alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Crop Science Research Laboratory: Mississippi State, MS
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Southeast Area Mississippi State, Mississippi Crop Science Research Laboratory





- ARS News & Events
- AgResearch Magazine
- Image Gallery
- News

Newsheadline bar Crop Science Research Laboratory Scientists continue to represent ARS by making presentations to national and international meetings.  For more news events, please visit the individual web sites of the research units of the Crop Science Research Laboratory.
   ARS News Articles  Three Scientists Inducted into ARS Hall of FameSep 12, 2007


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
# L_2008301EN.01001201.xml

| 12.11.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 301/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.11.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 301/12

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 4 November 2008

appointing an Italian member of the Committee of the Regions

(2008/846/EC)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 263 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal of the Italian Government,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 24 January 2006, the Council adopted Decision 2006/116/EC (1) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2006 to 25 January 2010. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 24 January 2006, the Council adopted Decision 2006/116/EC (1) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2006 to 25 January 2010.

| (2) | A member’s seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the expiry of the mandate of Mr Fabio GAVA, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

A member’s seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the expiry of the mandate of Mr Fabio GAVA,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The following is hereby appointed as a member of the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2010:

Ms Maria Luisa COPPOLA, Consigliere regionale — Assessore, Regione Veneto.

Article 2

This Decision shall take effect on the day of its adoption.

Done at Brussels, 4 November 2008.

For the Council

The President

C. LAGARDE

---

(1)  
  OJ L 56, 25.2.2006, p. 75.

1

---
Exhibit 31.2



Certification

I, Terrence J. Dunne, certify that:



(1) I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Daybreak Oil and Gas, Inc. Company.



(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 small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

(4) The small business issuer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)) for the small business issuer and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) Not required;

(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer'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 small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

(5) The small business issuers other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer'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 small business issuer'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 small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.



Date:  June 13, 2006



By /s/  TERRENCE DUNNE

Terrence Dunne, Principal Accounting Officer
# L_2008041EN.01002401.xml

| 15.2.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 41/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.2.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 41/24

---

COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION

of 12 February 2008

concerning the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Fund (Ninth EDF) for the financial year 2006

(2008/118/EC)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement, signed in Cotonou on 23 June 2000 (1) and amended in Luxembourg (Grand Duchy of Luxembourg) on 25 June 2005 (2),

Having regard to the Internal Agreement on the financing and administration of Community aid under the Financial Protocol to ACP-EC Partnership Agreement (3) setting up, amongst others, the Ninth European Development Fund (Ninth EDF), and in particular Article 32(3) thereof,

Having regard to the Financial Regulation of 27 March 2003 applicable to the 9th European Development Fund (4), and in particular Articles 96 to 103 thereof,

Having examined the revenue and expenditure account and the balance sheet relating to the operations of the Ninth EDF as at 31 December 2006 and the Court of Auditors’ report concerning the financial year 2006 together with the Commission’s replies (5),

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to Article 32(3) of the Internal Agreement, the discharge for the financial management of the Ninth EDF is to be given to the Commission by the European Parliament on the recommendation of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to Article 32(3) of the Internal Agreement, the discharge for the financial management of the Ninth EDF is to be given to the Commission by the European Parliament on the recommendation of the Council.

| (2) | The overall implementation by the Commission of the operations of the Ninth EDF during the financial year 2006 has been satisfactory, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The overall implementation by the Commission of the operations of the Ninth EDF during the financial year 2006 has been satisfactory,

HEREBY RECOMMENDS that the European Parliament give the Commission a discharge in respect of the implementation of the operations of the Ninth EDF for the financial year 2006.

Done at Brussels, 12 February 2008.

For the Council

The President

A. BAJUK

---

(1)  
  OJ L 317, 15.12.2000, p. 3.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 287, 28.10.2005, p. 4.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 317, 15.12.2000, p. 355.

3

(4)  
  OJ L 83, 1.4.2003, p. 1.

4

(5)  
  OJ C 259, 31.10.2007, p. 1.

5

---
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-7017
WILLIAM EDWARD BROWN, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RONALD J. ANGELONE, Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-95-1174-R) Submitted: October 17, 1996 Decided: October 25, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William Edward Brown, Appellant Pro Se. John H. McLees, Jr., OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal from the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1994), amended by Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Brown v. Angelone , No. CA-95-1174-R (W.D. Va. May 29, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
# C_2008264EN.01000501.xml

| 17.10.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 264/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.10.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 264/5

---

COUNCIL DECISION

COUNCIL DECISION

of 13 October 2008

appointing Luxembourg members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Freedom of Movement for Workers

(2008/C 264/02)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of 15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community (1), and in particular Articles 26 and 27 thereof,

1

Having regard to the lists of candidates submitted to the Council by the Governments of the Member States,

Whereas:

| (1) | By its Decision of 25 September 2008 (2), the Council appointed the members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Freedom of Movement for Workers for the period from 25 September 2008 to 24 September 2010, with the exception of certain members including the Luxembourg members and alternate members in the categories of representatives of trade unions and employers' organisations. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

By its Decision of 25 September 2008 (2), the Council appointed the members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Freedom of Movement for Workers for the period from 25 September 2008 to 24 September 2010, with the exception of certain members including the Luxembourg members and alternate members in the categories of representatives of trade unions and employers' organisations.

