alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# CE2010212EN.01045501.xml

| 5.8.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 212/455 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.8.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 212/455

---

Thursday 7 May 2009Common rules for the allocation of slots at Community airports ***I

P6_TA(2009)0382

European Parliament legislative resolution of 7 May 2009 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EEC) No 95/93 on common rules for the allocation of slots at Community airports (COM(2009)0121 – C6-0097/2009 – 2009/0042(COD))

2010/C 212 E/57

(Codecision procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2009)0121),

having regard to Article 251(2) and Article 80(2) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C6-0097/2009),

having regard to Rules 51 and 43(2) and (3) of its Rules of Procedure,

having regard to the report of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A6-0274/2009),

| 1. | Approves the Commission proposal as amended; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

| 2. | Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

| 3. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and to the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and to the Commission.

---

Thursday 7 May 2009P6_TC1-COD(2009)0042

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 7 May 2009 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EC) No .../2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EEC) No 95/93 on common rules for the allocation of slots at Community airports

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position at first reading corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EC) No 545/2009.)

---
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

In connection with the Annual Report of Nationwide Life Insurance Company (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Timothy G. Frommeyer, Senior Vice President  Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my
knowledge, that:



| | (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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

February 29, 2008



|                                                      
|------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Timothy G. Frommeyer                              
|Name: Timothy G. Frommeyer                            
|Title: Senior Vice President  Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Nationwide Life Insurance Company and will be retained by Nationwide Life Insurance Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Item 4.  Parents and Subsidiaries of the Registrant

         The Frank B. Howes Trust, which holds 36.5 per cent of the Registrant's
         outstanding common stock, is the parent of the Registrant.  This
         percentage includes 3,000,000 shares which is held in escrow by the
         Insurance Department of Iowa.  The escrow arrangement was required by
         the Commissioner of Insurance of the State of Iowa in order to gain
         approval of Registrant's new stock issue of April 1971.  Under the
         terms of this arrangement, those shares could not be sold for a period
         of five (5) years or until Registrant attained certain profitable
         operating goals for three (3) consecutive years.  The escrow
         arrangement also required that should Registrant dissolve during this
         period, the shares held in escrow will not participate in the assets of
         Registrant legally available for distribution until after there has
         been paid or irrevocable set aside for all other shares an amount equal
         to the other shares at the per offering price of $1.25, adjusted for
         stock splits and stock dividends.  As of April 6, 1976, five (5) years
         elapsed.

         The Insurance Department of Iowa, Securities Division has indicated
         that under the terms of the Escrow Agreement the approval of the
         Commissioner of Insurance was required.  The Insurance Department,
         reviewing the condition of the Registrant, did conclude that the
         requisite approval of the Commissioner would not be forthcoming at that
         time, and furthermore, that the Insurance Department will act as escrow
         agent for the shares of the Frank B.  Howes Trust.
#### In the Matter of Nina King, Appellant, v Cesar Perales, as Commissioner of the New York State Department of Social Services, Respondent.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent dated January 7, 1987, which, after a hearing, denied the petitioner’s application to expunge a record maintained in the Statewide central register of child abuse and maltreatment reports.

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.

The petitioner customarily bathed her two-year-old daughter, Adrienne, in the kitchen sink and would add hot water from the faucet when the bath water cooled. On April 9, 1985, however, she deviated from her normal routine by adding water which had been boiled approximately 10 minutes earlier to Adrienne’s bath water. Because Adrienne was not restrained when the hot water was poured into the sink, she kicked up her foot, causing her to sustain a second degree burn on her left foot.

Despite the petitioner’s contention to the contrary, the fact that she did not intend to harm her daughter or to pour the scalding water onto a portion of her body does not entitle her to an expungement of all records concerning the maltreatment of Adrienne as a result of this incident. Social Services Law § 412 (2) defines a "maltreated child” as including a child under 18 years old who is neglected as defined by the Family Court Act. Family Court Act § 1012 (f) (i) (B) defines a neglected child to include a child whose physical condition has been impaired as a result of the failure of his parent to exercise a minimum degree of care in providing the child with proper supervision or guardianship by unreasonably inflicting harm. While it is true that the petitioner did not intend to harm her daughter, she did fail to exercise a minimum degree *695of care by pouring scalding water into the child’s bath water in a kitchen sink without testing the temperature of the water and without restraining the child’s movement. An isolated accidental injury will not constitute neglect unless there is a showing that the parent was aware of the inherent danger of the situation *(see, Matter of Lydia K.,*123 Misc 2d 41, 43, *affd*112 AD2d 306, *affd*67 NY2d 681). The danger that a two-year-old child will be burned when water, which had just recently been boiling, is poured into a confined area without restraining the child’s movement is readily apparent. Therefore, since sufficient evidence was produced to substantiate the indicated report of maltreatment, the petitioner is not entitled to the expungement of the record maintained in the State-wide central register *(see, Matter of Ebanks v Perales,*111 AD2d 331). Kooper, J. P., Spatt, Harwood and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.
#### *In*the Matter of Anne M. McKenna et al., Appellants, v Board of Review of the City of Mount Vernon et al., Respondents.

