alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 363 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 363

       Designating September 2021 as ``School Bus Safety Month''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 14, 2021

   Mrs. Fischer (for herself and Mr. Peters) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
       Designating September 2021 as ``School Bus Safety Month''.

Whereas, in an average year, on every school day in the United States, 
        approximately 500,000 public and private school buses carry more than 
        26,000,000 K-12 students to and from school;
Whereas school buses comprise the largest mass transportation fleet in the 
        United States;
Whereas, in an average year, 48 percent of all K-12 students ride a school bus 
        for each of the 180 school days in a year, and school bus operators 
        drive school buses a total of nearly 4,400,000,000 miles;
Whereas the Child Safety Network (referred to in this preamble as the ``CSN''), 
        which is celebrating 32 years of public service in the United States, 
        supports the CSN Safe Bus campaign, which is designed to provide the 
        school bus industry with driver training, the latest technology, and 
        free safety and security resources;
Whereas the designation of School Bus Safety Month will allow broadcast and 
        digital media and social networking industries to commit to 
        disseminating public service announcements that are produced to--

    (1) provide free resources designed to safeguard children;

    (2) recognize school bus operators and professionals; and

    (3) encourage the driving public to engage in safer driving behavior 
near school buses when students board and disembark from school buses;

Whereas key leaders who deserve recognition during School Bus Safety Month and 
        beyond have--

    (1) provided security awareness training materials to more than 14,000 
public and private schools;

    (2) trained more than 116,800 school bus operators; and

    (3) provided more than 163,120 counterterrorism guides to individuals 
who are key to providing both safety and security for children in the 
United States; and

