alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2019049DE.01002401.xml

| 7.2.2019 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | C 49/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.2.2019

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

C 49/24

---

Berichtigung der Empfehlung des Rates vom 26. November 2018 zur Förderung der automatischen gegenseitigen Anerkennung von im Ausland erworbenen Hochschulqualifikationen und von Qualifikationen der allgemeinen und beruflichen Bildung der Sekundarstufe II sowie der Ergebnisse von Lernzeiten im Ausland

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union C 444 vom 10. Dezember 2018
  )

(2019/C 49/12)

Auf der Titelseite, Inhaltsverzeichnis, und Seite 1, Titel:

Anstatt:

„Empfehlung des Rates vom 26. November 2018 zur Förderung der automatischen gegenseitigen Anerkennung von im Ausland erworbenen Hochschulqualifikationen und von Qualifikationen der allgemeinen und beruflichen Bildung der Sekundarstufe II sowie der Ergebnisse von Lernzeiten im Ausland“

muss es heißen:

muss es heißen:

„Empfehlung des Rates vom 26. November 2018 zur Förderung der automatischen gegenseitigen Anerkennung von Hochschulqualifikationen und Qualifikationen der allgemeinen und beruflichen Bildung der Sekundarstufe II sowie der Ergebnisse von Lernzeiten im Ausland“.

Seite 2, Erwägungsgrund 11, vierter Satz:

Anstatt:

Anstatt:

„Durch das Fehlen einer solchen automatischen Anerkennung von im Ausland erworbenen Qualifikationen und der Ergebnisse von Auslandslernzeiten wird die Mobilität jedoch behindert.“

muss es heißen:

muss es heißen

„Durch das Fehlen einer solchen automatischen Anerkennung von Qualifikationen und Ergebnissen von Auslandslernzeiten wird die Mobilität jedoch behindert.“

---
### The Honorable Charles R. Wolle, Chief Judge, United State s 1 

### District Court for the Southern District of Iowa. ___________ No. 96-2028

___________ Gary Dean Snow, * * Plaintiff-Appellant, * * v. * * Ronald Welder; Don Lynch, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Defendants, * Southern District of Iowa. * Francis Denner, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Defendant-Appellee, * * Marla Reed, * * Defendant. *

___________ Submitted: July 2, 1996 Filed: July 8, 1996

___________ Before BOWMAN, HEANEY, and BEAM, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Gary Dean Snow, an Iowa inmate, appeals the district court's adverse 1 grant of summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We have reviewe d the record, and conclude that the district court's judgment was correct. Affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47A(a).

### -2- A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 9 (Friday, January 13, 1995)]
[Sunshine Act Meetings]
[Page 3302]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-1031]



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


Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System

Time and Date: 10:00 a.m., Wednesday, January 18, 1995.

Place: Marriner S. Eccles Federal Reserve Board Building, C Street 
entrance between 20th and 2lst Streets, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20551.

Status: Closed.

Matters to be Considered:

    1. Personnel actions (appointments, promotions, assignments, 
reassignments, and salary actions) involving individual Federal 
Reserve System employees.
    2. Any items carried forward from a previously announced 
meeting.

Contact Person for More Information: Mr. Joseph R. Coyne, Assistant to 
the Board; (202) 452-3204. You may call (202) 452-3207, beginning at 
approximately 5 p.m. two business days before this meeting, for a 
recorded announcement of bank and bank holding company applications 
scheduled for the meeting.

    Dated: January 11, 1995.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 95-1031 Filed 1-11-95; 10:39 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
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





In connection with the accompanying Annual Report of Titanium Asset Management Corp. (the “Company”), on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 (the “Report”), I, Robert Brooks, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 results of operations of the Company.




Dated:  March 29, 2011





/s/ Robert BrooksRobert BrooksChief Executive Officer
#### Francisco Javier PEREZ, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 03-72064.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 10, 2004.*

Decided May 17, 2004.

David A. Rowe, Esq., Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner.

Regional Counsel, Western Region, Laguna Niguel, CA, CAC-Distriet Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel, San Francisco, CA, Joan E. Smiley, Esq., Hillel Smith, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: CANBY, KOZINSKI, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Francisco Javier Perez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) April 18, 2003 order denying his motion to reopen his deportation proceedings due to ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a). *Kalaw v. INS,*133 *550F.3d 1147, 1150 (9th Cir.1997). We review the denial of a motion to reopen for abuse of discretion. *Celis-Castellano v. Ashcroft,*298 F.3d 888, 890 (9th Cir.2002). We deny the petition for review in part, and dismiss it in part.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Perez’s motion to reopen because Perez did not demonstrate that his prior attorney’s failure to apply for adjustment of status and a waiver of inadmissibility caused Perez any prejudice. *See Iturribavria v. INS,*321 F.3d 889, 901 (9th Cir.2003) (petitioner must show prejudice in order to demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel).

