alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 23.1





                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Form S-8 (Nos. 333-80065, 333-06563, 333-11451, 333-35651, 333-28929, 333-28927,
333-71913, and 333-80963) of our report dated January 18, 2002, with respect to
the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Secure Computing
Corporation included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended
December 31, 2001.


                                        /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Minneapolis, Minnesota
March 26, 2002


                                       44
Exhibit 32.2



PERICOM SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF 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 this annual report of Pericom Semiconductor Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-K/A for the twelve months ended July 2, 2005 (the Report), I, Michael D. Craighead, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter
63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:



(1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods indicated.



September 20, 2005



By:

/s/ Michael D. CraigheadMichael D. CraigheadChief Financial OfficerPericom Semiconductor Corporation
October 15, 2015

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

MARGNUS IBE, Appellant

NO. 14-15-00686-CV V.

PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES, LLC, Appellee

________________________________

Today the Court heard its own motion to dismiss the appeal from the 

judgment signed by the court below on July 24, 2015. Having considered the 

motion and found it meritorious, we order the appeal DISMISSED.

We further order that all costs incurred by reason of this appeal be paid by 

appellant, Margnus Ibe.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
# C_2008249EN.01S00301.xml

| 1.10.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 249/s3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.10.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 249/s3

---

NOTE TO THE READER

NOTE TO THE READER

The institutions have decided no longer to quote in their texts the last amendment to cited acts.

Unless otherwise indicated, references to acts in the texts published here are to the version of those acts currently in force.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1330 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1330

To designate the United States Post Office located at 450 North Centre 
Street in Pottsville, Pennsylvania, as the ``Peter J. McCloskey Postal 
                              Facility''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 29, 1997

