alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Service Center Operations Directorate

## Leadership

Connie Nolan is the Associate Director for the Service Center Operations Directorate (SCOPS).

Service Center Operations Directorate (SCOPS) provides services for persons seeking immigration benefits while ensuring the integrity and security of our immigration system.

We provide decisions to individuals who want to receive immigration benefits.

We support components at headquarters and service centers.

We treat everyone with respect and dignity regardless of the outcome of the decision.

We ensure that new immigrants and citizens understand the privileges and advantages of lawful presence in the United States.

SCOPS consists of six Service Centers that provide immigration benefits for petitioners and applicants who do not require interviews. These six centers are California Service Center (CSC), Humanitarian, Adjustment, Removing Conditions, and Travel Documents Service Center (HART), Nebraska Service Center (NSC), Potomac Service Center (PSC), Texas Service Center (TSC), and Vermont Service Center (VSC).

Generally, the work performed by the service centers is organized by these distinct product lines, but is not limited to:
                    - Business  – Immigrant (permanent) and nonimmigrant (temporary) classifications for individuals of extraordinary ability; outstanding researchers and professors; executives and managers; advanced degree professionals; athletes; entertainers; skilled and unskilled workers; individuals working in specialty occupations; religious workers; agricultural workers and temporary and seasonal workers; and workers in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), among others.
                    - Family  – Petitions for immediate family members and fiancés.
                    - Humanitarian  – Benefit requests filed by refugees and asylees and their accompanying family members, individuals seeking consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), and individuals seeking temporary protected status (TPS); relief for victims of abuse, crimes, and severe forms of trafficking; waivers of inadmissibility; and posthumous naturalization based on death in active military service, among other humanitarian benefits.
                    - Students and exchange visitors  – Requests for employment authorization (practical training in a field of study for foreign students), dependents of exchange visitors (such as medical students, au pairs, or other cultural visitors), and waivers for medical doctors to enable them to work in medically underserved areas.
                    - Fraud Detection  – Operational support, oversight and policy guidance for the Center Fraud Detection Operations (CFDOs) at each of the Service Centers.
                    - National Security  – Oversight, operational support, and policy guidance for the Background Check Units (BCU) at each of the Service Centers.

03/19/2024

0 / 2000To protect your privacy, please do not include any personal information in your feedback. Review our Privacy Policy.
Exhibit 4.19

Shares Subscription Agreement

(This
Agreement is entered into between the following parties on January 30, 2016 in Beijing)

Issuer: China Tower Corporation Limited (China
Tower)

Subscriber: China Mobile Group Hebei Co., Ltd.

Whereas the issuer and the subscriber have signed the Transaction Agreement of the Existing Telecommunication Tower and related Assets by Issuance of
Shares and Payment of Cash on October 14, 2015. Based on the above agreement and the specific circumstances of delivery of towers and related assets, the issuer has determined to issue a total of 119,344,615,024 shares at a par value of RMB1
per share.



|1. | Subscription Price
|-- | ------------------

RMB1 per share.



|2. | Subscription Amount and Quantity
|-- | --------------------------------

The subscriber confirms to pay RMB4,375,693,430 to subscribe
for 4,375,693,430 shares.



|3. | Subscription Method
|-- | -------------------

The subscriber agrees to subscribe for the shares issued by investing with
assets.



|4. | Payment Method
|-- | --------------

The subscriber has completed the actual payment of contribution before
December 31, 2015.



|5. | Shareholders Rights and Obligations
|-- | ------------------------------------

The both parties confirm that the subscriber shall
become the owner of shares subscribed for in this transaction from the effective date of this Agreement, and enjoy its shareholder rights and bear the corresponding obligations for such shares. The both parties agree that the issuer shall complete
the change to register of shareholders, revision of Articles of Association and change to industrial and commercial registration within 30 days after signing this Shares Subscription Agreement.



|6. | Entry into Force and Counterparts
|-- | ---------------------------------

This Agreement shall enter into force on December 31,
2015. This agreement is executed in six counterparts, each party holding two copies, and the rest shall be submitted for examination and approval/record filing.

