alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# CI2021451EN.01000101.xml

| 8.11.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CI 451/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.11.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CI 451/1

---

Networking of organisations operating in the fields within the European Food Safety Authority’s (EFSA’s) mission

(2021/C 451 I/01)

Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 (1), Article 36(2), provides that the European Food Safety Authority’s ‘Management Board, acting on a proposal from the Executive Director, shall draw up a list to be made public of competent organisations designated by the Member States which may assist the Authority, either individually or in networks, with its mission.’

The list was first drawn up by EFSA’s Management Board on 19 December 2006, and since then is:

| i. | updated regularly, on the basis of proposals from EFSA’s Executive Director, taking account of reviews or new designation proposals from the Member States (in accordance with Commission Regulation (EC) No 2230/2004, Article 2(4) (2)), and |
| --- | --- |

i.

updated regularly, on the basis of proposals from EFSA’s Executive Director, taking account of reviews or new designation proposals from the Member States (in accordance with Commission Regulation (EC) No 2230/2004, Article 2(4) (2)), and

| ii. | made public on EFSA’s website, where the latest updated list of competent organisations is published. |
| --- | --- |

ii.

made public on EFSA’s website, where the latest updated list of competent organisations is published.

This respective information is available on the EFSA website, at the following locations:

| i. | the latest amendment to the list of competent organisations by EFSA’s Management Board on 14 October 2021 – https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/events/event/88th-management-board-web-meeting, and |
| --- | --- |

i.

the latest amendment to the list of competent organisations by EFSA’s Management Board on 14 October 2021 – https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/events/event/88th-management-board-web-meeting, and

| ii. | the updated list of competent organisations – http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/partnersnetworks/scorg |
| --- | --- |

ii.

the updated list of competent organisations – http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/partnersnetworks/scorg

EFSA will keep this Notice updated, specifically regarding the provided website links.

For more information please contact Cooperation.Article36@efsa.europa.eu

---

(1)  Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety (OJ L 31, 1.2.2002, p. 1).

(2)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 2230/2004 of 23 December 2004 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of European Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 with regard to the network of organisations operating in the fields within the European Food Safety Authority’s mission (OJ L 379, 24.12.2004, p. 64), as last amended.

---
**EXHIBIT        32**

**CERTIFICATE        OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND **

**PRINCIPAL        FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE **

**SARBANES-OXLEY        ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)**

|  | 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 results of operations of the                    Company. |
|--|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                                                                                                                                                                              |   |   |   |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|
| /s/ Alan                      Doyle                                                                                                                                                          |   |   |   |
|                                                                                                                                                                                                   |   |   |   |
| Alan                        DoylePresident                        (Chief Executive Officer),Treasurer                        (Principal Financial Officer)January                        20, 2006 |   |   |        |
Order entered August 21, 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 12 - 01670 - CR No. 05 - 12 - 01672 - CR No. 05 - 13 - 00101 - CR QUIDALE D. DICKERSON , Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the Criminal District C ourt No. 5

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No s . F11 - 59093 - L , F11 - 59094 - L, F10 - 61899 - L



### O RDER The Court ORDERS the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine why appellant’s brief has not been filed. In this regard, the trial court shall make ap propriate findings and recommendations and determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeals, whether appellant is indigent, or if not indigent, whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeals. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 38.8( b ). If the trial cour t cannot obtain appellant’s presence at the hearing, the trial court shall conduct the hearing in appellant’s absence. See Meza v. State , 742 S.W.2d 708 (Tex. App.

– Corpus Christi 1987, no pet.) (per curiam). If appellant is indigent, the trial court is O RDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective representation, which may include appointment of new counsel.We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record of the proceedings, which shall include

written findings and recommendations, to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date of this order. The appeals are ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with the above order. The appeals shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the findings are received, whichev er is earlier.

/s/ DAVID EVANS JUSTICE
(Republished)

#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Matthew Rodwell, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Carey, J.), rendered on May 16, 1985, unanimously affirmed. No opinion. Concur—Murphy, P. J., *558Ross, Asch, Rosenberger and Smith, JJ. [133 AD2d 552.]
#### PEOPLE ex rel. TROY SUNDAY OBSERVER v. BOARD OF SUP’RS OF RENSSELAER COUNTY et al.