  Mr. Specter (for himself and Mr. Santorum) introduced the following 
      bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                          Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To designate the United States Post Office located at 450 North Centre 
Street in Pottsville, Pennsylvania, as the ``Peter J. McCloskey Postal 
                              Facility''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The United States Post Office located at 450 North Centre Street in 
Pottsville, Pennsylvania, shall be known as the ``Peter J. McCloskey 
Postal Facility''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the United States Post Office referred 
to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Peter J. 
McCloskey Postal Facility''.
                                 <all>
```
Order entered February 22, 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**
No. 05
- 12
- 00599
- CV
ROLAND VON KURNATOWS KI III, ET AL . , Appellant s V. CITY OF COMMERCE, TE XAS, ET AL . , Appellee s On Appeal from the 196th District Court Hunt County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 76,781 

### O RDER The Court has before it appellees’ February 20, 2013 unopposed motion to abate appeal pending official approval of agreed final judgment. The Court GRANTS the motion and ORDERS that this appeal be abated for ninety days. The Court ORDERS the parties to advise the Court of the status of this case every thirty days.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS JUSTICE
#### LeGrante V. ELLIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. James E. TILTON; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 10-16145.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted July 12, 2011.*

Filed July 22, 2011.

LeGrante V. Ellis, San Luis Obispo, CA, pro se.

Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner LeGrante V. Ellis appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical condition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, *Resnick v. Hayes,*213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000), and for an abuse of discretion the denial of leave to amend, *Chodos v. West Publ’g Co.,*292 F.3d 992, 1003 (9th Cir.2002). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Ellis’s action because Ellis failed to allege facts in his first amended complaint showing that defendants acted with deliberate indifference. *See Toguchi v. Chung,*391 F.3d 1051, 1060 (9th Cir.2004) (“Deliberate indifference is a high legal standard. A showing of medical malpractice or negligence is insufficient to establish a constitutional deprivation under the Eighth Amendment.”).

The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing without leave to amend after providing Ellis with one opportunity to amend and concluding that further amendment would be futile. *See Cato v. United States,*70 F.3d 1103, 1106-07 (9th Cir.1995) (dismissal without leave to amend is not an abuse of discretion where amendment would be futile).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Case 1:02-cv-00171 Document 1 Filed 01/08/02 Page 1 of 8
Case 1:02-cv-00171 Document 1 Filed 01/08/02 Page 2 of 8
Case 1:02-cv-00171 Document 1 Filed 01/08/02 Page 3 of 8
Case 1:02-cv-00171 Document 1 Filed 01/08/02 Page 4 of 8
Case 1:02-cv-00171 Document 1 Filed 01/08/02 Page 5 of 8
Case 1:02-cv-00171 Document 1 Filed 01/08/02 Page 6 of 8
Case 1:02-cv-00171 Document 1 Filed 01/08/02 Page 7 of 8
Case 1:02-cv-00171 Document 1 Filed 01/08/02 Page 8 of 8
EX-4.1





 Exhibit 4.1 
  





 
 WCG Clinical, Inc. SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR CERTAIN DEFINITIONS CUSIP 000000 00 0 INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE THIS
CERTIFIES THAT SPECIMEN is the owner of BY FULLY PAID AND NON-ASSESSABLE COMMON SHARES, $0.01 PAR VALUE, OF (Brooklyn, AMERICAN COUNTERSIGNED New WCG CLINICAL, INC. STOCKAND York) transferable on the books of
the Corporation by the holder hereof in person or by Attorney upon surrender of this certificate properly endorsed. This certificate is not valid until countersigned COMMON and registered by the Transfer Agent and Registrar. TRANSFER IN WITNESS
WHEREOF, the said Corporation has caused this certificate to be signed by facsimile signatures of its duly & REGISTERED: authorized officers. TRUST INICA Dated: L L C .., G . I . N C . C . W . AUTHORIZED AND COMPANY TRANSFER H H .. D E
CHAIRMAN AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ELAWAR CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER SIGNATURE REGISTRAR AGENT 












 



 
 THE BOARD OF THIS CORPORATION HAS THE AUTHORITY TO CREATE AND DETERMINE THE RELATIVE RIGHTS AND PREFERENCES OF CLASSES OR SERIES OF
SHARES OF CAPITAL STOCK OTHER THAN COMMON STOCK. THIS CORPORATION WILL FURNISH TO ANY SHAREHOLDER UPON WRITTEN REQUEST SENT TO ITS PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICES, AND WITHOUT CHARGE, A FULL STATEMENT OF THE BOARD’S AUTHORITY TO CREATE AND
DETERMINE THE RELATIVE RIGHTS AND PREFERENCES OF CLASSES OR SERIES OF SHARES OF CAPITAL STOCK AS WELL AS THE DESIGNATIONS, PREFERENCES, LIMITATIONS AND RELATIVE RIGHTS OF THE SHARES OF EACH CLASS OR SERIES THEN OUTSTANDING OR AUTHORIZED TO BE
ISSUED. The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this certificate, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: UTMA –Custodian TEN COM – as tenants
in common (Cust) (Minor) TEN ENT – as tenants by entireties under Uniform Transfers to Minors JT TEN – as joint tenants with right of survivorship Act and not as tenants in common (State) Additional abbreviations may also be used though
not in the above list. For value received hereby sell, assign, and transfer unto PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE (PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS INCLUDING POSTAL ZIP CODE OF ASSIGNEE) Shares of the