(Reminder of this page intentionally left blank)



---

|                                                 
|-------------------------------------------------
|Issuer: China Tower Corporation Limited (chop)   
|Legal representative or authorized representative
|                                                 
|/s/ GAO Chunlei                                  
|                                                 
|Subscriber: China Mobile Group Hebei Co., Ltd.   
|Legal representative or authorized representative
|                                                 
|/s/ LIU Yuewen
# C_2021398EN.01000201.xml

| 1.10.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 398/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.10.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 398/2

---

Communication in accordance with Article 34 (7)(a)(iii) of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council, on decisions relating to binding information issued by the customs authorities of the Member States concerning the classification of goods in the customs nomenclature

(2021/C 398/02)

The customs authorities shall revoke decisions relating to binding information from this day if they become incompatible with the interpretation of the customs nomenclature as a result of the following international tariff measures:

Classification Decisions, Classification Opinions or amendments to the Explanatory Notes of the Nomenclature of the Harmonised Commodity Description and Coding System, adopted by the Customs Cooperation Council (CCC document No NC2803 - report of the 67th session of the HS Committee):

AMENDMENTS TO THE EXPLANATORY NOTES TO BE DONE UNDER AN ARTICLE 8 PROCEDURE OF THE HS CONVENTION AND CLASSIFICATION OPINIONS AND DECISIONS EDITED BY THE HS COMMITTEE OF THE WCO

(67th SESSION OF THE HSC – APRIL 2021)

DOC. NC2803

Amendments of the Explanatory Notes of the Nomenclature annexed to the HS Convention

| 24.03
  30.02
  Chapter 65
  73.23
  85.01
  87.03
  95.03
  95.05 (Page XX-9505-1. Part (A). Item (3)) | T/1
  T/12
  T/15
  T/27
  T/16
  T/14
  T/13
  T/15 |
| --- | --- |

24.03

30.02

Chapter 65

73.23

85.01

87.03

95.03

95.05 (Page XX-9505-1. Part (A). Item (3))

T/1

T/12

T/15

T/27

T/16

T/14

T/13

T/15

Classification Opinions approved by the HS Committee

| 0410.00/1 | T/18 |
| --- | --- |
| 2403.99/2 | T/19 |
| 2711.19/1 | T/20 |
| 7004.90/1 | T/21 |
| 7312.10/1-2 | T/22 |
| 8415.90/4 | T/23 |
| 8708.99/6 | T/24 |
| 9026.20/1 | T/25 |
| 9503.00/13 | T/26 |

0410.00/1

T/18

2403.99/2

T/19

2711.19/1

T/20

7004.90/1

T/21

7312.10/1-2

T/22

8415.90/4

T/23

8708.99/6

T/24

9026.20/1

T/25

9503.00/13

T/26

Classification Opinions deleted by the HS Committee

| 8528.69/1-2 | IJ/29 |
| --- | --- |

8528.69/1-2

IJ/29

Classification Decisions approved by the HS Committee

| 2933.79 (INN: List 118)
  2939.79
  2939.80 | T/5
  T/9, T/10
  T/10 |
| --- | --- |
| INN: List 120 | T/2 |
| INN: List 121
  INN: List 122
  INN: List 123
  INN: List 124 | T/3
  T/6
  T/7
  T/11 |

2933.79 (INN: List 118)

2939.79

2939.80

T/5

T/9, T/10

T/10

INN: List 120

T/2

INN: List 121

INN: List 122

INN: List 123

INN: List 124

T/3

T/6

T/7

T/11

Information regarding the contents of these measures can be obtained from the Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union of the European Commission (rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 200, 1049 Brussels, Belgium) or can be downloaded from the internet site of this Directorate-General:

https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/business/calculation-customs-duties/what-is-common-customs-tariff/harmonized-system-general-information_en

---
#### Skews v. Huey.

Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court.

