alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2009277EN.01000101.xml

| 22.10.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 277/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.10.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 277/1

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 982/2009

of 21 October 2009

establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 of 21 December 2007 laying down implementing rules for Council Regulations (EC) No 2200/96, (EC) No 2201/96 and (EC) No 1182/2007 in the fruit and vegetable sector (2), and in particular Article 138(1) thereof,

Whereas:

Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in Annex XV, Part A thereto,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The standard import values referred to in Article 138 of Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 are fixed in the Annex hereto.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 22 October 2009.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 21 October 2009.

For the Commission

Jean-Luc DEMARTY

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 350, 31.12.2007, p. 1.

2

---

ANNEX

Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

| (EUR/100 kg) |
| --- |
| CN code | Third country code (1) | Standard import value |
| 0702 00 00 | MA | 37,2 |
| MK | 23,8 |
| TR | 77,9 |
| ZZ | 46,3 |
| 0707 00 05 | MK | 31,4 |
| TR | 130,8 |
| ZZ | 81,1 |
| 0709 90 70 | TR | 112,6 |
| ZZ | 112,6 |
| 0805 50 10 | AR | 79,6 |
| CL | 83,5 |
| TR | 76,1 |
| US | 56,3 |
| ZA | 62,2 |
| ZZ | 71,5 |
| 0806 10 10 | BR | 200,6 |
| EG | 80,3 |
| TR | 119,9 |
| US | 205,1 |
| ZZ | 151,5 |
| 0808 10 80 | CL | 114,8 |
| CN | 78,3 |
| MK | 16,1 |
| NZ | 83,3 |
| US | 105,8 |
| ZA | 74,0 |
| ZZ | 78,7 |
| 0808 20 50 | CN | 49,7 |
| TR | 85,0 |
| ZA | 70,1 |
| ZZ | 68,3 |

(EUR/100 kg)

CN code

Third country code (1)

Standard import value

0702 00 00

MA

37,2

MK

23,8

TR

77,9

ZZ

46,3

0707 00 05

MK

31,4

TR

130,8

ZZ

81,1

0709 90 70

TR

112,6

ZZ

112,6

0805 50 10

AR

79,6

CL

83,5

TR

76,1

US

56,3

ZA

62,2

ZZ

71,5

0806 10 10

BR

200,6

EG

80,3

TR

119,9

US

205,1

ZZ

151,5

0808 10 80

CL

114,8

CN

78,3

MK

16,1

NZ

83,3

US

105,8

ZA

74,0

ZZ

78,7

0808 20 50

CN

49,7

TR

85,0

ZA

70,1

ZZ

68,3

---

(1)  Nomenclature of countries laid down by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1833/2006 (OJ L 354, 14.12.2006, p. 19). Code ‘
  ZZ
  ’ stands for ‘of other origin’.

---
UINTA RIVER AT RANDLETT, UTLatitude: 40.234Longitude: -109.804Elevation: 4801

UINTA RIVER AT RANDLETT, UT

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Lakefork #3 Site Page...



Lakefork #3

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Spirit Lk Site Page...



Spirit Lk

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Chepeta Site Page...



Chepeta

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Mosby Mtn. Site Page...



Mosby Mtn.
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATIONS


OF


PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Manhattan Pharmaceuticals, Inc. does hereby certify that, to the best of his knowledge:


(a)      the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Manhattan Pharmaceuticals, Inc. for the quarter ended June 30, 2011 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and


(b)      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Manhattan Pharmaceuticals, Inc.





Dated: August 15, 2011
/s/ Michael G. McGuinnessMichael G. McGuinnessPrincipal Executive and Financial Officer
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1992 

To reduce temporarily the royalty required to be paid for sodium produced 

on Federal lands, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 23, 2015 

Mr. COOK (for himself, Mrs. LUMMIS, Mr. HIMES, Mr. BROOKS of Alabama, 

Ms. BONAMICI, Mr. VALADAO, Mr. SCHRADER, and Mrs. MIMI WALTERS

of California) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To reduce temporarily the royalty required to be paid for 

sodium produced on Federal lands, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘American Soda Ash 

5 Competitiveness Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REDUCTION IN ROYALTY RATE ON SODA ASH. 

7 Notwithstanding section 102(a)(9) of the Federal 

8 Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 

9 1701(a)(9)), section 24 of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1992 IH

1 U.S.C. 262), and the terms of any lease under that Act, 

2 the royalty rate on the quantity or gross value of the out3 put of sodium compounds and related products at the 

4 point of shipment to market from Federal land in the 5- 

5 year period beginning on the date of enactment of this 

6 Act shall be 2 percent. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

I, Tim Paterson-Brown, Chief Executive Officer of MGTCapital Investments, Inc. (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to thebest of my knowledge:

 

(1)                             the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly periodended June 30, 2009 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements ofSection 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 Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
|                 | By:    | /s/ TIM PATERSON-BROWN  |
|----------------------|--------|-------------------------|
|                 |   | Tim Paterson-Brown      |
|                 |   |                    |
|                 |   | Chief Executive Officer |
|                 |   |                    |
| August 14, 2009 |   |                    |

 

----
#### John Ronecker, Respondent, v Consolidated Rail Corporation (Conrail) et al., Defendants, and Pennsylvania Truck Lines, Inc., Appellant.