We lack jurisdiction to consider the BIA’s discretionary determination that pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 212(h), Perez is prima facie ineligible for a waiver of inadmissibility because Perez failed to demonstrate the requisite hardship. *Cf. Kalaw,*133 F.3d at 1152 (holding that the transitional rules preclude direct judicial review of the BIA’s discretionary determination of “extreme hardship” in suspension of deportation cases).

Perez’s remaining contentions also lack merit.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
EXHIBIT 32



CERTIFICATION

(Pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350)



The undersigned hereby certifies
that, to his knowledge, (i) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed by First Citizens Bancorporation, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended June 30, 2004, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) the information contained in that report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition at June 30, 2004, June 30, 2003 and December 31, 2003, and the results of operations of the
Company for the quarters ended June 30, 2004 and June 30, 2003.



|                     |  |  |  |                        
|-------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|Date: August 9, 2004 |  |  |  | /s/ Jim B. Apple       
|                     |  |  |  | Jim B. Apple           
|                     |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer
|                     |  | 
|Date: August 9, 2004 |  |  |  | /s/ Craig L. Nix       
|                     |  |  |  | Craig L. Nix           
|                     |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

November 1, 2018

No. 04-18-00569-CR

Jamie Alysa VRAZEL,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 290th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018CR2634

Honorable Melisa C. Skinner, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

On October 26, 2018, appellant filed a motion to dismiss this appeal. However, on 

October 24, 2018, this court issued an opinion dismissing the appeal pursuant to Texas Rule of 

Appellate Procedure 25.2(d). Accordingly, appellant’s motion is denied as moot.

_________________________________

Irene Rios, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 1st day of November, 2018.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
Exhibit 32.1  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  In
connection with the Annual Report of ArtVentive Medical Group, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, James
Graham, Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Sect. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sect. 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 results of operations of the
Company. IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
31st day of March, 2010.  /s/ H. James Graham James
Graham Principal Financial Officer      Exhibit 32.2  CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  In
connection with the Annual Report of ArtVentive Medical Group, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Leon
Rudakov, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Sect. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sect. 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 results of operations of the
Company. IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
31st day of March, 2010.  /S/ Leon Rudakov Leon
Rudakov Chief
Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
THE CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN THE
FORM 10-Q OF DIONEX CORPORATION FOR THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30,
1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           18745
<SECURITIES>                                      6702
<RECEIVABLES>                                    29013
<ALLOWANCES>                                       473
<INVENTORY>                                      10517
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 73187
<PP&E>                                           45684
<DEPRECIATION>                                   15830
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  112709
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            30910
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         36211
<OTHER-SE>                                       42497
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    112709
<SALES>                                          33933
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 33933
<CGS>                                            10767
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    10767
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  41
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   8801
<INCOME-TAX>                                      2992
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               5809
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      5809
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .47
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .47
        

</TABLE>
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

Case No. 17-cv-00615 NC 

SUA SPONTE JUDICIAL REFERRAL 

RE: RELATING CASES

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

KHALID MOHAMMAD,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

THE KING CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT,

 Defendant.

Case No. 5:17-cv-00615 NC

SUA SPONTE JUDICIAL 

REFERRAL FOR PURPOSES OF 

DETERMINING RELATIONSHIP 

OF CASES

In accordance with Civil Local Rule 3-12(c), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the 

above captioned case is referred to District Judge Beth Labson Freeman to determine 

whether it is related to 5:16-cv-02903 BLF, Mohammad v. The King City Police 

Department. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Date: February 8, 2017 _________________________ Nathanael M. Cousins

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:17-cv-00615-BLF Document 5 Filed 02/08/17 Page 1 of 1
**Exhibit 31.1**CERTIFICATIONI, Terrance J. Lillis, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D requiredto be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of PrincipalLife Income Fundings Trust 2007-68 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);  2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as whole, donot contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other informationrequired to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report isincluded in the Exchange Act periodic reports;  4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement(s) required in thisreport under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Actperiodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicingagreement(s) in all material respects; and  5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria forasset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment ofcompliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be includedin this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwisedisclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in suchreports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by thefollowing unaffiliated parties: Citibank, N.A. and Bankers Trust Company, N.A.Date: March 27, 2008   /s/ Terrance J. Lillis   Terrance J. Lillis  Chief Financial Officer- Retirement and Investor Services
Case 3:16-cv-07222-SK   Document 81-4   Filed 01/14/19   Page 1 of 11

Case 3:16-cv-07222-SK   Document 81-4   Filed 01/14/19   Page 2 of 11

Case 3:16-cv-07222-SK   Document 81-4   Filed 01/14/19   Page 3 of 11

Case 3:16-cv-07222-SK   Document 81-4   Filed 01/14/19   Page 4 of 11

Case 3:16-cv-07222-SK   Document 81-4   Filed 01/14/19   Page 5 of 11

Case 3:16-cv-07222-SK   Document 81-4   Filed 01/14/19   Page 6 of 11

Case 3:16-cv-07222-SK   Document 81-4   Filed 01/14/19   Page 7 of 11

Case 3:16-cv-07222-SK   Document 81-4   Filed 01/14/19   Page 8 of 11

Case 3:16-cv-07222-SK   Document 81-4   Filed 01/14/19   Page 9 of 11

Case 3:16-cv-07222-SK   Document 81-4   Filed 01/14/19   Page 10 of 11

Case 3:16-cv-07222-SK   Document 81-4   Filed 01/14/19   Page 11 of 11
**Exhibit      8.1**

