alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Official Journal L 336I/2016

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 336I |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 5912 December 2016 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 336I

English edition

Legislation

Volume 5912 December 2016

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Council Regulation (EU) 2016/2230 of 12 December 2016 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against persons acting in violation of the arms embargo with regard to the Democratic Republic of the Congo | 1 |
| | | DECISIONS |
| | * | Council Decision (CFSP) 2016/2231 of 12 December 2016 amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo | 7 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Council Regulation (EU) 2016/2230 of 12 December 2016 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against persons acting in violation of the arms embargo with regard to the Democratic Republic of the Congo

1

DECISIONS

*

Council Decision (CFSP) 2016/2231 of 12 December 2016 amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo

7

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
# USCIS Provides Guidance on Program for International Entrepreneurs

03/10/2023

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has issued comprehensive guidance (PDF, 311.98 KB) on parole for international entrepreneurs.

To enhance entrepreneurship, innovation and job creation in the United States, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published the International Entrepreneur Rule on Jan. 17, 2017.

This rule provides a framework for DHS to use its parole authority to grant a period of authorized stay, on a case-by-case basis, to noncitizen entrepreneurs who possess a substantial ownership interest in a start-up entity and who can demonstrate that their stay in the United States would provide a significant public benefit through that start-up entity’s potential for rapid business growth and job creation.

After fully implementing the International Entrepreneur Rule in 2021, we have received a growing number of applications and continue to adjudicate them as expeditiously as possible.

We are now publishing guidance in the Policy Manual, which includes information about:
                - The criteria for consideration for the applicant, the start-up entity, and the qualified investment or government award or grant;
                - Evidence and documentation;
                - The discretionary nature of the entrepreneur parole adjudication;
                - Conditions on parole and bases for termination;
                - The criteria for consideration for an additional parole period; and
                - Options available to the entrepreneur’s family to join the entrepreneur as parolees and, if eligible, to obtain employment authorization.

Although an individual who is paroled into the United States has not been admitted into the United States for purposes of immigration law, parolees may enter and remain in the United States and may be authorized to work.

For more information, see Part G (International Entrepreneur Parole) in Volume 3, Humanitarian Protection and Parole, of the USCIS Policy Manual.

Additional information on the international entrepreneur parole process, including the criteria for consideration, related definitions, how to apply, and questions and answers, is available on the International Entrepreneur Parole page.

03/10/2023

0 / 2000To protect your privacy, please do not include any personal information in your feedback. Review our Privacy Policy.
Exhibit 32.1




CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT
TO




SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In
connection with the Annual Report of China Natural Gas, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Qinan
Ji, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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.





Date:
December 23, 2008





/s/ Qinan JiQinan
      Ji, Principal Executive
Officer
Exhibit 31.01
 CERTIFICATION
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Trust;
 2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of
a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made,
in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading
with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;
 3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and
for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;
 4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 (a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;
 (b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
 (c)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent
fiscal quarter (the Registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual
report) that has materially affected, or is reasonable likely to materially
affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants
auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):
 (a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and
 E 2




---



##### 



(b)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting.
 By:
    
    /s/ Theresa D. BecksTheresa D. BecksChief Executive OfficerCampbell & Company, Inc.Managing OperatorThe Campbell Fund TrustNovember 14, 2008
 E 3
exv10w9xay





Exhibit 10.9(a)


June 9, 2009


Graham Capital Management, L.P.

Rock Ledge Financial Center

40 Highland Avenue

Rowayton, CT 06853



Attention: Mr. Paul Sedlack





     Re: Management Agreement Renewals


Dear Mr. Sedlack:



We are writing with respect to your management agreements concerning the commodity pools to which
reference is made below (the “Management Agreements”). We are extending the term of the Management
Agreements through June 30, 2010 and all other provisions of the Management Agreements will remain
unchanged.



	 	•	 	Citigroup Diversified 2000 Futures Fund L.P.
	 
	 	•	 	Citigroup Fairfield Futures Fund L.P.
	 
	 	•	 	Smith Barney Diversified Futures Fund L.P. II
	 
	 	•	 	Smith Barney Diversified Futures Fund L.P.
	 