Order unanimously reversed *532on the law without costs and Pennsylvania Truck Lines, Inc.’s motion granted. Memorandum: Special Term erred by denying the motion of defendant Pennsylvania Truck Lines, Inc. (PTL) to dismiss plaintiffs complaint against it. It is undisputed that plaintiff was an employee of PTL on the date that he sustained his injuries, that the Workers’ Compensation Board determined that plaintiffs injuries were compensable, that plaintiff did not appeal from or move to vacate that determination, and that plaintiff accepted workers’ compensation benefits. This award of compensation acts as a bar to a direct action against PTL *(O’Connor v Midiria,*55 NY2d 538, 541; *Werner v State of New York,*53 NY2d 346, 355).

That plaintiff characterizes this as an action commenced pursuant to FELA (Federal Employer’s Liability Act) does not alter the above result. Because PTL is not a common carrier by railroad engaged in interstate commerce (45 USC § 51), plaintiffs action may not be pursued against it under FELA. Plaintiffs allegations that he was a joint employee of PTL and Conrail are relevant to his FELA action against Conrail *(see, Kelley v Southern Pac. Co.,*419 US 318, 324), but do not provide him with a remedy against PTL beyond an award of workers’ compensation benefits. (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Fudeman, J. — summary judgment.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Boomer, Balio and Lawton, JJ.
### IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 13

- 00299

- CV

GOLDA SEALE LANIER , Appellant

v.

LEON INDEPENDENT SCH OOL DISTRICT , Appellee

From the 87th District Court Leon County, Texas Trial Court No. T

- 12

- 437

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellants, Patrick Lanier and the Estate of Golda Seale Lanier, have filed an
unopposed motion to dismiss his appeal in this matter. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.1(a)(1).

Dismissal of this appeal would not prevent the parties from seeking relief to which they

would otherwise be entitled. The motion is granted, and the appeal is hereby

dismissed.
Absent a specific exemption, the Clerk of the Court must collect filing fees at the
time a document is presented for filing. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 12.1(b); Appendix to T EX

. R. A PP

.Lanier v. Leon Independent School District Page 2

P. , Order Regarding Fees (Amended Aug. 28, 2007, eff. Sept. 1, 2007); see T EX

. R. A PP

. P.

5; 10 TH T EX

. A PP

. (W ACO ) L OC

. R. 5; T EX

. G OV ’ T C ODE A NN

. §§ 51.207(b), 51.941(a) (West
2005); see also T EX

. G OV ’ T C ODE A NN

. § 51.208 (West 2013). Under the se circumstances,
we suspend the rule and order the Clerk to write off all unpaid filing fees in this case.
Tex. R. App. P. 2. The write

- off of the fees from the accounts receivable of the Court in
no way eliminates or reduces the fees owed by appellants

.

AL SCOGGINS Justice Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis , and Justice Scoggins Motion granted; appeal dismissed Opinion delivered and filed December 5, 2013 [CV06]
733 A.2d 1267

#### Robert D. HARMAN and Dorothy E. Harman on Behalf of Christopher HARMAN, a Minor and in their own right, Respondents, v. Bishnu C. BORAH, M.D., and Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, and Judy Bernbaum, M.D., and Jeane Parks, M.D., Petitioners.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

Aug. 2, 1999.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 2 nd day of August, 1999, the Petitions for Allowance of Appeal at No. 020 and No. 026 Eastern District Alloc. Dkt. 1999 are GRANTED, limited to the following issue:

> Did the Superior Court err by creating a per se rule that a trial court judge commits reversible error, and has no discretion to deny a motion for a mistrial whenever he or she engages in an off-the record discussion with a witness in the presence of the jury?

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petitions for Allowance of Appeal at No. 020 and No. 026 Eastern District Alloc. Dkt. 1999 are to be consolidated for purposes of oral argument.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v James Bass, Appellant.

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dubin, J.), rendered November 1, 1983, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We find that the court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea of guilty *(see, People v Tinsley,*35 NY2d 926; *People v Wright,*111 AD2d 837, 838). Moreover, the plea minutes establish that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently waived his rights in pleading guilty *(see, People v Harris,*61 NY2d 9). Mollen, P. J., Bracken, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.
[J

- 97

- 2020]

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

MICHAEL CROSSEY, DWAYNE THOMAS, IRVIN WEINREICH, BRENDA WEINREICH,

AND THE PENNSYLVANIA ALLIANCE FOR RETIRED AMERICANS,

Petitioners

v.