**List      of Subsidiaries of China Digital TV Holding Co., Ltd.**

| **Name**                                                      | **Jurisdiction                of Incorporation** |
|---------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|
|                                                          |                                             |
| China                Digital TV Technology Co., Ltd.          | British                Virgin Islands            |
|                                                          |                                             |
| Beijing                Super TV Co., Ltd.                     | People’s                Republic of China  |
|                                                          |                                             |
| Beijing                Novel-Super Media Investment Co., Ltd. | People’s                Republic of China  |
|                                                          |                                             |
| Golden                Benefit Technology Limited              | Hong                Kong                         |
|                                                          |                                             |
| China                Super Media Holdings Limited             | Hong                Kong                         |

----
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FRANCISCA MORALEZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

DARAKAR, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 17-cv-00648-KAW 

SECOND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Plaintiff Francisca Moralez filed her complaint in this action on February 9, 2017. The last 

day for the joint inspection of premises was May 25, 2017, and the Plaintiff's notice of need of 

mediation was due within 42 days of the joint site inspection. (See Scheduling Order at 1, Dkt. 

No. 4; General Order 56 ¶ 7.) Plaintiff did not file a notice of need of mediation, and on 

September 14, 2017, the Court issued an order to show cause, requiring Plaintiff to explain why 

the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. (Dkt. No. 16.)

That same day, Plaintiff filed a response, stating that the parties had discussed a potential 

resolution and that she had exchanged an initial settlement agreement with one of the Defendants. 

(Dkt. No. 16 ¶¶ 4, 6-7.) Plaintiff also stated that she would meet and confer with Defendants 

about a stipulation for administrative relief from the deadlines. (Id. ¶ 13.) 

On October 3, 2017, the Court discharged the order to show cause. (Dkt. No. 17.) The 

Court noted, however, that Plaintiff had not yet filed a stipulation for administrative relief from the 

deadlines, and ordered Plaintiff to file a request or stipulation and proposed order for 

administrative relief from the deadlines within 14 days of the order. (Id. at 2.) The Court stated 

that the request for administrative relief need not be filed if Plaintiff filed a notice of settlement of 

the entire case. (Id.)
2

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

As of the date of this order, however, Plaintiff has not filed a stipulation for administrative 

relief from the deadlines, nor has Plaintiff filed a notice of settlement of the case. Accordingly, 

the Court ORDERS Plaintiff to: (1) show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure 

to prosecute, and (2) file a request and proposed order for administrative relief from the deadlines 

or, in the alternative, a notice of settlement of the entire case. Failure to complete both tasks 

within 14 days of this order may result in the dismissal of this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 15, 2017

__________________________________

KANDIS A. WESTMORE

United States Magistrate Judge
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

STEVEN WAYNE BONILLA,

Plaintiff,

v.

NANCY E. O'MALLEY, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 17-cv-00276-VC (PR)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH 

PREJUDICE

Re: Dkt. No. 2

Plaintiff Steven Wayne Bonilla, a state inmate, has filed a pro se civil action under 42 

U.S.C. § 1983 against Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley and the Alameda 

County District Attorney’s Office1and has filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. 

Bonilla has been disqualified from proceeding in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) 

unless he is “under imminent danger of serious physical injury” at the time he filed his 

complaint. 28 U.S.C. 1915(g); In re Steven Bonilla, No. C 11-3180 CW (PR); Bonilla v. 

Dawson, No. C 13-0951 CW (PR). 

The allegations in this complaint do not show that Bonilla was in imminent danger at the 

time of filing. Therefore, the motion to proceed in forma pauperis is denied. Moreover, even if 

the IFP application were granted, his lawsuit would be barred under Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 

477, 486-87 (1994). Accordingly, the case is dismissed with prejudice.

 

1

The caption on the Court’s docket incorrectly states the defendant in this case is Sandra 

Margulies. The Clerk is directed to change the caption to reflect the correct defendants.

Case 3:17-cv-00276-VC Document 3 Filed 01/31/17 Page 1 of 2
2

This Order terminates docket number 2. 

The Clerk shall enter a separate judgment and close the case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:

______________________________________

VINCE CHHABRIA

United States District Judge

January 31, 2017

Case 3:17-cv-00276-VC Document 3 Filed 01/31/17 Page 2 of 2
ORDER OF DISMISSAL

CR 17-00032 EJD

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

ANDRE LAMONT WHITE,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CR 17-00032 EJD

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Leave is granted to the government to dismiss the indictment. The indictment is hereby ordered 

DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Court further orders that plea entered on March 13, 2017 is 

VACATED.

Dated: _______________ 

EDWARD J. DAVILA

United States District Judge

Case 5:17-cr-00032-EJD Document 25-1 Filed 06/08/17 Page 1 of 1

6/12/2017