Tried before the Hon. James J. Banks.

James A. Estes, for appellant. •

James Trotter, for appellee.

Opinion by

McClellan, C. J,

The appellant, O. C. Skews, recovered a judgment against W. H. Harney, and upon this judgment a writ of garnishment was sued out and served upon one Rose Huey. Upon the garnishee filing his answer, it was contested by the plaintiff. Upon issue being joined between the plaintiff and the garnishee, as directed by law in such cases, it was shown that Harney for a term of two years was to do the sanitary -work for the city of Bessemer and for such work was to receive 85 per cent, of the amount collected by the city from individuals and corporations for sanitary work done on their premises. Huey was the clerk and treasurer of the city of Bessemer, and before making Ms answer held in his hands a certain sum of money which had been paid to him as treasurer of the city of Bessemer b.y a corporation for sanitary work done on its premises. In receipting for said money he signed his name thereto as clerk and treasurer of the city of Bessemer.

There was introduced in evidence a resolution of the city council of Bessemer authorizing the contract with Huey as stated above. The cause was tried by the court without the intervention of a jury, and upon the hearing of all the evidence, the court rendered judgment in favor of the garnishee, discharging him. From this judgment the plaintiff appeals.

On this appeal, it is held that the money sought to be subjected by garnishment to the debt of Blarney was made up of sanitary demands collected by the city and in the hands of its treasurer in accordance with a resolution passed by the city council, and that it was, therefore, not subject to the garnishment.

The judgment is affirmed.
Exhibit 24.1

POWER OF ATTORNEY

Know All Men by These Presents, that the undersigned constitutes and appoints Denis McGlynn and Timothy R. Horne, each and
individually, as his true and lawful attorney-in-fact and agent. with full power of substitution, in any and all capacities to sign filings by Dover Motorsports, Inc. of Form 10-K and any and all amendments thereto, and to file the
same, with all exhibits, and any other documents in connection therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto said attorney-in-fact and agent, full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and thing requisite
or necessary to be done in and about the premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as he might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that said attorney-in-fact and agent, or his substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be
done by virtue hereof. This Power of Attorney may be signed in counterparts.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Power of Attorney, in the capacities indicated, as of this 6thday
of March, 2009.



| |  |  |  |                         
| |  |  |  | ------------------------
| |  | 
| |  |  |  | /s/ Patrick J. Bagley   
| |  |  |  | Patrick J. Bagley       
| |  |  |  | Director                
| |  | 
| |  |  |  | /s/ Kenneth K. Chalmers 
| |  |  |  | Kenneth K. Chalmers     
| |  |  |  | Director                
| |  | 
| |  |  |  | /s/ Jeffrey W. Rollins  
| |  |  |  | Jeffrey W. Rollins      
| |  |  |  | Director                
| |  | 
| |  |  |  | /s/ John W. Rollins, Jr.
| |  |  |  | John W. Rollins, Jr.    
| |  |  |  | Director                
| |  | 
| |  |  |  | /s/ R. Randall Rollins  
| |  |  |  | R. Randall Rollins      
| |  |  |  | Director                
| |  | 
| |  |  |  | /s/ Henry B. Tippie     
| |  |  |  | Henry B. Tippie         
| |  |  |  | Director                
| |  | 
| |  |  |  | /s/ Eugene W. Weaver    
| |  |  |  | Eugene W. Weaver        
| |  |  |  | Director                
| |  |  |  |                         
| |  |  |  |
# C_2021034EN.01000401.xml

| 1.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 34/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 34/4

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.9968 — TOTAL/Ørsted UK)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 34/04)

On 14 December 2020, 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 32020M9968 — TOTAL/Ørsted UK. 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 32020M9968 — TOTAL/Ørsted UK. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

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

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

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              650
<BONDS>                                            685
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         6,448
<OTHER-SE>                                   (657,133)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                (252,121)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (3,382)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (3,382)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                459,377
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (255,503)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                714,880
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   459,377
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .10


</TABLE>
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT NYGEL HARRIS, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D17-4384 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ________________________________ ) Opinion filed May 25, 2018. Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Polk County; Wayne M. Durden, Judge. Nygel Harris, pro se.
PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. NORTHCUTT, KELLY, and MORRIS, JJ., Concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2394 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2394

   To reauthorize the National Forest Foundation Act, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 18, 2015

Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania (for himself and Mr. Bost) introduced the 
   following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To reauthorize the National Forest Foundation Act, and for other 
                               purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``National Forest Foundation 
Reauthorization Act of 2015''.

