska Industrial Solutions Oy, NCC Industry Oy, Asfaltmix Oy

Operative part of the judgment

Article 101 TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that, in a case such as that in the main proceedings, in which all the shares in the companies which participated in a cartel prohibited by that article were acquired by other companies which have dissolved the former companies and continued their commercial activities, the acquiring companies may be held liable for the damage caused by the cartel in question.

---

(1)  OJ C 83, 5.3.2018.

---
The Honorable Carol E. Jackson, United States District Judge for the Eastern 1 District of Missouri. United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 97-1746

___________ Elmer Webb, Sr., * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Missouri. Pulitzer Publishing Company; Joseph * Pulitzer, IV, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: July 24, 1997 Filed: July 29, 1997

____________ Before McMILLIAN, BEAM, and MORRIS S. ARNOLD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. ElmerWe bb, Sr., appeals from the district court's order granting summar y 1 judgment against

Webb in his age discrimination action filed under Title VII, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and state law. After c arefully reviewing the record and the parties' arguments on appeal, we conclude that the district court's rulings were-2-

clearl y correct, and that an opinion would lack precedential value. Accordingly, w e affirm. We also deny Webb's pending motions. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Michael Jerome MCKINNEY, DOC #100414, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-1909

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 22, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUTPUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 10 (Thursday, January 16, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Page 4808]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-00925]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail and USPS Ground Advantage[supreg] 
Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: January 16, 2025.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
January 10, 2025, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage[supreg] Contract 
595 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at 
www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-1103, K2025-1102.

Sean Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2025-00925 Filed 1-15-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
STATE of Louisiana v. Matthew R. DOTSON

NO. 2018-KO-1821

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 22, 2019

Denied.
EX PARTE Anthony Demetrious HART

CR-16-1153

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

November 8, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. dismissed.
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

Pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S. C. § 1350, as adopted), Jane Shaw,the Chief Executive Officer of Aerogen, Inc. (the “Company”), and RobertBreuil, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies that,to the best of his or her knowledge:

1.                 The Company’sAnnual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2004, towhich this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the “Annual Report”),fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”); and

2.                 The informationcontained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

This Certification accompanies the Annual Report towhich it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission (the “SEC”) and is not to be incorporated by reference into anyfiling of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or theExchange Act (whether made before or after the date of the Annual Report),irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing. Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished tothe SEC or its staff upon request.

April 15,2005
| /s/  JANE E. SHAW |     | /s/  ROBERT S. BREUIL |
|-----------------------------|----------|---------------------------------|
| Jane  E. Shaw               |     | Robert  S. Breuil               |
| *Chief  Executive Officer*  | * * | *Chief  Financial Officer*      |

 

----
Exhibit 32.2
  Certification required by Rule
13a-14(b) or
 Rule 15d-14(b) and Section 906
of
 the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002
  In
connection with the Quarterly Report of NGP Capital Resources Company (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q/A for the period ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, John H.
Homier, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that to my knowledge:
  (1)
                The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
  (2)
                The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.
  May 10, 2010
                    
                    /s/Stephen K.
      GardnerStephen
      K. GardnerChief
      Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary
  A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
NGP Capital Resources Company and will be retained by NGP Capital Resources
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
III 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 6 

Fixing the hour of daily meeting of the Senate. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 3, 2023 

Mr. SCHUMER submitted the following resolution; which was considered and 

agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Fixing the hour of daily meeting of the Senate. 

1 Resolved, That the daily meeting of the Senate be 12 

2 o’clock meridian unless otherwise ordered. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [License No. 03/03-0265]

Pursuant to the authority granted to the United States Small Business Administration under section 309 of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, as amended, and 13 CFR 107.1900 of the Code of Federal Regulations to function as a small business investment company under the Small Business Investment Company license number 03/03-0265 issued to New York Credit SBIC Fund L.P., said license is hereby declared null and void.

Thomas Morris,

Director, Patient Capital Investments, Office of Investment and Innovation, United States Small Business Administration.

[FR Doc. 2025-00134 Filed 1-7-25; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
##### 



AMENDMENT NO. 1
TO THE EXECUTIVE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT OF
JAMES S. HAMMAN, JR.
    1.
    
    Amendment. Section 4(c)(i)(B)(2) of the Agreement is hereby amended to provide
as follows: any material adverse change in the status, position or responsibilities of
Executive, including a change in Executives reporting relationship;.2.
    
    Reaffirmation. In all other respects the Agreement remains the same and in
full force and effect.3.
    
    Effective Date. This Amendment No. 1 shall become effective as of the date
first written above (the Effective Date). On and after the Effective Date of this
Amendment No. 1, each reference in the Agreement to this Agreement, hereunder,
hereof, or words of like import referring to the Agreement shall mean and be a reference
to the Agreement as amended by this Amendment No. 1.4.
    