Whereas School Bus Safety Month offers the Senate and the people of the United 
        States an opportunity to recognize and thank the school bus operators 
        and the professionals focused on school bus safety and security in the 
        United States: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate designates September 2021 as ``School Bus 
Safety Month''.
                                 <all>
```
Nadia VERDONI, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D19-374

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[May 2, 2019]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-6788 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

LORENZO ADDERLY,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior

District Judge. (3:95-cr-00074-RLW; 3:07-cv-00194-RLW)

Submitted: September 13, 2007 Decided: September 19, 2007

Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lorenzo Adderly, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Wiley Miller, OFFICE OF

THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Lorenzo Adderly seeks to appeal the district court’s

orders denying: (1) his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for

reconsideration of the district court’s order denying relief on his

28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion, and (2) his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e)

motion for reconsideration of that order. The orders are not

appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate

of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000); Reid v. Angelone,

369 F.3d 363, 369 (4th Cir. 2004). A certificate of appealability

will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner

satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists

would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the

district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive

procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable.

Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v.

McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-

84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and

conclude that Adderly has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the

appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
- 3 -

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.3

                             SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE
                    INTERFACE, INC. NONQUALIFIED SAVINGS PLAN

      THIS SECOND AMENDMENT to the Interface, Inc. Nonqualified Savings Plan
(the "Plan") is made on this 30th day of December, 2002, by the Administrative
Committee of the Plan.

                                   WITNESSETH:

      WHEREAS, Interface, Inc. (the "Company") maintains the Plan for the
benefit of its employees; and

      WHEREAS, Section 9.1 of the Plan provides that the Administrative
Committee has the right to amend the Plan at any time; and

      WHEREAS, the Administrative Committee desires to amend the Plan to
designate Interface Fabrics Group Finishing Services, LLC and Interface Fabrics
Group South Services, LLC as participating companies in the Plan;

      NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended, as follows:

      1. Effective December 30, 2002, Exhibit A of the Plan is amended by adding
thereto the following:

            Interface Fabrics Group Finishing Services, LLC   December 30, 2002
            Interface Fabrics Group South Services, LLC       December 30, 2002

      2. Except as specified herein, the Plan shall remain in full force and
effect.

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Administrative Committee has caused its duly
authorized member to execute this Second Amendment on the date first written
above.

                                                 ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE

                                                 By: /s/ William G. Reynolds
                                                    ------------------------
Terry CHISM, DOC #S11297, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-1913

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed May 8, 2019.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Exhibit 32.2

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


The undersigned, Maureen D. Howley, Chief Financial Officer of the Managing
Owner, Preferred Investment Solutions Corp. (the "Managing Owner"), of World
Monitor Trust III ("the Trust"), hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (1)  The Trust's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June
          30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
          the date hereof (the "Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents,
          in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
          operations of the Trust.




/s/ Maureen D. Howley
---------------------------------------
Maureen D. Howley
Chief Financial Officer
August 12, 2005









                                      E-5
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING PRETRIAL SUBMISSIONS 

CASE NO. C-05-1858-MHP (PR) 

433641.02 

KEKER & VAN NEST, LLP 

ASHOK RAMANI - #200020 

BROOK DOOLEY - #230423 

JENNIFER A. HUBER - #250143 

710 Sansome Street 

San Francisco, CA 94111-1704 

Telephone: (415) 391-5400 

Facsimile: (415) 397-7188 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

ZAMEER RIAZ AZAM 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

ZAMEER RIAZ AZAM, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

OFFICER M. JOHNSON, 

Defendant. 

 

Case No. C-05-1858-MHP (PR) 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER REGARDING PRETRIAL 

SUBMISSIONS 

Dept: Courtroom 15, 18th Floor 

Judge: Hon. Marilyn Hall Patel 

Trial Date: February 17, 2009 

Case 3:05-cv-01858-MHP Document 56 Filed 01/14/09 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING PRETRIAL SUBMISSIONS 

CASE NO. C-05-1858-MHP (PR) 

433641.02 

Pursuant to Local Rules 6-2 and 7-12 of the Northern District of California, it is hereby 

stipulated and agreed by Plaintiff Zameer Riaz Azam and Defendant Mark Johnson, by and 

through their attorneys, as follows: 

WHEREAS, by Order dated September 22, 2008, the Court set the date for pretrial 

submissions to be filed by November 25, 2009; 

WHEREAS, also by Order dated September 22, 2008, the Court set the date of the 

pretrial conference for February 5, 2009 and trial for February 17, 2009. 

WHEREAS, the date set for the filing of pretrial submissions falls after the dates set for 

the pretrial conference and trial in this case; 