	 	•	 	Citigroup Diversified Futures Fund L.P.
	 
	 	•	 	Citigroup Fairfield Futures Fund L.P. II
	 
	 	•	 	CMF Graham Capital Master Fund L.P.




Please acknowledge receipt of this modification by signing one copy of this letter and returning it
to the attention of Ms. Jennifer Magro at the address above or fax to 212-793-1986. If you have any
questions I can be reached at 212-559-5046.



Very truly yours,




	 	 	 	 	 
	CITIGROUP MANAGED FUTURES LLC

 	 
	By:  	/s/ Jennifer Magro
 	 
	 	Jennifer Magro 	 
	 	Chief Financial Officer & Director 	 
	 	 
	GRAHAM CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, L.P.

 	 
	By:  	/s/ Paul Sedlack
 	 
	  	Print Name: Paul Sedlack
 	 




JM/sr
Exhibit 10.2

 

 

March 27,2006

 

 

Keddem Bioscience Ltd 

Tel-Aviv, Israel

 

 

Gentlemen,

 

 

We hereby consent theinclusion of our report of independent registered public accounting firmauditors of Keddem Bio-Science Ltd. as of December 31, 2005 and 2004 and forthe year ended December 31, 2005 and for the period from August 1, 2004 (dateof commencement of operation) to December 31, 2004, on Form 20-F of CompugenLtd. as of December 31, 2005 and for the year then ended.

 

This consent is not to approve any inclusion of KeddemBio-Science Ltd. audited financial statements in Compugen Ltd. Form 20-F.

*** ***

** **

** **

** **

 

Sincerely,

Kesselman & Kesselman

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

**__1__**
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-2000
<CASH>                                         396,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  119,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                    15,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               541,000
<PP&E>                                          32,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 652,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           66,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         4,000
<OTHER-SE>                                     582,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   652,000
<SALES>                                        173,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               198,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  649,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (451,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (451,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (451,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.12)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.12)


</TABLE>
#### Michael CORNELIUS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COLUMBIA, CITY OF, SOUTH CAROLINA, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 10-2279.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 22, 2011.

Decided: May 5, 2011.

Michael Cornelius, Appellant Pro Se. William Allen Nickles, III, Carl Lewis Solomon, Gergel, Nickles & Solomon, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

*253PER CURIAM:

Michael Cornelius appeals the district court’s orders adopting the recommendations of the magistrate judge and granting summary judgment to Defendant in Cornelius’ civil action alleging retaliation, in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, as amended, 29 U.S.CA. §§ 621-34 (West 2008 *&*Supp. 2010). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Cornelius v. Columbia, City of,*No. 3:08-cv-02508-CMC, 2010 WL 1258009 (D.S.C. Mar. 26, 2010); 2010 WL 4348133 (Oct. 27, 2010). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
Exhibit 13.2

Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Stora Enso Oyj (the Company) on Form 20-F for the period ended
December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Hannu Ryöppönen, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | 1) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: March 29, 2007



/S/    HANNU RYÖPPÖNENHannu Ryöppönen Chief Financial Officer


A signed original of this certification required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Lawrence E. Miller et al., Respondents, v Anetsberger Brothers, Inc., Appellant, et al., Defendant.

(Appeal No. 2.)

Present — Doerr, J. P., Boomer, Green, Pine and Balio, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 80 (Wednesday, April 25, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20786-20787]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-10276]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Oklahoma Advisory 
Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, that a meeting of 
the Kansas Advisory Committee to the

[[Page 20787]]

Commission will convene at 10 a.m. and adjourn at 1 p.m. on May 17, 
2001, at the Biltmore Hotel, 401 South Meridian, Oklahoma City, 
Oklahoma 73108. The purpose of the meeting is to receive planning input 
for project development.
    Persons desiring additional information, or planning a presentation 
to the Committee, should contact Melvin L. Jenkins, Director of the 
Central Regional Office, 913-551-1400 (TDD 913-551-1414). Hearing-
impaired persons who will attend the meeting and require the services 
of a sign language interpreter should contact the Regional Office at 
least ten (10) working days before the scheduled date of the meeting.
    The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the 
rules and regulations of the Commission.

