alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2021305EN.01003001.xml

| 30.7.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 305/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.7.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/30

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10373 — Primonial/Samsung/Target)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 305/03)

On 26 July 2021, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32021M10373. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32021M10373. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13

- 20332 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
ROLANDO EUCEDA

- LOPEZ, also known as Rolando Euceda, also known as Molojo Palmarez, also known as Rolando Lopez Euceda, also known as Rolando Euceda Lopez, also known as Edgardo David Castillo

- Castellano, also known as Edgardo David Castillo , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal s from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:10

- CR

- 214

- 1

Before PRADO, ELROD, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Rolando Euceda

Lopez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Euceda

- Lopez h a s not filed a response. We have reviewed

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED April 16, 2014 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 13-20332 Document: 00512598039 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/16/2014No. 13

- 20332

counsel’s brief and t he relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2.

2 Case: 13-20332 Document: 00512598039 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/16/2014
# C_2022290EN.01015201.xml

| 29.7.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 290/152 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.7.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 290/152

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Decision 2003/17/EC as regards its period of application and as regards the equivalence of field inspections carried out in Bolivia on cereal seed-producing crops and oil and fibre plant seed-producing crops and on the equivalence of cereal seed and oil and fibre plant seed produced in Bolivia

(COM(2022) 26 final — 2021/0016 (COD))

(2022/C 290/26)

| Referral | European Parliament, 14.2.2022
  Council, 8.2.2022 |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Articles 43(2) and Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union |
| Section responsible | Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment |
| Adopted at plenary | 23.3.2022 |
| Plenary session No | 568 |
| Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions) | 178/1/7 |

Referral

European Parliament, 14.2.2022

Council, 8.2.2022

Legal basis

Articles 43(2) and Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Section responsible

Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment

Adopted at plenary

23.3.2022

Plenary session No

568

Outcome of vote

(for/against/abstentions)

178/1/7

Since the Committee has already set out its views on the content of the proposal in question in its opinion on Equivalence of inspections — seed produced in Brazil and Moldova (1), adopted on 14 February 2018, it decided, at its 568th plenary session of 23 and 24 March 2022 (meeting of 23 March), by 178 votes in favour with 1 against and 7 abstentions, not to draw up a new opinion on the subject, but to refer to the position it had taken in the abovementioned document.

Brussels, 23 March 2022.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Christa SCHWENG

---

(1)  OJ C 227, 28.6.2018, p. 76

1

---
# C_2021463EN.01000701.xml

| 16.11.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 463/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.11.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 463/7

---

Notice for the attention of persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP, as implemented by Council Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2021/1984, and in Council Regulation (EU) No 36/2012, as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/1983, concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria

(2021/C 463/07)

The following information is brought to the attention of the persons that appear in Annex I to Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP (1), as implemented by Council Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2021/1984 (2), and in Annex II to Council Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 (3), as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/1983 (4), concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria.

The Council of the European Union has decided that those persons should be included in the list of persons and entities in Annex I to Decision 2013/255/CFSP and Annex II to Regulation (EU) No 36/2012. The grounds for designation of those persons appear in the relevant entries in those Annexes.

The attention of the persons concerned is drawn to the possibility of making an application to the competent authorities of the relevant Member State(s) as indicated on the websites in Annex III to Regulation (EU) No 36/2012, in order to obtain an authorisation to use frozen funds for basic needs or specific payments (cf. Article 16 of the Regulation).

The persons concerned may submit a request to the Council, together with supporting documentation that the decision to include them on the above-mentioned list should be reconsidered, before 1 March 2022, to the following address:

| Council of the European Union |
| --- |
| General Secretariat |
| RELEX.1.C |
| Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175 |
| 1048 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

Council of the European Union

General Secretariat

RELEX.1.C

Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175

1048 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

Email: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu

Any observations received will be taken into account for the purpose of the Council’s next review, pursuant to Article 34 of Decision 2013/255/CFSP and Article 32(4) of Regulation (EU) No 36/2012, of the list of designated persons and entities.