— In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent the Board of Review *371of the City of Mount Vernon (hereinafter the Board) reducing the assessed valuation of certain real property owned by the respondent Vernon Woods Apartments, Inc., the petitioners, adjoining property owners, appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Buell, J.), dated February 5, 1986, as *inter alia,*denied their application upon finding that the determination was not arbitrary and capricious, and, (2) a judgment of the same court, dated February 25, 1986, as, *inter alia,*confirmed the determination, denied the petition, and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the appeal from the order is dismissed; and it is further,

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,

Ordered that the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs are awarded one bill of costs.

The appeal from the intermediate order must be dismissed because no appeal lies as of right from an intermediate order in a CPLR article 78 proceeding (CPLR 5701 [b] [1]) and, in any event, even if permission to appeal therefrom had been obtained, the appeal would have terminated with the entry of judgment in the action *(see, Matter of Aho,*39 NY2d 241, 248). The issues raised on appeal from the order are brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal from the judgment (CPLR 5501 [a] [1]).

The Board’s determination to reduce the original assessment placed upon the subject premises was in accordance with law and supported by a rational basis in the record *(see,*RPTL 581 [1]; *Matter of South Bay Dev. Corp. v Board of Assessors,*108 AD2d 493; *Matter of Agoglia v Glass,*35 AD2d 954, 955, *affd*29 NY2d 535). Further, we agree with the Supreme Court, Westchester County, that the petitioners, adjoining property owners, failed to substantiate their conclusory allegations suggesting that certain Board members and city officials committed numerous improprieties and illegalities benefiting the property and its owners.

We also point out that our disposition of this appeal is in no way a determination of the merits of any proceeding commenced by the property owner under RPTL article 7 which may be pending. Rubin, J. P., Kooper, Spatt and Harwood, JJ., concur.
### Using NFIRS to fight fire with facts

This episode of The USFA Podcast features Marion Long discussing the value of the National Fire Incident Reporting System to the fire service.
|        |
|--------|
|        |  |  |
|   |   | I, James M. Lucania, certify that: |

|        |
|--------|
|        |  |  |
|   | 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Checkpoint Systems, Inc.; and |

|        |
|--------|
|        |  |  |
|   | 2. | Based on my knowledge, this 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 report. |

|                                           |
|-------------------------------------------|
|                                           |  |  |
| Date:  April 25, 2016 | By:          /s/ James M. Lucania |   |
|                                      | Name:     James M. Lucania Title:       Senior Vice President and                  Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer                (Principal Financial Officer) |   |
H. R. 663 

One Hundred Eleventh Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE FIRST SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday, 

the sixth day of January, two thousand and nine 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 12877 

Broad Street in Sparta, Georgia, as the ‘‘Yvonne Ingram-Ephraim Post Office 

Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. YVONNE INGRAM-EPHRAIM POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 12877 Broad Street in Sparta, Georgia, shall 

be known and designated as the ‘‘Yvonne Ingram-Ephraim Post 

Office Building’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Yvonne Ingram-Ephraim Post Office Building’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
EXHIBIT 23

                         Consent of Independent Auditors

We consent to the  incorporation  by reference  in  Registration  Statement  No.
33-11021 on Form S-3 dated  December 22, 1986,  in  Registration  Statement  No.
33-28010 on Form S-3 dated April 7, 1989, in Registration Statement No. 33-31747
on Form S-8 dated October 30, 1989, in  Registration  Statement No.  33-69206 on
Form S-8 dated May 18, 1993, in Registration Statement No. 333-37603 on Form S-3
dated October 9, 1997, in Registration Statement No. 333-68171 on Form S-8 dated
December 1, 1998, in the Registration  Statement No. 333-79025 on Form S-3 dated
March 17, 2000, in the  Registration  Statement  No.  33-80163 on Form S-8 dated
June 7, 1999 of  Knight-Ridder,  Inc.  and in the related  Prospectuses,  of our
report  dated  January 18,  2000,  with  respect to the  consolidated  financial
statements and schedule of  Knight-Ridder,  Inc.  included in this Annual Report
(Form 10-K/A) for the year ended December 26, 1999.