    Governing Law. The validity and construction of this Amendment No. 1 shall be
determined and governed in all respects by the laws of the State of Illinois without regard
to conflict of laws principles.
  CALAMOS ASSET MANAGEMENT, INC.
    
    
    
    JAMES S. HAMMAN, JR.By:
Its:
    
    /s/ John P. Calamos, Sr.

Chairman, CEO & Co-CIO
    
    
    
    /s/
James S. Hamman, Jr.CALAMOS ADVISORS LLCBy:
Its:
    
    /s/ Patrick H. Dudasik

EVP, COO, CFO & Treasurer
EX PARTE J.S.

1160879

Supreme Court of Alabama.

August 25, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Cert. denied.
DISMISS; and Opinion Filed October 15, 2018.

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-18-01189-CV

No. 05-18-01190-CV

IN RE RUDY LOPEZ, Relator

Original Proceeding from the 265th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. F91-44984-R and F93-39883-R

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Lang-Miers, Fillmore, and Stoddart

Opinion by Justice Lang-Miers

Before the Court is relator’s October 4, 2018 “Notice of Appeals,” which we treat as a 

petition for writ of mandamus. In the petition, relator complains that the district clerk has refused 

to file relator’s motion for judgment nunc pro tunc and refused to send relator a copy of the motion. 

Relator asks this Court to direct the district clerk to file “a special clerk’s record” that includes 

certain documents from the underlying proceeding. 

This Court does not have jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus against a district clerk 

unless it is necessary to enforce our own jurisdiction. TEX. GOV’T CODE § 22.221(a) (court of 

appeals may only issue writ of mandamus against district and county judges or as necessary to 

enforce jurisdiction of appellate court); In re Wilkerson, No. 05-16-00322-CV, 2016 WL 1320815, 

at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Apr. 5, 2016, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (citing In re Simpson, 997 

S.W.2d 939, 939 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, orig. proceeding)). Relator has no appeal pending in 
–2–

this Court and, therefore, our jurisdiction is not in jeopardy. Accordingly, we dismiss relator’s 

petition for writ of mandamus for want of jurisdiction.

181189F.P05

/Elizabeth Lang-Miers/

ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS

JUSTICE
Terry COLLINS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-2635

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed January 4, 2019.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
EX PARTE Anthony R. MCKEE

CR-16-0402

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

November 22, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. dismissed.
# C_2019139EN.01001301.xml

| 15.4.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 139/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.4.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 139/13

---

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 28 February 2019 — Groupe Léa Nature v European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), Debonair Trading Internacional Lda

(Case C-505/17 P) (1)

(Appeal - EU trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 8(1)(b) and Article 8(5) - Figurative mark containing the word elements ‘SO’BiO ētic’ - EU and national word and figurative marks containing the word element ‘SO...?’ - Opposition by the proprietor - Refusal of registration)

(2019/C 139/10)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Groupe Léa Nature SA (represented by: E. Baud, Avocat)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Markakis and D. Botis, Agents), Debonair Trading Internacional Lda (represented by T. Alkin, Barrister)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders Groupe Léa Nature SA to pay, in addition to its own costs, those incurred by Debonair Trading Internacional Lda and by The Office of the European Union for Intellectual Property (EUIPO). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Groupe Léa Nature SA to pay, in addition to its own costs, those incurred by Debonair Trading Internacional Lda and by The Office of the European Union for Intellectual Property (EUIPO).

---

(1)  OJ C 437, 18.12.2017.

---
Case 3:04-cv-01417-P Document 17 Filed 05/09/05 Page 1 of 15 PageID 184
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01417-P Document 17 Filed 05/09/05 Page 2 of 15 PageID 185
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01417-P Document 17 Filed 05/09/05 Page 3 of 15 PageID 186
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01417-P Document 17 Filed 05/09/05 Page 4 of 15 PageID 187
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01417-P Document 17 Filed 05/09/05 Page 5 of 15 PageID 188
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01417-P Document 17 Filed 05/09/05 Page 6 of 15 PageID 189
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01417-P Document 17 Filed 05/09/05 Page 7 of 15 PageID 190
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01417-P Document 17 Filed 05/09/05 Page 8 of 15 PageID 191
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01417-P Document 17 Filed 05/09/05 Page 9 of 15 PageID 192
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01417-P Document 17 Filed 05/09/05 Page 10 of 15 PageID 193
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01417-P Document 17 Filed 05/09/05 Page 11 of 15 PageID 194
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01417-P Document 17 Filed 05/09/05 Page 12 of 15 PageID 195
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01417-P Document 17 Filed 05/09/05 Page 13 of 15 PageID 196
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01417-P Document 17 Filed 05/09/05 Page 14 of 15 PageID 197
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01417-P Document 17 Filed 05/09/05 Page 15 of 15 PageID 198