2

| (2) | The Luxembourg Government has submitted nominations for the posts to be filled, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The Luxembourg Government has submitted nominations for the posts to be filled,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The following are hereby appointed members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Freedom of Movement for Workers for the period ending on 24 September 2010:

REPRESENTATIVES OF TRADE UNIONS

| Country | Members | Alternates |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Luxembourg | Ms Tania MATIAS
  Mr Eduardo DIAS | Mr Joé SPIER |

Country

Members

Alternates

Luxembourg

Ms Tania MATIAS

Mr Eduardo DIAS

Mr Joé SPIER

REPRESENTATIVES OF EMPLOYERS' ORGANISATIONS

| Country | Members | Alternates |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Luxembourg | Mr Marc KIEFFER
  Mr François ENGELS | Ms Magalie LYSIAK |

Country

Members

Alternates

Luxembourg

Mr Marc KIEFFER

Mr François ENGELS

Ms Magalie LYSIAK

Done at Luxembourg, 13 October 2008.

For the Council

The President

B. KOUCHNER

---

(1)  OJ L 257, 18.10.1968, p. 2.

1

(2)  OJ C 253, 4.10.2008, p. 7.

2

---
Exhibit 99.1


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

This  Certification  is  intended to  accompany  the  Quarterly  Report of First
Colonial Group, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31,
2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), and is
given solely for the purpose of satisfying the requirements of 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002. To
the best of their knowledge, the undersigned,  in their respective capacities as
set forth below, hereby certify 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 operation of the Company.


   /s/    SCOTT V. FAINOR   Chief Executive Officer       Date: May 14, 2003


   /s/    REID L. HEEREN    Vice President and Treasurer  Date: May 14, 2003


A signed  original  of this  written  statement  required  by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 has been provided to First Colonial Group,  Inc. and
will be retained by the Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA 

FORT WAYNE DIVISION 

 

SHAWN WATKINS, ) 

) 

Plaintiff, ) 

) CAUSE NO: 1:16-CV-0058 

v. ) 

) 

DEISTER MACHINE COMPANY, INC. ) 

) 

Defendant. ) 

 

OPINION AND ORDER 

Plaintiff Shawn Watkins, who is proceeding pro se, filed this case against his former 

employer, Defendant Deister Machine Company, Inc., advancing discrimination and retaliation 

claims under Title VII and the Americans with Disabilities Act. (DE 1).1

 

After he failed to appear in Court on three different occasions and offered no explanation 

for his absences (even after explicit warnings by the Court and being given opportunities to show 

cause), the Magistrate Judge entered a Report and Recommendation inferring a lack of 

prosecutorial intent, see GCIU Employer Ret. Fund v. Chicago Tribune Co., 8 F.3d 1195, 1199-

1200 (7th Cir. 1993) (lack of prosecutorial intent may be inferred from, among other things, failure 

to appear at hearings), and recommending dismissal of the action pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b). 

[DE 25, entered December 9, 2016]. The Magistrate Judge further advised the Plaintiff that he 

had a right to file any objections to the Report and Recommendation within 14 days and even 

extended that deadline sua sponte to provide more time in the event that the Plaintiff intended to 

 

1

 Watkins was originally represented by counsel but counsel moved to withdraw on September 27, 2016 [DE 19], 

citing an irretrievable breakdown in the attorney-client relationship. 
2 

respond. Nearly 6 months have passed and the Plaintiff has filed no objection or response to the 

Report and Recommendation. 

Accordingly, the Court APPROVES the Report and Recommendation [DE 25] and 

DISMISSES the case for lack of prosecution under Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b). 

Entered: This 30th day of May, 2017 

s/ William C. Lee 

United States District Court
* Pursuant to 5th CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-40997 Summary Calendar

DEBRA DILLARD; ALFREDA BLAKE, Plaintiffs-Appellees,

versus

CITY OF SULPHUR SPRINGS; ET AL., Defendants, JOHNNY P. MOSELEY, Sulphur Springs Police Officer; DAVID GILMORE, Sulphur Springs Police Officer; LEONARD STOUT, Sulphur Springs Police Officer, Defendants-Appellants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 5:98-CV-364 March 29, 2000 Before GARWOOD, HIGGINBOTHAM and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM * : Defendants police officers Johnny P. Moseley, David Gilmore, and Leonard Stout appeal the district court’s denial of their motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity. They argue that they reasonably believed the five-dollar bill used by plaintiffs Debra Dillard and Alfreda Blake–which was in fact a1 We express no opinion as to whether or not, on a more fully

developed record, appellants or any of them would be entitled to judgment as a matter of law on the issue of qualified immunity.