KATHY BOOCKVAR, SECRETARY OF

THE COMMONWEALTH, AND JESSICA MATHIS, DIRECTOR OF THE BUREAU OF ELECTION SERVICES AND NOTARIES,

Respondents :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 108 MM 2020

SUBMITTED: September 8 , 2020

CONCURRING AND DISSENTING STATEMENT

CHIEF JUSTICE SAYLOR DECIDED: September 17, 2020

I would not dismiss the Petitioner’s request for extension of the deadline for receipt

of mail

- in ballots as moot. Instead, I would have employed this case as the vehicle to

decide that issue on the evidentiary record developed before President Judge Leav itt in

accordance with this Court’s assignment, and I would have resolved the matter based on

the rationale set forth by Justice Donohue in her concurring and dissenting opinion in

Pennsylvania Democratic Party v. Boockvar , 133 MM 2020.

In all other resp ects, I join the per curiam Order.

Justices Donohue and Mundy join this concurring and dissenting statement.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

October 23, 2019

No. 04-19-00715-CV

THE STATE OF TEXAS, ex. rel. Todd A. Durden, In his Official Capacity as County Attorney 

of Kinney County, Texas, Relator,

Appellants

v.

Rick Alvarado, In his Official Capacity as District and County Clerk of Kinney County, Texas, 

Respondent; and Kinney County, Texas, By and Through Its Governing Body the Kinney 

County Commissioners Court, Being James T. “Tully” Shahan, In his Official Capacity as 

County Judge; Mark Frerich, In his Official Capacity as County Commissioner; Joe Montalvo, In 

his Official Capacity as County Commissioner; Dennis Dodson, In his Official Capacity as 

County Commissioner, and Tim Ward, In his Official Capacity as County Commissioner; 

Respondent, Intervenor and Real Party in Interest; Todd A. Durden, County Attorney and an 

Elected County Officer, Real Party in Interest.

Appellees

From the 63rd Judicial District Court, Kinney County, Texas

Trial Court No. 4863

Honorable Sid L. Harle, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Appellees have filed a plea to the jurisdiction containing a motion to dismiss in each of 

these appeals, asserting the orders appellant seeks to appeal are not final, appealable orders. 

Appellees attached a copy of the orders to their motion, and the orders state, “The Court requests 

Respondent[s] to prepare affidavits in support of their claimed fees and expenses of defense 

within thirty (30) days and the Court will make a ruling regarding the award of a reasonable 

amount of such fees at a later date.”

“[A]n order or judgment is not final for purposes of appeal unless it actually disposes of 

every pending claim.” Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 205 (Tex. 2001). Because 

the order expressly leaves appellees’ claim for attorney’s fees pending further ruling, appellant is 

ORDERED to file a response to the appellees’ motion no later than ten days from the date of this 

order showing cause why these appeals should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
_________________________________

Irene Rios, Justice

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

court on this 23rd day of October, 2019.

___________________________________

LUZ ESTRADA,

Chief Deputy Clerk
McKENZIE ROTHWELL BARLOW 

& COUGHRAN, P.S.

1325 FOURTH AVE, SUITE 910

SEATTLE, WA 98101

(206) 224-9900 

Noelle E. Dwarzski OSB 131866 

David S. Barlow OSB 840101 

McKenzie Rothwell Barlow & Coughran, P.S. 

1325 Fourth Ave., Ste. 910 

Seattle, WA 98101 

Tel. (206) 224-9900 

davidb@mrbclaw.com 

noelled@mrbclaw.com

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF OREGON

AT PORTLAND

BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE OREGON 

RETAIL EMPLOYEES PENSION PLAN,

Plaintiff, 

v. 

R&M FOODS, INC. D/B/A HANK’S 

THRIFTWAY, HERING INVESTMENTS, 

LLC, PERFECTION BAKERY, HANK’S 

PROPERTIES, LLC and DOES 1-25, 

Defendants.

Case No. 3:16-cv-00455-SI

ORDER OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL 

OF ALL REMAINING DEFENDANTS 

AND THIS ACTION WITH PREJUDICE 

AND WITHOUT FEES OR COSTS TO 

ANY PARTY 

In accordance with Plaintiff’s and Defendants’ R&M Foods, Inc. d/b/a Hank’s Thriftway 

and Perfection Bakery’s Stipulated Motion brought pursuant to FRCP 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), it is 

hereby: 

ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the claims against Defendants R&M 

Foods, Inc. d/b/a Hank’s Thriftway and Perfection Bakery are dismissed with prejudice and 

without costs or fees to any party and this action is dismissed in its entirety. 

