alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Official Journal C 194/2013

| | ISSN 1977-091X
  doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2013.194.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 194 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 565 July 2013 |

ISSN 1977-091X

doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2013.194.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 194

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 565 July 2013

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2013/C 194/01 | Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (1) | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2013/C 194/01

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (1)

1

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Parliament |
| 2013/C 194/02 | Decision of the Bureau of the European Parliament of 1 July 2013 amending the Implementing Measures for the Statute for Members of the European Parliament | 6 |
| | European Commission |
| 2013/C 194/03 | Euro exchange rates | 7 |
| 2013/C 194/04 | Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union | 8 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Parliament

2013/C 194/02

Decision of the Bureau of the European Parliament of 1 July 2013 amending the Implementing Measures for the Statute for Members of the European Parliament

6

European Commission

2013/C 194/03

Euro exchange rates

7

2013/C 194/04

Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union

8

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance, except for products falling under Annex I to the Treaty |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance, except for products falling under Annex I to the Treaty

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
#### Burton *v.*The State.

March 10, 1915.

Indictment for murder. Before Judge Littlejohn. Lee superior court. July 1, 1914.

*Ware G. Martin,*for plaintiff in error.

*Warren Grice, attorney-general, J. B. Williams, solicitor-general,*and *A. L. Henson,*contra.

Per Curiam.

1. Under the evidence there was no error in failing to charge on the subject of voluntary or involuntary manslaughter.

2. When the entire charge on the subject of reasonable fears is considered, there is nothing in it showing error prejudicial to the accused.

3. Where the charge fully covered a certain contention and as a part of it the presiding judge gave an instruction requested by counsel for the accused, it was not necessary that he should comply with another request upon the same subject, which was substantially covered by the general charge and the requested charge that was given. The presiding judge was not required to emphasize a charge on a particular subject by reiterating it by giving more than one request thereon.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur, except Fish, G. J., absent.*
**Exhibit 99.02**

 

**Certification of Principal Financial Officer**

**Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350**

**(Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)**

 

 

I, Beth Marie Buck, CPA, Vice President andChief Financial Officer (principal financial officer) of RWD Technologies, Inc.(the “Registrant”), certify that to the best of my knowledge, based upon areview of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2003of the Registrant (the “Report”):

 

(1)   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

(2)   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theRegistrant.

 

 
| /s/ Beth Marie Buck, CPA                    |   |
|---------------------------------------------|--------|
| Beth Marie Buck, CPA                        |
| Vice President and Chief  Financial Officer |
| May 12, 2003                                |

 

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-7325

ROHAMMAD CHALLAHAD MENZIES,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

RUFUS FLEMING, Warden,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CA-95-1391)

Submitted: July 2, 1998 Decided: July 17, 1998

Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Rohammad Challahad Menzies, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Cauthorne

Daniel, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Rohammad Challahad Menzies seeks to appeal the district

court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28

U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the

record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and

dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Menzies

v. Fleming, No. CA-95-1391 (E.D. Va. July 29, 1997). 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
EXHIBIT 32.2

Certification

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the
undersigned officer of Entrust, Inc., a Maryland corporation (the Company), hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that:

The
quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 (the Report) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                   |  |  |  |        |  |                        
|------------------ |  |  |  | ------ |  | -----------------------
|Date: May 11, 2009 |  |  |  |        |  | /s/ David J. Wagner    
|                   |  |  |  | Name:  |  | David J. Wagner        
|                   |  |  |  | Title: |  | Chief Financial Officer
IV

House Calendar No. 8

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 95

[Report No. 105–20]

Providing for consideration of the joint resolution (H. J. Res. 58) disapproving the certification of the President under section 490(b) of the Foreign

Assistance Act of 1961 regarding foreign assistance for Mexico during

fiscal year 1997.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 12, 1997

Mr. GOSS, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution;

which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of the joint resolution (H. J.

Res. 58) disapproving the certification of the President

under section 490(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act of

1961 regarding foreign assistance for Mexico during fiscal year 1997.

1 Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution

2 it shall be in order to consider in the House the joint reso3 lution (H. J. Res. 58) disapproving the certification of the

4 President under section 490(b) of the Foreign Assistance
2

HRES 95 RH

1 Act of 1961 regarding foreign assistance for Mexico dur2 ing fiscal year 1997. The joint resolution shall be consid3 ered as read for amendment. The previous question shall

4 be considered as ordered on the joint resolution and on

5 any amendments thereto to final passage without interven6 ing motion or demand for division of the question except:

7 (1) two hours of debate equally divided and controlled by

8 the chairman and ranking minority member of the Com9 mittee on International Relations; (2) the amendment rec10 ommended by the Committee on International Relations

11 now printed in the joint resolution, which shall be consid12 ered as read, shall be in order without intervention of any

13 point of order, and shall not be separately debatable; (3)

14 the further amendment specified in the report of the Com15 mittee on Rules accompanying this resolution, if offered

16 by a Member designated in the report, which shall be con17 sidered as read, shall be in order without intervention of

18 any point of order, and shall be separately debatable for

19 the time specified in the report equally divided and con20 trolled by the proponent and an opponent; and (4) one

21 motion to recommit with or without instructions.