2 genuine and valid five dollar Federal Reserve Note issued in 1953–was counterfeit because it was unusual in appearance, the serial number was written in red ink, the paper was not consistent with other currency, and the store clerk’s counterfeit detector pen (no evidence was presented as to the nature or reliability of such a pen) made a mark on the bill indicating that it was counterfeit. In their appeal, appellants do not challenge the district court’s determination that the evidence created a genuine issue of fact as to whether (or established that) plaintiffs were arrested by appellants without either a warrant or probable cause. Dillard and Blake submitted an affidavit of a criminal justice expert, John W. Watson, stating that “no properly trained officer could have believed that the $5 bill was counterfeit.” Appellants presented no contrary evidence, expert or otherwise, in this respect (and it is not common knowledge or judicially known that the matters referenced by appellants are indicia of likely counterfitting). On the basis of the present scanty record we cannot say that the district court erred in holding that the summary judgment record reflects a genuinely disputed issue of fact concerning whether a reasonable police officer could have reasonably concluded that there was probable cause to

arrest. 1 Therefore, the district court’s denial of the motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity filed by3

Moseley, Gilmore, and Stout is

AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with theQuarterly Report of National Mercantile Bancorp (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSBfor the period ending September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Scott A. Montgomery,Chief Executive Officer of the Company, 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 therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and

(2)  The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company as of and for the periods covered in the report.
|   |   |   | /s/ SCOTT A. MONTGOMERY  |
|--------|--------|--------|--------------------------|
|   |   |   | Scott A.  Montgomery     |
|   |   |   | Chief Executive  Officer |

 

Date:  November 14, 2006

 

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating,acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed formwithin the electronic version of this written statement required by Section906, has been provided to National Mercantile Bancorp and will be retained byNational Mercantile Bancorp and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

The foregoingcertification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission asan exhibit to the Form 10-QSB and shall not be considered filed as part of theForm 10-QSB.

 

----
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

SOUTH BEND DIVISION

Travis Cunningham, 

Plaintiff, 

v. Case No. 3:16-CV-396 JVB

State of Indiana, et al., 

 

Defendants. 

OPINION AND ORDER

 Plaintiff Travis Cunningham, a pro se prisoner, filed a confusing complaint. It is unclear 

whom he is suing or why. He appears to name two defendants in his caption: Westville 

Correctional Facility and Indiana Department of Corrections. However it also appears that he 

might also be trying to sue: State of Indiana, County of LaPorte, Mark Sevier, and Director of 

Classification. 

 “Indiana’s two-year statute of limitations . . . is applicable to all causes of action brought 

in Indiana under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.” Snodderly v. R.U.F.F. Drug Enforcement Task Force, 239 

F.3d 892, 894 (7th Cir. 2001). However Cunningham begins by describing events which 

occurred more than four years ago. 

 He asserts that he is wrongfully imprisoned, but this is a civil rights case and “habeas 

corpus is the exclusive remedy for a state prisoner who challenges the fact or duration of his 

confinement and seeks immediate or speedier release . . ..” Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 481 

(1994). 
2

 He complains about numerous events and states that Superintendent Mark Sevier has 

been made aware of them, but there is no general respondeat superior liability under 42 U.S.C. § 

1983. Merely telling a supervisor about some event does not make that person financially liable. 

“[P]ublic employees are responsible for their own misdeeds but not for anyone else’s.” Burks v. 

Raemisch, 555 F.3d 592, 596 (7th Cir. 2009). 

 This complaint does not plausibly state a claim, therefore it will be stricken. Cunningham 

may file an amended complaint, but if he does, he must also resolve his filing fee status. Cf. 

Luevano v. Wal-Mart, 722 F.3d 1014 (7th Cir. 2013). In the amended complaint he must clearly 

list his defendants. He must explain what each defendant did (or did not do) which makes that 

defendant financially liable to him. 

 For these reasons, the court: 

 (1) STRIKES the complaint (DE 1); 

 (2) DIRECTS the clerk to place this cause number on a blank Prisoner Compliant 

form and send it to Travis Cunningham; 

 (3) GRANTS Travis Cunningham until August 18, 2016, to file an amended 

complaint and resolve his filing fee status; and 

 (4) CAUTIONS Travis Cunningham that if he does not respond by that deadline, this 

case will be dismissed without further notice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. 

 SO ORDERED on July 7, 2016. 

 s/ Joseph S. Van Bokkelen 

 JOSEPH S. VAN BOKKELEN 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE