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
 Northeast Area
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        
                Northeast Area Cities

                    Washington, D.C.
                            Newark, Delaware
                            Boston, Massachusetts
                            Beltsville, Maryland (BHNRC)
                            Beltsville, Maryland (BARC)
                            Frederick, Maryland
                            Orono, Maine
                            Geneva, New York
                            Ithaca, New York
                            University Park, Pennsylvania
                            Wyndmoor, Pennsylvania
                            Kearneysville, West Virginia
                            Leetown, West Virginia
                            Burlington, Vermont


                    Civil Rights & EEO Policy StatementsSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Northeast Area Docs NEA Intern Pages







NEA 2022 Internsheadline bar USDA-ARS Northeast Area Summer Research Employment Program 2022 Interns
 Marquis SkinnerVirginia TechUsing Observed Yield Maps to Optimize Variable Fertilizer ApplicationSkills acquired: crop yield modeling, numerical optimization, sensitivity analysisUSDA-ARS Hydrology and Remote Sensing Laboratory
 /ARSUserFiles/80600500/images/NEA Interns/image_6483441.JPG
 Click on image to download


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
# C_2020077EN.01004702.xml

| 9.3.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 77/47 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.3.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 77/47

---

Judgment of the General Court of 30 January 2020 — BZ v Commission

(Case T-336/19) (1)

(Civil service - Contract staff - Dismissal for obviously inadequate work - Proportionality - Article 8 of the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants - Liability)

(2020/C 77/67)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: BZ (represented by: C. Mourato, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Berscheid, B. Mongin and M. Brauhoff, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, annulment of the Commission’s decision of 25 July 2018 to dismiss the applicant in response to a report on the probationary period before the end of that period and, second, payment of compensation for the material or non-material damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the European Commission’s decision of 25 July 2018 to dismiss BZ; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the European Commission’s decision of 25 July 2018 to dismiss BZ;

| 2. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Orders the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Commission to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 255, 29.7.2019.

---
Exhibit 32.1

NANOGEN, INC.

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

In connection with
the accompanying Quarterly Report of Nanogen Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the three months ended June 30, 2008 (the Report), I, Howard C. Birndorf, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                |  |  |  |                                                   
|--------------- |  |  |  | --------------------------------------------------
|                |  | 
|August 13, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/ HOWARD C. BIRNDORF                            
|                |  |  |  | Howard C. Birndorf                                
|                |  |  |  | Chairman of the Board, and Chief Executive Officer
(121 App. Div. 487.)

#### O’NEIL v. NEW YORK & Q. C. RY. CO.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

October 4, 1907.)

Carriers—Carriage of Passengers—Actions fob Personal Injuries—Instructions—Absolute Duty to Carry Safely.

In an action against a street railway company for injuries to a passenger, it was error to charge that the company was bound to carry plaintiff safely.

. [Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 9, Carriers, §§ 1085-1106.]

Appeal from Municipal Court.

Action by Margaret O’Neil against the New York & Queens County Railway Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed, and new trial ordered.

Argued before WOODWARD, JENKS, HOOKER, RICH, and GAYNOR, JJ.

Van Vechten Veeder and Nathaniel S. Corwin, for appellant.

M. P. O’Connor and Geo. F. Hickey, for respondent.

GAYNOR, J.

The plaintiff was hurt by the negligence of the defendant while it was carrying her as a passenger in its street car, as it is claimed. The trial justice persisted in charging the jury that the company was bound to carry her- safely.

The judgment should be, reversed.

Judgment of the Municipal Court reversed, and new trial ordered ; costs to abide the event. All concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Gary J. Bialaszewski, Appellant.

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Counsel’s application to withdraw granted *(see, People v Crawford,*71 AD2d 38). (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Ostrowski, J.—violation of probation.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Denman, Boomer, O’Donnell and Schnepp, JJ.
EXHIBIT 31.2


                                    CERTIFICATION
                               PURSUANT TO SECTION 302
                           OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Hua Meng, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this Form 10-KSB of Dahua Inc.

2.   Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement
of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were
made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.   The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

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

       b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant'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

       c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most
recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and

5.   The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's Board
of Directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

      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 registrant'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 registrant's internal control
over financial reporting.


Date:   April 12, 2006


/s/ Hua Meng
---------------------------------
Hua Meng, Chief Financial Officer
# C_2020271EN.01003601.xml

| 17.8.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 271/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.8.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 271/36

---

Judgment of the General Court of 25 June 2020 — Klymenko v Council

(Case T-295/19) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken in respect of the situation in Ukraine - Freezing of funds - List of persons, entities and bodies to whom the freezing of funds and economic resources applies - Retention of the applicant’s name on the list - Obligation of the Council to verify that the decision of an authority of a third State has been taken in compliance with the rights of the defence and the right to effective judicial protection)