House Calendar No. 8

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 95

[Report No. 105–20]

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of the joint resolution

sistance for Mexico during fiscal year 1997.eign Assistance Act of 1961 regarding foreign asthe President under section 490(b) of the For-(H. J. Res. 58) disapproving the certification of

MARCH 12, 1997

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
**Exhibit 99.1**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO****18 U.S.C.SECTION 1350,****ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO****SECTION906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report of U.S. Restaurant Properties,Inc., (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2003 asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (theReport), I, Robert J. Stetson, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that:

 

          (1)The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.78m or 78o(d)); and

          (2)The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| /s/ Robert  J. Stetson   |
|--------------------------|
| Robert J.  Stetson       |
| Chief  Executive Officer |
| May 14, 2003             |

 

 

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          26,689
<SECURITIES>                                    25,934
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,824
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                55,876
<PP&E>                                           9,783
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,124
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  67,118
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,777
<BONDS>                                          6,927
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           136
<OTHER-SE>                                      53,282
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    67,118
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                10,485
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                35,536
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 217
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (24,484)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (24,484)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (24,484)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (1.80)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (1.80)


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1179 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1179

 To amend the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 to reauthorize the 
                   National Flood Insurance Program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 16, 1997

Mr. D'Amato (for himself and Mr. Sarbanes) (by request) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                  Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 to reauthorize the 
                   National Flood Insurance Program.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``National Flood Insurance 
Reauthorization Act of 1997''.

SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM.

    Section 1319 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 
4026) is amended by striking ``September 30, 1997'' and inserting 
``September 30, 2002''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Thomas W. Davison, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Sontra Medical 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 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 our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, 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
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

(c) 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 function):

(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: November 20, 2006



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ Thomas W. Davison                
|Thomas W. Davison                    
|President and Chief Executive Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-6348

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

SHERMAN L. WELLONS, JR.,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern

District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Charles H. Haden II, Chief

District Judge. (CR-91-251, CA-96-907-5)

Submitted: May 19, 1998 Decided: July 16, 1998

Before WIDENER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Sherman L. Wellons, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Michael Lee Keller, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, West Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying

his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998).

We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court.

United States v. Wellons, Nos. CR-91-251; CA-96-907-5 (S.D.W. Va.

Feb. 5, 1997). 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
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

DAN E. MOLDEA

,

Plaintiff

,

v.

MICHAEL OVITZ

,

Defendant

. Case No. 18

- cv

- 00560 ( CRC )

ORDER

For the reasons stated in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, it is hereby

ORDERED that [ 3 ] Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.

SO ORDERED.

CHRISTOPHER R. COOPER

United States District Judge

Date: February 6 , 2019
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

ANTHONY DEGLIOMINI AND KAREN

DEGLIOMINI,

Petitioners

v.

ESM PRODUCTIONS, INC. AND CITY OF

PHILADELPHIA,

Respondents :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 376 EAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the

Commonwealth Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 28th day of January, 2020 , the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

GRANTED

. The issues as stated by P etitioner are:

1. Can the City of Philadelphia contractually immunize itself from tort liability for breaching a mandatory public safety duty which has existed for decades under common law, and which is now codified and/or imposed under Pennsylvania’s Tort Claims Act and Philadelphia’s Home Rule Charter?

2. Does The Phillies’ exculpatory Release immunize the City from liability for negligently repairing its road hazard before the parties drafted or entered the Release, and long before the event covered by the Release.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

February 24, 2009 

s0217 

Order 

 

February 24, 2009 

137532 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 137532 

 COA: 286539 

Muskegon CC: 00-045041-FH 

THEODORE A. LEE, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 9, 2008 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant’s 

motion for relief from judgment is prohibited by MCR 6.502(G).
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. James Julius TAYLOR, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-5279.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Aug. 24, 2011.

Decided: Aug. 30, 2011.

Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, G. Alan DuBois, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. George E.B. Holding, United States Attorney, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Kristine L. Fritz, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before KEENAN and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Vacated and remanded by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

James Julius Taylor pled guilty, pursuant to a -written plea agreement, to possession with intent to distribute fifty grams or more of cocaine base, 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (2006) (Count One), and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A) (2006) (Count Two). Taylor was sentenced to 120 months in prison on Count One, and sixty months on Count Two. The sentences run consecutively. Taylor now appeals, contending that the district court erred when it failed to apply the provisions of the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 (FSA) when imposing sentence. The United States requests that the sentence be vacated and the matter remanded for resentencing on Count One in conformity with the FSA.

Based on our consideration of the materials before the court, we vacate the criminal judgment and remand this case to the district court to permit resentencing. By this disposition, however, we indicate no view as to whether the FSA is retroactive*685ly applicable to a defendant like Taylor, whose offenses were committed prior to April 3, 2010, the effective date of the FSA, but who was sentenced after that date. We leave that determination in the first instance to the district court.

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.

*VACATED AND REMANDED.*
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.1

               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

  We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
  From S-8 (Nos. 33-98920 and 33-308349) pertaining to the 1995 Stock Incentive
  Plan and Employee Stock Purchase Plan and the related Prospectus of
  Cardiometrics, Inc., with respect to the financial statements of
  Cardiometrics, Inc. included in this amended Annual Report (Form 10-K/A) for
  the year ended December 31, 1996.

                                        /s/  ERNST & YOUNG LLP
                                        -----------------------------
                                        Ernst & Young LLP

Palo Alto, California
June 11, 1997