The attention of the persons concerned is also drawn to the possibility of challenging the Council’s decision before the General Court of the European Union, in accordance with the conditions laid down in Article 275, second paragraph, and Article 263, fourth and sixth paragraphs, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

---

(1)  OJ L 147, 1.6.2013, p. 14.

(2)  OJ L 402 I, 15.1.2021, p. 5.

(3)  OJ L 16, 19.1.2012, p. 1.

(4)  OJ L 402 I, 15.1.2021, p. 1.

---
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v *130John Smith, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lombardo, J.), rendered June 3, 1985, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contentions that the prosecutor’s cross-examination and comments made on summation and the trial court’s charge on reasonable doubt deprived him of a fair trial were not preserved for appellate review by timely objections *(see, People v Medina,*53 NY2d 951; *People v Bowen,*50 NY2d 915) and we decline to review these contentions in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. Finally, the sentence imposed by the trial court was appropriate, under all of the circumstances *(see, People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80). Mangano, J. P., Bracken, Kunzeman and Harwood, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 5

      CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350 OF
        CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE (18 U.S.C. 1350)

In  connection  with the  report of  Canadian  Natural  Resources  Limited  (the
"Company")  on the Form 40-F for the fiscal  year  ending  December  31, 2007 as
filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the
"Report"),  I, Douglas A. Proll,  certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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.

DATED this 26th day of March, 2008.



CANADIAN NATURAL RESOURCES LIMITED


By:    /S/ Douglas A. Proll
       ---------------------------------------------------
       Name:  Douglas A. Proll
       Title: President and Chief Operating Officer
              Chief Financial Officer and Senior
              Vice-President, Finance (Principal Financial
              Officer)
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 18

- 00186

- CR

Ross Thomas Brantley III

v.

The State of Texas §

§

§

§

§ From the 372nd District Court

of Tarrant County (1091400D)

May 24 , 2018

Per Curiam

(nfp)



### JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on app eal in this case and holds that

the appeal should be dismissed. It is ordere d that the appeal is dismissed for

want of jurisdiction.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

PER CURIAM
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       3,519,133
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               10,255,228
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,114,394
<INVENTORY>                                  2,450,328
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            12,384,220
<PP&E>                                     180,008,648
<DEPRECIATION>                              23,780,141
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             182,269,720
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       14,053,270
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       42,241,169
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        17,224
<OTHER-SE>                                 (9,623,326)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               182,269,720
<SALES>                                     19,251,982
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            81,940,809
<CGS>                                        8,858,980
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               71,725,171
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               397,243
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          15,273,042
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (5,057,404)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    49,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (5,106,404)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (5,106,404)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        


</TABLE>
# C_2021413EN.01001201.xml

| 12.10.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 413/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.10.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 413/12

---

Notice for the attention of the data subjects to whom the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/1544 and Council Regulation (EU) 2018/1542 concerning restrictive measures against the proliferation and use of chemical weapons apply

(2021/C 413/10)

The attention of data subjects is drawn to the following information in accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1).

The legal basis for this processing operation are Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/1544 (2), as amended by Council Decision (CFSP) 2021/1799 (3), and Council Regulation (EU) 2018/1542 (4).

The controller of this processing operation is the Council of the European Union represented by the Director General of RELEX (External Relations) of the General Secretariat of the Council and the department entrusted with the processing operation is RELEX.1.C that can be contacted at:

| Council of the European Union |
| --- |
| General Secretariat |
| RELEX.1.C |
| Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175 |
| 1048 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

Council of the European Union

General Secretariat

RELEX.1.C

Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175

1048 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

Email: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu

The purpose of the processing operation is the establishment and updating of the list of persons subject to restrictive measures in accordance with Decision (CFSP) 2018/1544, as amended by Decision (CFSP) 2021/1799, and Regulation (EU) 2018/1542.

The data subjects are the natural persons who fulfil the listing criteria as laid down in Decision (CFSP) 2018/1544 and Regulation (EU) 2018/1542.