WHEREAS, the Court’s Trial Requirements do not set a filing deadline for the parties’ 

oppositions to any motions in limine filed with pretrial submissions; 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED that the parties’ pretrial submissions shall be filed by 

January 26, 2009. 

IT IS HEREBY FURTHER STIPULATED that the parties’ objections to motions in 

limine shall be filed by February 2, 2009. 

Dated: January 13, 2009 KEKER & VAN NEST, LLP 

By: _/s/ Jennifer Huber______ 

JENNIFER HUBER 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

ZAMEER RIAZ AZAM 

Dated: January 13, 2009 COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA 

By: _/s/ Monika Cooper_________ 

MONIKA L. COOPER 

Attorneys for Defendant 

MARK JOHNSON 

Case 3:05-cv-01858-MHP Document 56 Filed 01/14/09 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING PRETRIAL SUBMISSIONS 

CASE NO. C-05-1858-MHP (PR) 

433641.02 

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

Pursuant to stipulation, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: January ___, 2009. ____________________________________ 

 The Honorable Marilyn Hall Patel 

 United States District Court Judge 

13

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Marilyn H. Patel

Case 3:05-cv-01858-MHP Document 56 Filed 01/14/09 Page 3 of 3
U NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

ANDREW GILL , ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Civil Action No. 1: 23

- cv - 0211 7 ( UNA )

v. ) ) STEVEN VIOREL , et al ., ) ) Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court on its initial review of plaintiff’s pro se complaint, ECF No. 1, and application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis , ECF No. 2. The Court will grant

the in forma pauperis application and dismiss the case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), by which the Court is required to dismiss a case “at any time” if it determines that the action is

frivolous. “A complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausib le on its face.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal , 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) ( quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly , 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). A complaint that lacks “an arguable basis either in law or in fact” is frivolous, Neitzke v. Williams , 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989), and a “complaint plainly abusive of the judicial process is properly typed malicious,” Crisafi v. Holland , 655 F.2d 1305, 1309 (D.C. Cir. 1981). Plaintiff, a resident of the District of Columbia, sues 2 8 defendants for damages , although

how the defenda nts are connected to one another, or how the intended claims are connected to the defendants, if at all, is impossible to decipher. The 60

- page prolix complaint fails to formally comply with Federal Rule 10(a) and D.C. Local Civil Rule 5.1(d), (e), and (g ), and isincomprehensible, covering a wide range of disparate topics, and is comprised mostly of personal

ruminations and conspiracy theories.

This Court cannot exercise subject matter jurisdiction over a frivolous complaint. Hagans

v. Lavine , 415 U.S . 528, 536

- 37 (1974) (“Over the years, this Court has repeatedly held that the federal courts are without power to entertain claims otherwise within their jurisdiction if they are ‘so attenuated and unsubstantial as to be absolutely devoid of merit.’”) (qu oting Newburyport Water Co. v. Newburyport , 193 U.S. 561, 579 (1904)); Tooley v. Napolitano , 586 F.3d 1006, 1010 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (examining cases dismissed “for patent insubstantiality,” including where the plaintiff allegedly “was subjected to a campaign of surveillance and harassment deriving from uncertain origins.”). So a court is obligate d to dismiss a complaint as frivolous “when the facts alleged rise to the level of the irrational or the wholly incredible,” Denton v. Hernandez , 504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992), or “postulat[e] events and circumstances of a wholly fanciful kind,” Crisafi , 655

F.2d at 1307

– 08. The instant complaint falls squarely into this category. In addition to failing to state a claim for relief or establish this Court’s jurisdiction, the complaint is frivolous on its face. Consequently, this case will be dismissed without prejudice. A separate order accompanies this memorandum opinion.

TREVOR N. McFADDEN Date: 7/31/23 United States District Judge
Case 3:17-cv-00252-WHO Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 1 of 7
Case 3:17-cv-00252-WHO Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 2 of 7
Case 3:17-cv-00252-WHO Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 3 of 7
Case 3:17-cv-00252-WHO Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 4 of 7
Case 3:17-cv-00252-WHO Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 5 of 7
Case 3:17-cv-00252-WHO Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 6 of 7
Case 3:17-cv-00252-WHO Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 7 of 7
|Exhibit 32.2
|------------

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Asia Electrical Power International Group Inc. a Nevada corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Xiaoling Chen, Chief Accounting Officer Secretary of the Company, certifies to the best of his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                              
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   
|(2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
|   



|/s/ Xiaoling ChenXiaoling Chen
Chief Accounting Officer and Secretary
May 14, 2007
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------



---
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________

NO. 09-22-00200-CR

__________________

DYLAN PAUL TICE, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

__________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 252nd District Court

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 20-34,902

__________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In an open plea, appellant Dylan Paul Tice pleaded guilty to the offense of 

violation of a protective order with previous convictions, a third-degree felony. See 

Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 25.07(g)(2). After conducting a sentencing hearing, the trial 

court found Tice guilty of the offense of violation of a protective order with previous 

convictions and assessed Tice’s punishment at six years of confinement. 

Tice’s appellate counsel filed an Anders brief that presents counsel’s 

professional evaluation of the record and concludes that the appeal is frivolous. See 