////

////

ORDER OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF 

DEFENDANT – 1 

3801.000 008 rh221202 

Case 3:16-cv-00455-SI Document 16 Filed 08/22/16 Page 1 of 2
McKENZIE ROTHWELL BARLOW 

& COUGHRAN, P.S.

1325 FOURTH AVE, SUITE 910

SEATTLE, WA 98101

(206) 224-9900 

DATED this 22nd day of August, 2016. 

_/s/ Michae. H. Smon______ 

The Honorable Michael H. Simon 

U.S. District Court Judge 

Submitted by:

 s/ Noelle E. Dwarzski

Noelle E. Dwarzski, OSB 131866 

 s/ David S. Barlow 

David S. Barlow, OSB 840101 

McKENZIE ROTHWELL BARLOW

 & COUGHRAN, P.S.

1325 4th Ave., Suite 910 

Seattle, WA 98101 

Tel. (206) 224-9900 

noelled@mrbclaw.com

davidb@mrbclaw.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Trust

 /s/ Thomas I. Kramer

Thomas I. Kramer, OSB 811504 

 /s/ Kirk S. Peterson

Kirk S. Peterson, OSB 933974 

BULLARD LAW

200 SW Market Street, Suite 1900 

Portland, OR 97201 

Tel. (503) 248-1134 

tkramer@bullardlaw.com

kpeterson@bullardlaw.com 

Attorneys for Defendants R&M Foods, Inc. 

and Perfection Bakery

ORDER OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF 

DEFENDANT – 2 

3801.000 008 rh221202 

Case 3:16-cv-00455-SI Document 16 Filed 08/22/16 Page 2 of 2
<PAGE>   1


                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


The Board of Directors
Metro Networks, Inc.:


We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (No.
333-23561 and No. 333-32549) on Form S-8 of Metro Networks, Inc. of our report
dated March 9, 1999 relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Metro
Networks, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 1998 and 1997, and the
related consolidated statements of operations, cash flows and stockholders'
equity/partners' capital for each of the years in the three-year period ended
December 31, 1998, which report appears in the December 31, 1998 annual report
on Form 10-K of Metro Networks, Inc. and subsidiaries.



                                                 KPMG LLP


Houston, Texas
March 30, 1999
State of New York

Supreme Court, Appellate Division

Third Judicial Department

Decided and Entered: January 26, 2017 106753 

106754

________________________________

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF

NEW YORK,

Respondent,

v MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

DEVANTE KNOX,

Appellant.

________________________________

Calendar Date: November 29, 2016

Before: McCarthy, J.P., Garry, Lynch, Clark and Mulvey, JJ.

__________

Jack H. Weiner, Chatham, for appellant.

D. Holley Carnright, District Attorney, Kingston (Joan

Gudesblatt Lamb of counsel), for respondent.

__________

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Ulster County

(Williams, J.), rendered April 21, 2014, convicting defendant

upon his plea of guilty of the crimes of criminal possession of a

weapon in the second degree and criminal sale of a controlled

substance in the third degree. 

Defendant was charged in two separate indictments with

multiple crimes. During a combined proceeding, he pleaded guilty

to criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and

criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree in

satisfaction of both indictments. He also waived his right to

appeal both orally and in writing. Under the terms of the plea

agreement, County Court agreed to sentence defendant as a prior

felony offender to concurrent prison terms of no more than 10

years for each crime, to be followed by five years of postrelease
-2- 106753

106754 

supervision for criminal possession of a weapon in the second

degree and three years of postrelease supervision for criminal

sale of a controlled substance in the third degree. At

sentencing, the court sentenced defendant to concurrent prison

terms of seven years for each crime, to be followed by the

aforementioned periods of postrelease supervision. Defendant now

appeals. 

Appellate counsel seeks to be relieved of his assignment of

representing defendant on the ground that there are no

nonfrivolous issues to be raised on appeal. Based upon our

review of the record and counsel's brief, we agree. Therefore,

the judgment is affirmed and counsel's request for leave to

withdraw is granted (see People v Cruwys, 113 AD2d 979, 980

[1985], lv denied 67 NY2d 650 [1986]; see generally People v

Stokes, 95 NY2d 633 [2001]).

McCarthy, J.P., Garry, Lynch, Clark and Mulvey, JJ.,

concur.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, and application to

be relieved of assignment granted.

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger

Clerk of the Court
**Exhibit 32.2**

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Allan Rowley, Chief Financial Officer of  MGTCapital Investments, Inc. (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 ofthe Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of myknowledge:

(1)                                                                                  the Quarterly Report on Form10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2007 (the “Report”)fully complies with the requirements of  Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

(2)                                                                                  the information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Company.

 
|                   | By:    | /s/ ALLAN  ROWLEY        |   |
|------------------------|--------|--------------------------|--------|
|                   |   | Allan Rowley             |   |
|                   |   | Chief Financial  Officer |   |
| November  7, 2007 |   |                     |   |

 

----