(Supreme’ Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

December 18, 1896.)

Proceeding on the relation of the Troy Sunday Observer against the board of supervisors of Rensselaer county and Daniel E. Conway.

No opinion. Determination of the board of supervisors confirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. All concur.
**AMENDMENT
TO RETENTION AND SEVERANCE AGREEMENT**
 
 THIS IS
AN AMENDMENT (the ***“Amendment”*** ) to that
certain retention and severance agreement (the ***“Agreement”*** ) dated
as of the 11 th day of
October, 2001, between MPOWER COMMUNICATIONS CORP., a Nevada corporation (the ***“Company”*** ) and
Roger Pachuta ( ***“Executive”*** ).
 
 The
Company and Executive, for and in consideration of the promises, terms and
conditions contained herein, do hereby agree to make the following amendments to
the Agreement.
 
 1.
    Paragraph
      4(a) of the Agreement is amended as
follows:
 
 4. **Severance
Benefit** .
 
 (a) You
are entitled to receive a severance benefit (the “Severance Benefit”) of one
times your salary immediately preceding your termination if your employment is
terminated (i) by the Company without Cause, (ii) due to your death or
Disability, or (iii) by you for Good Reason.
 
 2.
    Executive
      shall have no right to have paid or payable from any trust adopted by the
      Company, any portion of the Severance Benefit in excess of $150,000,
      unless and until all other employees entitled to receive payments from the
      trusts established by the Company for the purpose of paying severance
      benefits have been paid in full all of the severance benefits they are
      each entitled to.
 
 3.
    Except
      as amended by this Amendment, all terms and conditions of the Agreement
      shall remain in full force and effect. Moreover, it is the intention of
      the parties hereto that if this Amendment is void, becomes voidable, or
      otherwise is or becomes unenforceable as drafted, then the Agreement shall
      continue in full force and effect, in accordance with the terms and
      conditions thereof immediately prior to the execution of this Amendment.
      This Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts which
      together shall constitute one instrument, shall be governed by and
      construed in accordance with the laws and decisions of the State of New
      York applicable to contracts made and to be performed therein without
      giving effect to the principles of conflict of
laws.
 
 
 **IN
WITNESS WHEREOF** , the
parties have duly executed this Agreement as of this 4 th day of
February, 2005.
 
 
 **MPOWER
COMMUNICATIONS CORP.**
 
 /s/ Rolla P. Huff
    
    
    /s/ Roger PachutaRolla P. HuffChairman and
    CEO
    
    
    Roger
      Pachuta
#### Kevin McGowan et al., Plaintiffs, v Amalgamated Bank of New York et al., Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs-Appellants. M. Farbman & Sons, Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent.

— Ordered that the order of the Supreme Court, Putnam County, dated August 26, 1986, is affirmed, with costs, for reasons stated by Justice Dickinson. Thompson, J. P., Brown, Fiber and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.
LINITED STATES OF AMERICA

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

UNITED STATES COAST GUARI)

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD

Complainant

VS

RICHARD GONZALES

Respondent

Docket Number 2023 -0023

Enforcernent Activity No. 7 592291

CONSENT ORJER

Issued: March 13. 2023

Bv Administrative Law Judge: Honorable Timothv G. Stueve

Appearances:

LT Matthew Berakovich

USCG Sector Houstor/Galveston

For the Coast Cuard

Richard Gonzales, Pro Se

For Respondent
CONSENT ORDERAPPROVIN G SETTLEMENTAGREE NT

on or about February 16,2023' the parties in this case submitted a Motion for Approval

of Settlement Agreement and Entry ofconsent order to be approved as a settlement of the case

under 33 C.F.R. $ 20.502.

I have carefufly reviewed the terms of the Settlement Agreement and find it is fair and

reasonable and in substantial compliance with the requirements of 33 C.F.R. $ 20.502.

ORDER

Upon consideration of the record, it is hereby ORDERED, the Settlement Agreement is

APPROVED in full and incorporated herein by reference. This Consent Order shall constitute

full, final, and complete adjudication of this proceeding.

Done and dated M arch 13 . 2023 , at

Alameda, Califomia

Timothy C. Stueve

Administrative Law Judge

U.S. Coast Guard
#### In the Matter of Patricia Barone et al., Respondents, v Board of Cooperative Educational Services of Suffolk County, Third Supervisory District, et al., Appellants, et al., Respondents.