2

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. 

Crim. App. 1978). On July 27, 2022, we granted an extension of time for Tice to file 

a pro se brief. We received no response from Tice. 

We have independently reviewed the appellate record, and we agree with 

counsel’s conclusion that no arguable issues support the appeal. See Anders, 386 

U.S. at 744. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order appointment of new counsel 

to re-brief the appeal. Cf. Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 

1991). We affirm the trial court’s judgment.1

AFFIRMED.

_________________________

 W. SCOTT GOLEMON

 Chief Justice

Submitted on October 28, 2022

Opinion Delivered November 9, 2022

Do Not Publish

Before Golemon, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ.

1Tice may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for 

discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.
Case 3:17-cv-00223-RS Document 276 Filed 12/01/17 Page 1 of 1
Uni

ted 

Stat

es D

istr

ict C

ourt

For t

he N

orth

ern 

Dis

trict

 of C

alifo

rnia

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Uni

ted 

Stat

es D

istr

ict C

ourt

For t

he N

orth

ern 

Dis

trict

 of C

alifo

rnia

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ZAMEER RIAZ AZAM,

Plaintiff,

v.

OFFICER M. JOHNSON; et al.,

Defendants.                                                              /

No. C 05-1858 MHP (pr)

ORDER REFERRING CASE TOFEDERAL PRO BONO PROJECTFOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

Zameer Riaz Azam filed this pro se prisoner civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. §

1983.   The court has denied defendants' motion for summary judgment.  It appears to be in

the interest of justice to appoint counsel to represent plaintiff in this action.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff shall be referred to the Federal Pro Bono

Project in the manner set forth below:

(1) The clerk shall forward to the Federal Pro Bono Project: (a) a copy of this

order, (b) a copy of the court file, and (c) a notice of referral of this action.

(2) Upon an attorney being located to represent plaintiff, that attorney will be

appointed as counsel for plaintiff in this matter until further order of the court.

(3) All proceedings in this action are stayed until four weeks from the date an

attorney is appointed to represent plaintiff in this action or other order of the court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:   March 11, 2008 ______________________ Marilyn Hall Patel

United States District Judge
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 10 (Thursday, January 16, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Page 4806]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-00982]

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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Committee on Equal Opportunities in Science & Engineering; Notice 
of Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation (NSF) announces the 
following meeting:
    Name and Committee Code: Committee on Equal Opportunities in 
Science & Engineering (#1173) (Virtual).
    Date and Time: February 13, 2025; 1 p.m.-5:30 p.m. (eastern) and 
February 14, 2025; 10 a.m.-3:30 p.m. (eastern)
    Place: National Science Foundation, 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, 
Alexandria, VA 22314 (Virtual). Meeting Registration: Virtual 
attendance information will be forthcoming on the CEOSE website at 
http://www.nsf.gov/od/oia/activities/ceose/index.jsp.
    Type of Meeting: Open.
    Contact Persons: Dr. Bernice Anderson, Senior Advisor and CEOSE 
Executive Secretary, Office of Integrative Activities (OIA); National 
Science Foundation, 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22314. 
Contact Information: Phone: 703-292-8040, Email: [email protected].
    Minutes: Meeting minutes and other information may be obtained from 
the CEOSE Executive Secretary at the above address or the website at 
http://www.nsf.gov/od/oia/activities/ceose/index.jsp.
    Purpose of Meeting: To study data, programs, policies, and other 
information pertinent to the National Science Foundation and to provide 
advice and recommendations concerning broadening participation in 
science and engineering.
    Agenda: CEOSE Agenda-at-a-Glance (February 13-14, 2025)

Day 1

1 p.m.-2 p.m. Opening, Welcome, Introduction
2 p.m.-2:30 p.m. Presentation: Report of the CEOSE Executive Liaison
2:30 p.m.-3 p.m. Presentation: Broadening Participation in the SBE 
Sciences
3 p.m.-3:15 p.m. Break
3:15 p.m.-4:30 p.m. Panel: Institutional Transformation
4:30 p.m.-5:30 p.m. Discussion: Reports of the CEOSE AC Liaisons

Day 2

10 a.m.-10:15 a.m. Opening Remarks
10:15 a.m.-11:15 a.m. Discussion: Dissemination of the 2023-2024 CEOSE 
Report
11:15 a.m.-12 p.m. Discussion: 2025-2026 CEOSE Report
12 p.m.-1:30 p.m. Working Lunch: Topics/Advice to Share with NSF Senior 
Leadership
1:30 p.m.-2 p.m. Discussion with NSF Leadership
2 p.m.-2:15 p.m. Break
2:15 p.m.-3 p.m. Reflections and Advice to New Members
3 p.m.-3:30 p.m. Announcements, Closing Remarks, Adjournment

    Dated: January 13, 2025.
Crystal Robinson,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2025-00982 Filed 1-15-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
```
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

G:\CRBALL\2017\5\Wiley - further order re gov response.wpd

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

 v.

WILLIE WILEY, JR.,

Defendant. /

No. CR 17-05 CRB

FURTHER ORDER REGARDING

GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE

In its Order of May 9, 2017 (dkt. 81), the Court did not intend to characterize the

statements made by the government at the May 2, 2017 hearing as willful misrepresentations.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 8, 2017 

CHARLES R. BREYER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
# L_2017134EN.01005201.xml

| 23.5.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 134/52 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.5.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 134/52

---

Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/220 of 8 February 2017 amending Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1106/2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain stainless steel wires originating in India following a partial interim review under Article 11(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 34 of 9 February 2017
  )

On page 28, Article 1, last row in table, second column ‘Duty (%)’:

for:

‘16,2’,

read:

‘12,5’.

---