The personal data collected includes data necessary for the correct identification of the person concerned, the statement of reasons and any other data related thereto.

The personal data collected may be shared as necessary with the European External Action Service and the Commission.

Without prejudice to restrictions pursuant to Article 25 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725, the exercise of the rights of the data subjects such as the right of access, as well as the rights to rectification or to object will be answered in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2018/1725.

Personal data will be retained for 5 years from the moment the data subject has been removed from the list of persons subject to the restrictive measures or the validity of the measure has expired, or for the duration of court proceedings in the event they had been started.

Without prejudice to any judicial, administrative or non-judicial remedy, data subjects may lodge a complaint with the European Data Protection Supervisor in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2018/1725.

---

(1)  OJ L 295, 21.11.2018, p. 39.

(2)  OJ L 259, 16.10.2018, p. 25.

(3)  OJ L 362, 12.10.2021, p. 51.

(4)  OJ L 259, 16.10.2018, p. 12

---
#### P & N Tiffany Properties, Inc., Appellant, v Village of Tuckahoe, Respondent.

Submitted January 8, 2007;

decided January 11, 2007

Motion by Vivian L. Hausch to withdraw as counsel for appellant on the appeal herein granted.
EXHIBIT 21

                 REMINGTON PRODUCTS COMPANY, L.L.C. SUBSIDIARIES


Remington Products Australia Pty., Ltd.
800 Wellington Road
Rowville
Victoria 3178, Australia
Tel:  011 613 9751 5522
Fax: 011 613 9751 5523

Remington Products New Zealand Ltd.
2 Ngaire Avenue
Newmarket
Auckland, New Zealand
Tel:  011 649 529 0081
Fax: 011 649 529 0082

Remington Products (Canada) Inc.
61 Amber Street
Markham, Ontario, Canada L3R 3J7
Tel:  905 470 9400
Fax: 905 470 9405

Remington Consumer Products Limited
Watermans House, Watermans Court
Kingsbury Crescent, The Causeway
Staines, Middlesex, UK TW18 3BA
Tel:  011 44 1784 411411
Fax: 011 44 1784 411412

Remington Consumer Products Limited
29 Earlsfort Terrace, Dublin 2
New Nangor Road, Dublin 22, Ireland
Tel:  011 353 1 460 4711
Fax: 011 353 1 460 4714

Remington Products Company GmbH
Niederlassung Deutschland
Siemensstrasse 7
D-88499 Riedlingen, Germany
Tel:  011 49 7371 93250
Fax: 011 49 7371 932530

Remington Capital Corporation

Remington Rand Corporation

Remington Licensing Corporation

Remington Corporation, L.L.C.
60 Main Street
Bridgeport, CT 06604
CHILD WEAR OF PERSONAL FLOTATION DEVICES (PFDs) 

FEDERAL VERSUS STATE REQUIREMENTS 

Written By Danielle Davis

There seems to be confusion when using cites 33 CFR 175.25 and 33 

CFR 175.15(c). Both cites discuss the requirement for child wear of 

personal floatation devices (PFDs). When determining the proper 

cite, keep in mind that only when a State has failed to establish a 

State requirement for children to wear a PFD, does the federal 

requirement found at 33 CFR 175.15(c) apply. When a State has 

established a State requirement for child wear of a PFD, the federal 

cite 33 CFR 173.15(c) is not applicable. The state law takes 

precedence over the federal regulation. 

33 CFR 175.15(c) provides that no person may operate a recreational 

vessel underway with any child under 13 years old aboard unless 

each such child is either wearing an appropriate PFD approved by 

the Coast Guard or below decks or in an enclosed cabin. If the child 

is observed above deck without a PFD, then a violation has occurred. 

If the child was below decks with no PFD, then no violation has 

occurred. 

33 CFR 175.25 provides that where a State has established by 

statute that children aboard a recreational vessel of a certain age 

wear an appropriate PFD approved by the Coast Guard, that 

requirement applies on the waters subject to the State’s jurisdiction. 