                                            /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

San Jose, California
April 5, 2000
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME, THE CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET, AND THE NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-29-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-29-1996
<CASH>                                          22,880
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  368,764
<ALLOWANCES>                                    12,685
<INVENTORY>                                     42,941
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               565,727
<PP&E>                                       1,660,186
<DEPRECIATION>                                 757,722
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,900,310
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          544,570
<BONDS>                                        456,518
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,945
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,129,563
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,900,310
<SALES>                                      2,774,843
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,774,843
<CGS>                                          472,207<F1>
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,439,925
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (131,690)<F2>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                21,412
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              73,296
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                466,608
<INCOME-TAX>                                   198,735
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            267,873
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   267,873
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.75
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.75
<FN>
<F1>
COST OF GOODS SOLD CONSISTS OF NEWSPRINT, INK AND SUPPLEMENTS.
<F2>OTHER EXPENSES CONSIST OF ALL NON-OPERATING COSTS NET, EXCLUDING INCOME TAXES.
AMOUNT INCLUDES INTEREST EXPENSE NET OF INTEREST INCOME AND OTHER NON-OPERATING
COSTS, NET OF NON-OPERATING INCOME. INCLUDES PRETAX GAIN OF $155.9 MILLION
ON THE SALE OF KNIGHT RIDDER FINANCIAL.
</FN>
        



</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 85 (Wednesday, May 2, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 21993]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-10921]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious 
Diseases Special Emphasis Panel.
    Date: June 7-8, 2001.
    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Holiday Inn Georgetown, Mirage II Room, 2101 Wisconsin 
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20007.
    Contact Person: Priti Mehrotra, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute 
of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 
Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-2550, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c5b5a8f4f0fda785abacadeba2aab3"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e0908dd1d5d882a08e8988ce878f96">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, 
Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, 
Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes 
of Health, HHS)

    Dated: April 25, 2001.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 01-10921 Filed 5-1-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
**EXHIBIT 10.10**

 

November 6, 2003

 

Mr. Stephen W. Bershad

66 Arroyo Hondo Trail

Santa Fe, NM  87508

 

Dear Mr. Bershad:

 

Reference ismade to the Employment Agreement, dated October 12, 2000 (the “EmploymentAgreement”), between Axsys Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”) and you.

 

The Companydesires to extend the Initial Period (as defined in Section 2(a) of theEmployment Agreement) until October 12, 2004, subject to the earliertermination of the Initial Period by you in your sole discretion or by theCompany, acting through its Board of Directors, in its sole discretion, by 30days’ prior written notice to the other.

 

If theforegoing extension of the Initial Period meets with your approval, pleaseindicate your acceptance in the space provided below.

 
|                                     |   |                                 | AXSYS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.      |
|------------------------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------|-------------------------------|
|                                     |   |                                 |                          |   |   |
|                                     |   |                                 |                          |   |   |
|                                     |   |                                 |                          | By: |   | /s/ Anthony  J. Fiorelli, Jr. |   |
|                                     |   |                                 | Chairman of  the Compensation |   |
|                                     |   | Committee of  the Board of Directors |
|                                     |   |                                 |                          |
|                                     |   |                                 |                          |
| Accepted and  Agreed:                    |   |                                 |
|                                     |   |                                 |
|   /s/  Stephen W. Bershad |   |                                 |
| Stephen W.  Bershad                      |   |                                 |
|                                          |        |                                      |                               |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |

 

----
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED MAY 8, 2015

NO. 03-15-00052-CV

Anna Marie Casas, Appellant

v.

Vencelao Laureano, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 264TH DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, PEMBERTON, AND BOURLAND

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION -- OPINION BY JUSTICE PURYEAR

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the trial court on December 22, 2014. Having 

reviewed the record, the Court holds that appellant has not prosecuted her appeal and did not 

comply with a notice from the Clerk of this Court. Therefore, the Court dismisses the appeal for 

want of prosecution. Appellant shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and 

the court below.