    Dated at Washington, DC, April 20, 2001.
Edward A. Hailes, Jr.,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 01-10276 Filed 4-24-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-11489

CURTIS LEE SHEPPARD, JR.,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

JUDGE REED O’CONNOR, United States District Judge; E. SCOTT FROST, 

United States Magistrate Judge; MARCIA A. CRONE, United States District 

Judge; ZACK HAWTHORN, Magistrate Judge; MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER, 

United States District Judge; K. NICOLE MITCHELL, Magistrate Judge,

Defendants-Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:18-CV-155

Before OWEN, WILLETT, and OLDHAM, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Curtis Lee Sheppard, Jr., Texas prisoner # 1656666, moves this court for 

authorization to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) following the district court’s 

dismissal without prejudice of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. Because he has 

failed to show that he should be allowed to proceed IFP on appeal under 28 

U.S.C. § 1915(g), see Banos v. O’Guin, 144 F.3d 883, 885 (5th Cir. 1998), 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 5, 2019

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 18-11489 Document: 00514984280 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/05/2019
No. 18-11489

2

Sheppard’s motion for leave to proceed IFP is denied. His motion for the 

appointment of counsel is also denied.

The facts surrounding the IFP decision are inextricably intertwined with 

the merits of the appeal. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 & n.24 (5th 

Cir. 1997). The appeal presents no nonfrivolous issues and is dismissed as 

frivolous. 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

MOTIONS DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED.

 Case: 18-11489 Document: 00514984280 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/05/2019
Exhibit 13.1



Certification pursuant to Section 906 Sarbanes Oxley Act by the Chief

Executive Officer of Telecom Italia Media S.p.A.



The certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with the Annual Report on Form 20-F (the Report) for the purpose of
complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code.



Enrico Parazzini, the Chief Executive Officer of Telecom Italia Media S.p.A., certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:



| | 1. | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Telecom Italia Media S.p.A..
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: June 30, 2005



By:

/s/ Enrico ParazziniName:

Enrico ParazziniChief Executive Officer
Motion Denied as Moot, Appeal Dismissed, and Memorandum Opinion filed

October 23, 2018

.

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14- 18 -00776- CV

DARRELL J. HARPER, Appellant

V. HARRIS COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR COLLECTOR, ANN HARRIS BENNETT, AND HARRIS COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT, CHIEF

APPRAISAL, ROLAND ALTINGER, Appellees

On Appeal from the 165th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2017-77474

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N Appellant has been declared a vexatious litigant and is prohibited from filing new litigation in a Texas state court without permission from the local administrative judge. 1 See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 11.102. He filed the underlying suit

1 The vexatious

- litigant order was signed on January 20, 2014, by the 201st District Court of Travis County in cause number D

- 1

- GN

- 14

- 004334. The order was subsumed by the final2

without obtaining permission from the local administrative judge. Appellee Ann Harris Bennett, in her official capacity as Harris County Tax Assessor-Collector, filed a notice of mistakenly-filed vexatious litigation and motion to stay and dismiss. Appellant responded by seeking permission from the administrative judge to proceed with his civil suit. Describing appellant’s response as “rambling laundry lists of complaints that are virtually indecipherable,” the administrative judge denied appellant’s request on August 13, 2018. The order of denial states appellant “may appeal this decision by writ of mandamus to an appellate court. ”
Appellant now attempts to appeal the administrative judge’s order. An order denying a vexatious litigant permission to file suit “is not grounds for appeal, except that the litigant may apply for a writ of mandamus with the court of appeals not later than the 30th day after the date of the decision.” Id. § 11.102(f).
On October 10, 2018 , this court notified the parties of its intention to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction unless a response was filed showing meritorious grounds for continuing the appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a). Appellant’s responses
do not demonstrate that we have jurisdiction to hear his appeal.
The appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. Appellant’s motion, filed September 14, 2018, regarding the clerk’s record is DENIED AS MOOT

.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Christopher, Jamison, and Brown.

judgment, signed on May 29, 2015. The Austin Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment, expressly concluding it had no basis to reverse the vexatious-litigant declaration. Harper v. State , No. 03- 15 -00405-CV, 2016 WL 4628067 (Tex. App.— Austin Aug. 30, 2016, pet. denied) (mem. op.).