(2020/C 271/45)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Oleksandr Viktorovych Klymenko (Moscow, Russia) (represented by M. Phelippeau, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by A. Vitro and P. Mahnič, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/354 of 4 March 2019 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2019 L 64, p. 7) and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/352 of 4 March 2019 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2019, L 64, p. 1), in so far as those acts maintain the applicant’s name on the list of persons, entities and bodies to which those restrictive measures apply.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/354 of 4 March 2019 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/352, of 4 March 2019 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies with regard to the situation in Ukraine, in so far as the name of Mr Oleksandr Viktorovych Klymenko was maintained on the list of persons, entities and bodies to which those restrictive measures apply. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/354 of 4 March 2019 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/352, of 4 March 2019 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies with regard to the situation in Ukraine, in so far as the name of Mr Oleksandr Viktorovych Klymenko was maintained on the list of persons, entities and bodies to which those restrictive measures apply.

| 2. | Orders the Council of the European Union to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 213, 24.6.2019.

---
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**Certification Pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to**

 

**Section 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002**

 

I, Joel Boyarski, the Chief Financial Officer ofWorldGate Communications, Inc., hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that (1) the Form 10-Q of WorldGate Communications, Inc., for the quarterlyperiod ended September 30, 2004 (the “Form 10-Q”), fully complies withrequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934(15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and (2) the information contained in the Form 10-Qfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of WorldGate Communications, Inc.

 

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 has been provided to WorldGate and will be retained by WorldGateand furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff uponrequest.

 

 
| Dated: | November 17, 2004 | /s/ JOEL BOYARSKI                                          |
|--------|-------------------|------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |              |                                                       |
|   |              | Joel Boyarski,  Principal Financial and Accounting Officer |
|        |                   |                                                            |  |

 

----
# C_2019413EN.01003402.xml

| 9.12.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 413/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.12.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 413/34

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Paris (France) lodged on 8 October 2019 — Republic of Moldova v Komstroy, a company the successor in law to the company Energoalians

(Case C-741/19)

(2019/C 413/41)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour d’appel de Paris

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Republic of Moldova

Respondent: Komstroy, a company the successor in law to the company Energoalians

Questions referred

| — | Must Article 1.6 of the Energy Charter Treaty be interpreted as meaning that a claim which arose from a contract for the sale of electricity and which did not involve any contribution on the part of the investor in the host State can constitute an ‘investment’ within the meaning of that article? |
| --- | --- |

—

Must Article 1.6 of the Energy Charter Treaty be interpreted as meaning that a claim which arose from a contract for the sale of electricity and which did not involve any contribution on the part of the investor in the host State can constitute an ‘investment’ within the meaning of that article?

| — | Must Article 26(1) of the Energy Charter Treaty be interpreted as meaning that the acquisition, by an investor of a Contracting Party, of a claim established by an economic operator which is not from one of the States that are Parties to that Treaty constitutes an investment? |
| --- | --- |

—

Must Article 26(1) of the Energy Charter Treaty be interpreted as meaning that the acquisition, by an investor of a Contracting Party, of a claim established by an economic operator which is not from one of the States that are Parties to that Treaty constitutes an investment?

| — | Must Article 26(1) of the Energy Charter Treaty be interpreted as meaning that a claim held by an investor, which arose from a contract for the sale of electricity supplied at the border of the host State, can constitute an investment made in the area of another Contracting Party, in the case where the investor does not carry out any economic activity in the territory of that latter Contracting Party? |
| --- | --- |

—

Must Article 26(1) of the Energy Charter Treaty be interpreted as meaning that a claim held by an investor, which arose from a contract for the sale of electricity supplied at the border of the host State, can constitute an investment made in the area of another Contracting Party, in the case where the investor does not carry out any economic activity in the territory of that latter Contracting Party?

---
##### 



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
FOR THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30,
2007, of Alion Science and Technology Corporation;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the
period covered by this report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included
in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) 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 registrant and we have:
 a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is
made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this report is being prepared;b)
    
    [Paragraph reserved in accordance with SEC transition instructions contained
in SEC Release 34-47986]c)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant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; andd)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter
(the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and
the audit committee of the registrants Board of Directors (or persons performing the
equivalent functions):
 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 registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report
financial information; andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting.
 Date: December 28, 2007By:
    
    /s/ Bahman AtefiName:
    
    Bahman AtefiTitle:
    
    Chief Executive Officer
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





In
connection with the Annual Report of Amanasu Techno Holdings
Corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-K for the
period ended December 31, 2018 as filed with the Securities
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
I, Atsushi Maki, Principal Accounting Officer, certify, pursuant to
and solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to
the best of my knowledge:





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.





Date: October 4,
2019


By:/s/ Atsushi
Maki


Atsushi
Maki


Principal Accounting Officer
#### SELLEY et al., Respondent, v. IRISH INDUSTRIAL EXPOSITION *&*AMUSEMENT CO., Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

October 25, 1907.)

Action by Edwin J. Selley and another against the Irish Industrial Exposition & Amusement Company. T. M. Tyng, for appellant. L. M. Berkeley, for respondents.

No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Order filed. See 53 Misc. Rep. 46, 102 N. Y. Supp. 1006.