capital stock represented by the within Certificate, and do hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint Attorney to transfer the said stock on the books of the within-named Corporation with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated X X NOTICE:
THE SIGNATURE TO THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND WITH THE NAME AS WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THE CERTIFICATE IN EVERY PARTICULAR WITHOUT ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT OR ANY CHANGE WHATEVER. SIGNATURE GUARANTEED ALL GUARANTEES MUST BE MADE BY A FINANCIAL
INSTITUTION (SUCH AS A BANK OR BROKER) WHICH IS A PARTICIPANT IN THE SECURITIES TRANSFER AGENTS MEDALLION PROGRAM (“STAMP”), THE NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE, INC. MEDALLION SIGNATURE PROGRAM (“MSP”), OR THE STOCK EXCHANGES MEDALLION
PROGRAM (“SEMP”) AND MUST NOT BE DATED. GUARANTEES BY A NOTARY PUBLIC ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE.
Opinion issued August 23, 2012

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-12-00568-CV

———————————

IN RE MICROCHECK SYSTEMS, INC., AND MICROCHECK

SOLUTIONS, INC., 

Relators

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION
2

In this original proceeding, Relators MicroCheck System, Inc. and 

MicroCheck Solutions, Inc. seek relief from two interlocutory trial court orders 

dismissing certain claims as preempted by federal law.1

 

We deny the petition for writ of mandamus.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Bland and Huddle.

 1 The underlying case is MicroCheck Systems, Inc. v. Zigrossi & Murphy, L.L.C., 

No. 2004-59790, in the 125th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Hon. 

Kyle Carter, presiding.
Case 1:03-cv-05817 Document 88 Filed 06/21/06 Page 1 of 4
Case 1:03-cv-05817 Document 88 Filed 06/21/06 Page 2 of 4
Case 1:03-cv-05817 Document 88 Filed 06/21/06 Page 3 of 4
Case 1:03-cv-05817 Document 88 Filed 06/21/06 Page 4 of 4
Case: 1:02-cv-07345 Document #: 161 Filed: 12/05/03 Page 1 of 11 PageID #:1234
Case: 1:02-cv-07345 Document #: 161 Filed: 12/05/03 Page 2 of 11 PageID #:1235
Case: 1:02-cv-07345 Document #: 161 Filed: 12/05/03 Page 3 of 11 PageID #:1236
Case: 1:02-cv-07345 Document #: 161 Filed: 12/05/03 Page 4 of 11 PageID #:1237
Case: 1:02-cv-07345 Document #: 161 Filed: 12/05/03 Page 5 of 11 PageID #:1238
Case: 1:02-cv-07345 Document #: 161 Filed: 12/05/03 Page 6 of 11 PageID #:1239
Case: 1:02-cv-07345 Document #: 161 Filed: 12/05/03 Page 7 of 11 PageID #:1240
Case: 1:02-cv-07345 Document #: 161 Filed: 12/05/03 Page 8 of 11 PageID #:1241
Case: 1:02-cv-07345 Document #: 161 Filed: 12/05/03 Page 9 of 11 PageID #:1242
Case: 1:02-cv-07345 Document #: 161 Filed: 12/05/03 Page 10 of 11 PageID #:1243
Case: 1:02-cv-07345 Document #: 161 Filed: 12/05/03 Page 11 of 11 PageID #:1244
#### High Shoals Manufacturing Company *v.*Price *et al.*

February 25, 1915.

Action for damages. Before Judge Brand. Walton superior court. December 6, 1913.

*Hal G. Nowell, S. H. Sibley,*and *F. 0. Foster,*for plaintiff in error.

*Gobb & Erwin, George G. Thomas,*and *R. L. Cox,*contra.

Beck, J.

No errors are shown to have been committed by the court, of such a character as to require the grant of a new trial. The charges excepted to are in substantial accord with the rulings made in the case of *Price*v. *High Shoals Mfg. Co.,*132 *Ga.*246 (64 S. E. 87, 22 *L.*R. A. (N. S.) 684) ; and the requests to charge are either faulty in themselves or not in accord with the rulings made in the ease referred to.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur, except Fish, O. J., absent, and*

Lumpkin and Atkinson, JJ.,

dissenting. We adhere to the opinion expressed by us in *Price*v. *High Shoals Mfg. Co.*(supra). For the reasons there expressed we dissent.
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 152 (Wednesday, August 11, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 44022]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-17110]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Notice of Agreement Filed

    The Commission hereby gives notice of the filing of the following 
agreement under the Shipping Act of 1984. Interested parties may submit 
comments, relevant information, or documents regarding the agreement to 
the Secretary by email at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e8bb8d8b9a8d9c899a91a88e858bc68f879e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="8cdfe9effee9f8edfef5cceae1efa2ebe3fa">[email protected]</span></a>, or by mail, Federal 
Maritime Commission, Washington, DC 20573. Comments will be most 
helpful to the Commission if received within 12 days of the date this 
notice appears in the Federal Register. Copies of agreement are 
available through the Commission's website (www.fmc.gov) or by 
contacting the Office of Agreements at (202)-523-5793 or 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a6d2d4c7c2c3c7c8c7cadfd5cfd5e6c0cbc588c1c9d0"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5e2a2c3f3a3b3f303f32272d372d1e38333d70393128">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Agreement No.: 012248-001.
    Agreement Name: MOL/NMCC Joint Operating Agreement.
    Parties: Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, Ltd.; and Nissan Motor Car Carrier 
Co., Ltd.
    Filing Party: Rebecca Fenneman; Jeffrey/Fenneman Law and Strategy 
PLLC.
    Synopsis: The amendment would remove World Logistics Service 
(U.S.A.) Inc. as a party to the agreement and conform the language to 
reflect its removal; revise MOL's ownership of NMCC; correct a 
typographical error; and remove the authority to jointly negotiate with 
tug or towing vessel service providers on any matter relating to rates 
or services provided within the United States by those tugs or towing 
vessels.
    Proposed Effective Date: 9/17/2021.
    Location: https://www2.fmc.gov/FMC.Agreements.Web/Public/AgreementHistory/304.

    Dated: August 5, 2021.
Rachel E. Dickon,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-17110 Filed 8-10-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-02-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