For example, the State of Ohio has established by statute that 

children under the age of 10 years old wear a PFD. A violation would 

not exist if a child of 11 years was not wearing a PFD aboard a 

recreational vessel on waters subject to Ohio jurisdiction. So 

knowing if a State requirement exists is the first factor in 

determining what cite is applicable. Secondarily, knowing the child’s 

age and location on the vessel when observed without a PFD is 

critical. 
A narrative for an alleged violation for a child not wearing a PFD 

should indicate if the State has established a requirement for child 

wear of a PFD. If so, then 33 CFR 175.25 is applicable and the 

evidence should then support violation of the State requirement. 

Remember it is 33 CFR 175.25 that gives the authority for Coast 

Guard enforcement of the requirements of the State’s statute. If the 

wrong cite is used, the case will most likely be dismissed. 

When submitting a case don’t just indicate there were children on 

board and not wearing a PFD. This is insufficient evidence. Boarding 

teams should always ask questions, seek evidence or document how 

they determine the age of the child and provide that information in 

the violation case. Evidence to support a conclusion that the child 

was of an age that required wear of a PFD, is almost always 

necessary to find a violation occurred. Similarly important is a good 

description as to where the child was located on the vessel when 

observed without a PFD and whether the vessel was underway at 

the time.
CD EXAS

October 9, 1953

Eon. Bryan Bell, Director Motor TransportationDivision Railroad Commission Tribune Building Austin, Texas OpinionNo. S-104
Re: Authority of a specialized motor carrier, licensed to transport oil field equlpment, to carry certain enumerated coauuodlties used in the maintenance Dear Sir: of oil refineries.

You have requested the opinion of this office as to whether specializedmotor carriershaving authority to transport oil field equipment under their certificatesmay carry hydrated lime and sand in bags to be used in the malntenance of oil refineries.

In 1941,Article glib,Vernon's Civil Statutes, was amended so as to add a technical statutorydefinition of the term "oil field equipment",which specializedmotor carriers were authorized to transport,and that definition reads as follows:

"Section 1 (I) For the purpose of this Act, the term '011 field equipment'means and Includesmachinery,materials, and equipment Incidental to or used in the constructlbn,' operation, and maintenance of facilities which are used for the discovery,production, and processing of natural gas and petroleum, and such machinery,materials, and equipmentwhen used in the constructionand maintenance of pipe lines."
Your inquiry can be resolved by determining whether hydrated lime and sand in bags comeswithin the definition of 'materials",as the maintenance of a refinery is unquestionably -c within the comprehension of the "processing of natural gas and

petroleum."Hon. Bryan Bell, page 2 (S-104)

Webster's IiewInternationalDictionary defines "material"as,

"the substance or substances, or the parts, gooda, stock, or.the like, of which anything Is composed or may be made;

. . ."
IJocases have otherwisedefined 'materials"as used in the foregoing statute, and within the definition set. out above and certainly as accepted In the petroleum Industry, we hold that hydrated lime and sand are "materl&ls"within the comprehension of the statutorydefinition of "oil field equipment."

However, such "materials" of such statute,must be "lncident~l under the clear provisions to or used in the construction,operation, and maintenance" of such refineries. Sand, we suppose,might normallyhave some appropriate use in some filter function of a refinery, and hydrated lime is normally used in treatingwater for cooling towers,btitthe "use" of the commodities that is actually intended is a fact quebtion to be resolved by theRailroad Commlss1oi-1. The neceselty for transporting the sand In bags, Instead of in bulk, also requires the judgment of the Commission on a fact issue.

Sand and hydrated lime are "materials"wlthin the definition of "011 field equlbment", and are authorized to be transportedby specialized motor carriers underArt. glib,V.C.S., If their carriage is Incidental to or used In the construction, operation or maintenance of an 011 refinery. APPROVED: Willis E. Gresham Reviewer Robert S. Trottl First Assistant John Ben Shepperd Attorney General Yours very truly, JOHN BEN SHEPPRRD Attorney General