— In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, *inter alia,*to compel the appellants to inform the petitioners of their rights pursuant to Education Law § 3014-b, the appeals (by permission), are from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Lama, J.), dated November 16, 1984, which, *inter alia,*vacated a prior judgment dismissing the proceeding and directed an evidentiary hearing, and from an amended order of the same court, dated December 4, 1984, to the same effect.

Ordered that the appeals from the order dated November 16, 1984, are dismissed, as that order was superseded by the amended order dated December 4,1984; and it is further,

Ordered that the amended order dated December 4, 1984, is affirmed; and it is further,

Ordered that the petitioners-respondents are awarded one bill of costs, payable by the appellants.

The issue to be resolved in this proceeding namely, whether there was a takeover within the meaning of Education Law § 3014-b, is not solely within the special competence of the New York State Department of Education. Therefore, the doctrine of primary jurisdiction does not apply *(cf. Matter of Patti Ann H. v New York Med. Coll.,*88 AD2d 296, 300, *affd*58 NY2d 734). This court has previously determined that the interpretation and application of Education Law § 3014-b are within the province of the courts *(see, Matter of Sklar v Board of Coop. Educ. Servs.,*104 AD2d 622; *Matter of Gill v Dutchess County Bd. of Coop. Educ. Servs.,*99 AD2d 836; *Koch v Putnam-Northern Westchester Bd. of Coop. Educ. Servs.,*98 AD2d 311, *lv dismissed*63 NY2d 895; *Matter of Acinapuro v Board of Coop. Educ. Servs.,*89 AD2d 329). Accordingly, Special Term did not err in refusing to defer jurisdiction to the New York State Commissioner of Education. Thompson, J. P., Niehoff, Rubin and Eiber, JJ., concur.
#### Depierris *v.*Mattern.

*(Supreme Court, Special Term, New York County.*

May 31, 1890.)

Nuisance—Erection of Building—Intended Business.

The fact that a building in course of construction may-, when completed, be used for a business which will be a nuisance to an adjoining owner, is not a ground for restraining the completion of the building, where it is not of itself a nuisance.

At chambers. Action by Bertrand D. Depierris against Jacob Mattern, that defendant be perpetually enjoined from using the building Ho. 215 West Fifty-Third street, in the city of New York, or the extension to be erected *627thereto, for a wagon shop, paint shop, or forge. Plaintiff moves for an injunction *pendente lite.*

*Thomas F. Murtha;*for plaintiff. *Clemens J. Kraeht,*for defendant.

Lawrence, J.

The plaintiff asks for an injunction restraining the defendants, his agents, servants, and employes, from proceeding with the alteration, adaptation, and use of the building known as “Ho. 215 West Fifty-Third Street,” in the city of Hew York, or with the building or construction of an extension or addition thereto. It appears from the papers submitted by the plaintiff that the defendant threatens to build an extension to the house in question, and intends to make, and is making, alterations on the same. It is alleged, on information and belief, that the business to be carried on by the defendant in said building when completed, and in said house when altered, is that of building and repairing wagons and vehicles, and, in addition to and in conjunction with said business, it is the intention of defendant to carry on a blacksmithing establishment and paint shop. The affidavits submitted by the defendant show that the building will not be completed or ready for use until about September 1, 1890. There is no allegation in the complaint that, the alteration to and extension of the building would amount to a violation of the building laws. Indeed, it appears that the plans have been submitted to and approved of by the superintendent of buildings. The possibility or probability that the property may be used when the building is completed in a manner detrimental to the plaintiff’s rights is no ground for granting an injunction in the first instance. The building itself is not a nuisance. See *Bridge Co.*v. *Paige,*83 N. Y. 188, where Earl, J.,in delivering the opinion of the court, says: “A wrong or unlawful motive in erecting a building otherwise lawful does not make the building itself unlawful or a nuisance.” See, also, *Morgan*v. *City of Binghampton,*102 N. Y. 500, 7 N. E. Rep. 424. I am therefore of the opinion that this application is premature, and that it. should be denied, with costs.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2548 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2548

   To amend the Public Health Service Act with respect to a national 
                      pediatric research network.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 21, 2015

Mrs. McMorris Rodgers introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend the Public Health Service Act with respect to a national 
                      pediatric research network.