SEC. 2. NATIONAL FOREST FOUNDATION ACT REAUTHORIZATION.

    (a) Extension of Authority To Provide Matching Funds for 
Administrative and Project Expenses.--Section 405(b) of the National 
Forest Foundation Act (16 U.S.C. 583j-3(b)) is amended by striking 
``for a period of five years beginning October 1, 1992'' and inserting 
``during fiscal years 2016 through 2018''.
    (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 410(b) of the 
National Forest Foundation Act (16 U.S.C. 583j-8(b)) is amended by 
striking ``during the five-year period'' and all that follows through 
``$1,000,000 annually'' and inserting ``there are authorized to be 
appropriated $3,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2016 through 2018''.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-29-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 DEC-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-29-1998
<CASH>                                           2,286,570
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,432,616
<ALLOWANCES>                                       (34,801)
<INVENTORY>                                      5,555,289
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                12,219,301
<PP&E>                                          55,627,755
<DEPRECIATION>                                  (3,527,632)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  67,446,977
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           51,342,139
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                          1,000
<COMMON>                                            24,283
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,526,422
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    67,446,977
<SALES>                                          6,519,421
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 6,519,421
<CGS>                                            6,160,522
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,219,992
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   884,961
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  68,495
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (2,677,559)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         6,044
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (2,683,603)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   (278,125)
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (2,961,728)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        (1.26)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (1.39)
        


</TABLE>
#### QUINCY v. WARNER.

(Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department.

May 14, 1894.)

Evidence—Declarations oe Servant.

In an action for injuries alleged to have been caused by defendant’s servant, a declaration by the servant that the accident was partly caused by his fault is admissible to contradict his testimony that he was free from fault.

Appeal from circuit court, Kings county.

Action by George A. Quincy against Benjamin J. Warner to recover damages for personal injuries. From a judgment entered on a verdict in favor of plaintiff for $2,758.06 damages and costs, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial on the minutes, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Argued before DYKMAN and PRATT, JJ.

Albert G. McDonald, for appellant.

Dailey, Bell & Crane (James D. Bell, of counsel), for respondent.

DYKMAN, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment entered upon a verdict in favor of the plaintiif, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial upon the minutes of the court. The action was for the recovery of damages resulting from an injury to the plaintiff, caused by a fall through a trapdoor in a general hallway of an entrance to a building belonging to the defendant, in the city of Brooklyn. The building was occupied by various tenants, and, among others, by an insurance company, in whose employ the plaintiff was when he was injured. As the plaintiff was about to go up to the office of the company, he fell into the hole, the door being up at the time.

The decisive question upon the trial was whether the janitor, who was the servant of the defendant, was guilty of negligence in permitting the door to be removed, or allowing it to remain off of the opening, which it was designed to cover and protect. The testi*858mony on the part of the plaintiff was sufficient to prove want of proper care, and that introduced by the defendant was sufficient for his exculpation. It is therefore the common case where testimony on one side is adequate to impose liability, and upon the other sufficient to relieve therefrom, and thus presents a question of fact for the determination of the jury, and leaves an appellate tribunal destitute of power to interfere. There is an exception to the admission of proof of the declaration of the janitor that the accident was his fault, in part, which is not entirely free from doubt. We have concluded, however, that the testimony was admissible in contradiction of his testimony, which was to the effect that he was free from fault. There was no exception to the charge, as finally made. The judgment and order should be affirmed, with costs.