In the

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 21-13192

Non-Argument Calendar

____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

PRENTICE BOND, 

a.k.a. P,

a.k.a. Peze,

Defendant-Appellant.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Georgia

D.C. Docket No. 5:21-cr-00009-MTT-CHW-2

____________________

USCA11 Case: 21-13192 Date Filed: 05/16/2022 Page: 1 of 2
2 Opinion of the Court 21-13192

Before GRANT, BRASHER, and MARCUS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The government’s motion to dismiss this appeal pursuant to 

the appeal waiver in Bond’s plea agreement is GRANTED. See 

United States v. Boyd, 975 F.3d 1185, 1192 (11th Cir. 2020) (district 

court must have clearly conveyed to defendant that he was giving 

up his right to appeal under most circumstances); United States v. 

Bushert, 997 F.2d 1343, 1350–51 (11th Cir. 1993) (sentence appeal 

waiver will be enforced if it was made knowingly and voluntarily).

USCA11 Case: 21-13192 Date Filed: 05/16/2022 Page: 2 of 2
Exhibit 23.1

 

RYDER SCOTT COMPANY

PETROLEUM CONSULTANTS

(Letterhead)

 

 

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM ENGINEERS**

 

 

As independent oil and gas consultants, Ryder Scott Company, L.P. hereby consents to (a) the use of our report setting forth our estimates of proved reserves and future revenue, as of December 31, 2005, to the interest of Tengasco, Inc. (“Tengasco”) in certain oil and gas properties; and (b) all references to our firm included in or made a part of Tengasco’s Annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005.

 

 

|   | S/ Ryder Scott Company, L.P. |  
 

RYDER SCOTT COMPANY, L.P.

 

 

Houston, Texas

March 7, 2006

 

  |
|--------|------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Exhibit 31.2



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER

PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF

THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Timothy P. McGurran, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Secure Computing Corporation;



2. Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual report;



3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual 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 annual report;



4. The registrants other certifying officers 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) 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;



5.
The registrants other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of 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 controls 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 controls over financial reporting.



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ Timothy P. McGurran              
|Timothy P. McGurran                  
|President and Chief Operating Officer
|March 12, 2004                       



50
FILED U.S. COURT OF A P P E A LS E LE V EN T HC IR C U IT MARCH 20, 2006 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 04- 16434 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C . D o c k e tN o . 0 2 - 0 0 0 0 2 - C V - 5 - L A C - E MT S P E N C E R L . S P E I G H T S , P e titio n e r - A p p e lla n t, v ersu s J A M E S C R O S B Y , C H A R L E S C R I S T , R e s p o n d e n ts - A p p e lle e s .

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f ort he N or the r n D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( M ar c h 20, 2006) B efo re D U B IN A , B L A C K an d B A R K E T T , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M:2

A pp el l antS pencer L. Sp ei gh t s ( “ S pei gh t s” ), a F l ori da pri soner s er vi ng an en h an ced l i fe sen t en ce fo r ro b b ery w i th a fi rearm , ap p eal s p ro se t he di stri ct court ’ s deni al of hi s m ot i on for e nt ry of j ud gm entas t o a m ot i on for s um m ar y j udgm e nthe ha d f

i l e d a s pa r tof

hi s pe t i t i on f

orw r i tof

ha be a s c orpus br ought un der 28 U . S . C . § 2 25 4. B ec ause the re cord dem on stra t es thatt he di stri ctcourt e nt e r e d f i na l j udgm e nta s t o S pe i ght s ’ s ha be a s pe t i t i on, w e c onc l ude tha tthe di stri ctcourtprop er l y deni ed S pei gh t s’ s m ot i on for e nt ry of j ud gm entas un nece ss ar y s i nce the cl ai m s a s a dd re ss ed w er e r endered m oo tby the ea rl i erfi nal j ud gm enton t he habeas pet i t i on . A cc ordi ng l y, w e a ff i rm t he di stri ctcourt ’ s order d en yi n g S p ei g h t s’ s p ro se m ot i on f ore ntr y of

j udgm e nta s t o a m ot i on f or s um m a r y j udgm e ntt ha the ha d f i l e d a s pa r tof

hi s pe t i t i on f

orw r i tof

ha be a s c orpus b r o u g h t u n d e r2 8 U .S .C . § 2 2 5 4 . A F F I R M E D .
**Avis juridique important**

*|*

# 12002E056

**Treaty establishing the European Community (Nice consolidated version) - Part Three: Community policies - Title III: Free movement of persons, services and capital - Chapter 4: Capital and payments - Article 56 - Article 73b - EC Treaty (Maastricht consolidated version) -***Official Journal C 325 , 24/12/2002 P. 0056 - 0056 Official Journal C 340 , 10/11/1997 P. 0199 - Consolidated version Official Journal C 224 , 31/08/1992 P. 0025 - Consolidated version*

Treaty establishing the European Community (Nice consolidated version)

Part Three: Community policies

Title III: Free movement of persons, services and capital

Chapter 4: Capital and payments

Article 56

Article 73b - EC Treaty (Maastricht consolidated version)

Article 56

1. Within the framework of the provisions set out in this chapter, all restrictions on the movement of capital between Member States and between Member States and third countries shall be prohibited.

2. Within the framework of the provisions set out in this chapter, all restrictions on payments between Member States and between Member States and third countries shall be prohibited.