    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 ``Pediatric Research Improvement Act 
of 2015''.

SEC. 2. NATIONAL PEDIATRIC RESEARCH NETWORK.

    Section 409D(d) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 
284h(d)) is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1)--
                    (A) by striking ``in consultation with the Director 
                of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of 
                Child Health and Human Development and in collaboration 
                with other appropriate national research institutes and 
                national centers that carry out activities involving 
                pediatric research'' and inserting ``in collaboration 
                with the national research institutes and national 
                centers that carry out activities involving pediatric 
                research'';
                    (B) by striking subparagraph (B);
                    (C) by striking ``may be comprised of, as 
                appropriate'' and all that follows through ``the 
                pediatric research consortia'' and inserting ``may be 
                comprised of, as appropriate, the pediatric research 
                consortia''; and
                    (D) by striking ``; or'' at the end and inserting a 
                period; and
            (2) in paragraph (1), paragraph (2)(A), the first sentence 
        of paragraph (2)(E), and paragraph (4), by striking ``may'' 
        each place it appears and inserting ``shall''.
                                 <all>
```
---

Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, Yilun Jin, the Chief Financial Officer and
Treasurer of AMERICAN LORAIN CORPORATION (the Company), DO HEREBY CERTIFY
that:

| | 1. | The Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal
      year ended December 31, 2008 (the Report), fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
      and
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                         
| | 2. | Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
      all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of
      the Company.                                                             

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned has executed this
statement this 29th day of March 2010.

/s/ Yilun Jin Yilun Jin
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer)

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906 has been provided to American Lorain Corporation and will be retained by
American Lorain Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

The forgoing certification is being furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission pursuant to §18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being
filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the
Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general
incorporation language in such filing.

---
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

United States Coast GuardU.S. Department of Homeland Security

Search
Search

Search

-  Home    -  News Room             
  -  Reserve             
  -  Forcecom             
  -  Operations             
  -  Mission Support             
  -  Atlantic Area             
  -  Pacific Area             
  -  History 
-  Units    -  Organization             
  -  Coast Guard A to Z             
  -  Atlantic Area             
  -  Pacific Area             
  -  Force Readiness Command 
-  Leadership    -  Commandant’s Initiatives             
  -  Senior Leadership             
  -  Deputy Commandant for Operations             
  -  Deputy Commandant for Mission Support             
  -  Atlantic Area Commander             
  -  Pacific Area Commander             
  -  Reserve             
  -  Auxiliary 
-  Resources    -  CG Support             
  -  Legal      -  JoinCGJAG             
    -  Legal_Assistance        -  Find-A-Legal-Assistance-Lawyer             
      -  FAQ 
  -  Civil Rights             
  -  Work-Life             
  -  Administrative Law Judges      -  Virtual Hearing 
  -  Newsroom             
  -  Family             
  -  Library             
  -  CG Web Mail             
  -  Return 2 Service      -  FAQ 
-  Community    -  Art Program             
  -  Girl Scouts / Boy Scouts      -  Eagle Scout Recognition 
  -  Coast Guard Band             
  -  Coast Guard Cities             
  -  Honor Guard             
  -  JROTC      -  NEWS 
  -  Special Programs      -  Industry Academy        -  Contacts             
      -  2018 
  -  Trademark             
  -  Resources      -  History             
    -  CGC Eagle 
-  Mariners    -  National Vessel Documentation Center             
  -  National Maritime Center             
  -  National Pollution Funds Center      -  NRD        -  NRD_FAQs             
      -  Trustee_Links             
      -  NRD_DOCS             
      -  About_NRD_Funding 
  -  Boating Safety 
-  doing business		 
-  Join		 
-  Recruiting		 
-  contact		 
-  About		 

HomeResourcesAdministrative Law JudgesDecisions2002 ALJ Decisons

 

**ALJ Decisions: 2002**

 

 

**

                      - FOIA
                      - Privacy Policy
                      - MHS Notice of Privacy Practices
                      - Accessibility
                      - No FEAR
                      - Whistleblower Protection
                      - U.S. Department of Homeland Security
                      - DHS Office of Inspector General
                      - WhiteHouse.gov
                      - USA.gov

### Stay Connected

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil