alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2018301EN.01003501.xml

| 27.8.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 301/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.8.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 301/35

---

Order of the President of the General Court of 22 June 2018 — FMC v Commission

(Case T-719/17 R)

((Application for interim measures - Plant protection products - Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1496 - Non-renewal of approval of the active substance DPX KE 459 (flupyrsulfuron-methyl) - Application for suspension of operation - Lack of urgency - Balancing of interests))

(2018/C 301/46)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: FMC Corp. (established in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States) (represented by: D. Waelbroeck, I. Antypas and A. Accarain, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Koleva, A. Lewis and I. Naglis, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Articles 278 and 279 TFEU, seeking suspension of the operation of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1496 of 23 August 2017 concerning the non-renewal of approval of the active substance DPX KE 459 (flupyrsulfuron-methyl), in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, and amending Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 (OJ 2017 L 218, p. 7)

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The application for interim measures is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The application for interim measures is dismissed.

| 2. | The costs are reserved. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The costs are reserved.

---
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 104 (Wednesday, May 30, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 29295]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-13533]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army


Army Science Board; Notice of Closed Meeting

    In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory 
Committee ACT (P.L. 92-463) announcement is made of the following Study 
Group Meeting:
    Name of Study Group: Asymmetric Study Group.
    Date of Meeting: 13 June 2001.
    Time of Meeting 0800-1630.
    Place of Meeting: Directed Technologies, Inc., 3601 Wilson 
Boulevard, Suite 650, Arlington, VA 22201, Phone: (703) 243-3383, 
FAX: (703) 243-2724.
    Agenda: The Army Science Board Study Group will conduct a study 
on ``Asymmetric Threats to Land Based Operations (2015-2020)'' as a 
means of examining and addressing innovative ways that asymmetric 
threats can be used to disrupt land based operations in the future. 
The 1-day meeting will be closed to the public. This meeting will be 
closed to the public in accordance with Section 552(c) of Title 5, 
U.S.C. Appendix 2, subsection 10(d). For further information, please 
contact Ms. Betty LaFavers, Office by the Assistant Secretary of the 
Army (Acquisition, Logistics and Technology), (703) 695-1683.

Wayne Joyner,
Executive Assistant, Army Science Board.

4th Meeting-- ``Asymmetric Threats to Land Based Operations 2015-
2020''

Director Technologies, Inc., 3601 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 650, 
Arlington, VA 22201, 703 243-3383)--Fax 703 243-2724.

Agenda

13 June 2001

0800  Administrative Matters--Co-Chairs
815  Executive Session (Internal Working Sessions)--All
1000  Break
1015  Executive Session (Continued)--ALL
1230 Lunch & Roundtable Discussion
1300 Executive Session (Continued)--ALL
1500 Break
1515  Executive Session--ALL
1630  Ajourn--ALL

[FR Doc. 01-13533 Filed 5-29-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710-08-M
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

JOANNE DESUE

v.

BANK OF AMERICA (WORKERS' 

COMPENSATION APPEAL BOARD)

PETITION OF: BANK OF AMERICA

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 194 WAL 2022

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the 

Commonwealth Court

BANK OF AMERICA

v.

JOANNE DESUE (WORKERS' 

COMPENSATION APPEAL BOARD)

PETITION OF: BANK OF AMERICA

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 195 WAL 2022

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the 

Commonwealth Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 29th day of November, 2022, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.

The Application for Supersedeas is DENIED.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

January 17, 2023

No. 04-22-00716-CR

EX PARTE George TROTTI

From the 379th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018CR7385-W2

Honorable Ron Rangel, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

On December 8, 2022, Appellant George Trotti’s record on appeal was complete. On 

December 9, 2022, we ordered Appellant to file his opening brief within thirty days. As of 

January 17, 2023, no brief has been filed, and we have received no motion for extension of time. 

Contra TEX. R. APP. P. 31.1(a), 38.6(a)(1).

Therefore, we order Appellant to respond to this notification by filing his brief, a 

motion to extend time, or a motion to dismiss within ten days of the date of this order. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b) (requiring this court, when no brief is filed, to notify the parties and the 

trial court of the omission and provide Appellant an opportunity to respond); In re Crews, No. 

09-99-383CR, 2000 WL 300517, at *1 (Tex. App.—Beaumont Mar. 22, 2000, no pet.) (per 

curiam) (not designated for publication). 

If Appellant fails to comply with this order, we will abate this appeal and remand the 

cause to the trial court for it to conduct an abandonment hearing. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(2), 

(3). 

A hearing could result in this court considering the appeal without briefs. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 38.8(4); In re Crews, 2000 WL 300517, at *1. 

_________________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 17th day of January, 2023.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T Y O O N H O K I M, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 07- 72419 A ge nc yN o. A 070- 971- 332 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

a n O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d S e pt e m be r13, 2010 ** B efo re: S IL V E R M A N , C A L L A H A N , an dN . R . S M IT H , C i rcu i tJu d g es. Y oon H o K i m , ana t i ve a nd c i t i z e n of S outh K or e a , pe t i t i ons f orr e vi e w of the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ order di sm i ss i ng hi s app ea l fr om an im m ig r a tio n ju d g e ’s r e m o v a l o r d e r . W e h a v e ju r is d ic tio n u n d e r8 U .S .C . § 1 2 5 2 . W e rev i ew d e n o v o q u est i o n s o f l aw an dcl ai m s o f du e p ro cess v i o l at i o n s, 

# FI LED SEP 23 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS07- 72419 2 L op ez -U m an zor v . G on zales , 405 F . 3d 1049, 1053 ( 9th C i r . 2005) , a nd w e de nythe p e titio n f o rr e v ie w . W e r e je c t K im ’s c o n te n tio n th a t th e g o v e rn m e n t s h o u ldb e e q u itab ly e s t oppe d f

r om or de r i ng hi s r e m ova l . B e c aus e “ the gove rnm e nti s notbound bythe unauthor i z e d a c t s of

i t s a ge nt s , ” K i m c annots how “ a f f i rm a t i ve m i s c onduc tgoi ng b e y o n dm e r e n e g lig e n c e ” o n th e p art o f th e g o v e rn m e n t to w arr an t e s to p p e l. Wa tki n s v . U. S. A rmy , 87 5 F . 2d 69 9, 70 7 (9th C i r. 19 89 ) ( en banc) (i nt ernal q u o ta tio n m ark s o m itte d ) ; se e al so Sh i n v. Mukasey , 54 7 F . 3d 10 19 , 10 22 (9th C i r. 20 08 ) ( “ [T ] he go vernm entcann otbe sa dd l ed w i th the fe l on i ou s, un autho ri ze d i ss uance of re si dency docum ent at i on by a thi evi ng em pl oyee . ”) . W e f in dn o d e f

e c ts a m o u n tin g to adu e p r o c e s s v io la tio n . Se e Sh in , 547 F . 3d a t 1 0 2 4 - 2 5 ; H

on g v. Mukasey , 51 8 F . 3d 10 30 , 10 35 -36 (9th C i r. 20 08 ). P E T I T I ON F OR RE V I E W DE NI E D.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 216 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 216

   To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make permanent the 
                deduction for qualified business income.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 3, 2019

Mr. Smith of Missouri introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make permanent the 
                deduction for qualified business income.

    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 ``Main Street Tax Certainty Act''.

SEC. 2. DEDUCTION FOR QUALIFIED BUSINESS INCOME MADE PERMANENT.

    Section 199A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by 
striking subsection (i).
                                 <all>
```
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Communications Commission

          - 47 CFR Part 73
          - [DA 01-1153; MM Docket No. 01-34; RM-10061]

# AGENCY:

Federal Communications Commission.

# ACTION:

Final rule.

# SUMMARY:

The Commission, at the request of D&H Media, permittee of Station KWKJ(FM), Warsaw, Missouri, reallots Channel 253A from Warsaw to Windsor, Missouri. Channel 253A is allotted at Windsor in compliance with the Commission's minimum distance separation requirements, with respect to domestic allotments, without the imposition of a site restriction at coordinates 38-31-56 NL and 93-31-19 WL.

# DATES:

Effective June 18, 2001.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Victoria M. McCauley, Mass Media Bureau, (202) 418-2180.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This is a synopsis of the Commission's Report and Order, MM Docket No. 01-34, adopted April 25, 2001, and released May 4, 2001. The full text of this Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, International Transcription Services, Inc., (202) 857-3800, 1231 20th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20036.

# List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

      - Radio broadcasting

# PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES

1. The authority citation for Part 73 continues to read as follows: 

Authority:47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334 and 336.

§ 73.202

2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Missouri is amended by removing Channel 253A at Warsaw and add Windsor, Channel 253A. 

Federal Communications Commission.

John A. Karousos,

Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 01-13450 Filed 5-29-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
#### *In re*Herzberg, Bankrupt.

*District Court, S. D. New York.*

November 24, 1885.

Bankruptcy—Injunction—Discharge—Section 5106.

An injunction is authorized by section 5100, to await the determination of the *question*of the bankrupt's discharge only. After the discharge has been granted, the bankrupt's relief against the further prosecution of suits in tho state courts must be obtained in those courts only, where the effect of the discharge must he determined. *Held, therefore,*that an injunction obtained *ex parte*in the bankruptcy court, after the discharge had been granted, continuing the previous injunction, was improvidently granted, and should be vacated.

In Bankruptcy.

*N. L. Hahn,*for bankrupt.

*Van Loon é Capron,*for creditors.

Brown, J.

The bankrupt in this case procured from this court an injunction staying the proceedings against him in the state court until the determination of the question of his discharge. His discharge was obtained on the twenty-fifth of June, 1885. On the following day he obtained from this court *ex parte*a further injunction perpetually staying the prosecution of the action in the stale court. A motion is now made to vacate the last-named order as improvidently granted. Section 5106 of the Bevised Statutes authorizes the court in bankruptcy to stay prosecution of suits against the bankrupt “to await the determination of the court in bankruptcy on the question of Ms discharge.” In the *Case of Rosenberg,*3 Ben. 14, 18, Blatohford, J., says:

> “The manifest object of the provision is to relieve the bankrupt, while he is proceeding in good faith to obtain his discharge, and until the question. *700of his discharge is determined, and he either obtains it or is refused it, from being harassed by suits for the recovery of provable debts. If the amount of a debt is in dispute, the suit may proceed so as to put the debt in a condition of provability, and then it must stop. If a discharge is granted, then the bankrupt is able to plead the discharge in any suit that may have been stayed, and the stay ceases.”

The same learned judge, in the *Case of Wright,*2 Ben. 509, says:

> “The question whether the discharge affects the debt in question can only arise and be determined between the parties in a suit prosecuted to collect the debt, in which the discharge, after it shall have been granted, shall be pleaded or set up as a bar to a recovery.”

It would he manifestly improper, therefore, for this court, after the bankrupt’s discharge had been granted, to undertake to determine its final effect upon the creditor’s claim in the state court. The bankrupt is justly entitled to a fair opportunity to present the question in the state court, and have it litigated there. It cannot be doubted that, upon proper application in that court, such an opportunity will be granted, unless the debtor has in some way forfeited his right thereto. In any event, it is not a matter for further adjudication or injunction in this court, after the order granting the discharge. The motion to vacate must therefore be granted.
#### In the Matter of Anonymous, an Applicant for Admission to the Bar.

Decided February 23, 2010

Appeal dismissed, without costs, by the Court of Appeals, sua sponte, upon the ground that the order appealed from does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 105 (Thursday, May 31, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 29632]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-13628]



[[Page 29632]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Fiscal Service


Surety Companies Acceptable on Federal Bonds: Termination--Amwest 
Surety Insurance Company

AGENCY: Financial Management Service, Fiscal Service, Department of the 
Treasury.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is Supplement No. 16 to the Treasury Department Circular 
570; 2000 Revision, published June 30, 2000 at 65 FR 40868.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Surety Bond Branch at (202) 874-6507.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the Certificate 
of Authority issued by the Treasury to the above named Company, under 
the United States Code, Title 31, Sections 9304-9308, to qualify as an 
acceptable surety on Federal bonds is terminated effective today.
    The Company was last listed as an acceptable surety on Federal 
bonds at 65 FR 40873, June 30, 2000.
    With respect to any bonds, including continuous bonds, currently in 
force with above listed Company, bond-approving officers should secure 
new bonds with acceptable sureties in those instances where a 
significant amount of liability remains outstanding. In addition, in no 
event, should bonds that are continuous in nature be renewed.
    The Circular may be viewed and downloaded through the Internet at 
http://www.fms.treas.gov/c570/index.html. A hard copy may be purchased 
from the Government Printing Office (GPO), Subscription Service, 
Washington, DC, telephone (202) 512-1800. When ordering the Circular 
from GPO, use the following stock number: 048-000-00536-5.
    Questions concerning this notice may be directed to the U.S. 
Department of the Treasury, Financial Management Service, Financial 
Accounting and Services Division, Surety Bond Branch, 3700 East-West 
Highway, Room 6A04, Hyattsville, MD 20782.

    Dated: May 23, 2001.
Judith R. Tillman,
Assistant Commissioner, Financial Operations, Financial Management 
Service.
[FR Doc. 01-13628 Filed 5-30-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-35-M
#### In the Matter of the Estate of Armenak Ajamian, Deceased. Alice Ajamian, as Administrator of the Estate of Armenak Ajamian, Deceased, Respondent; Robert Ajamian, Appellant; Troy Savings Bank et al., Respondents.

Submitted November 21, 2011;

decided January 10, 2012

Reported below, 2011 NY Slip Op 86009(U).

*869Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution.
Exhibit 99.1

               CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

                                 AS ENACTED BY

                 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 20-F of Companhia Energetica de
Minas Gerais--CEMIG (the "Company") for the period ended December 31, 2001, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I Djalma Bastos de Morais, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of
the Board of Directors of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, 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.





                                   /s/ Djalma Bastos de Morais
                                   ------------------------------------------
                                   Name:   Djalma Bastos de Morais
                                   Title:  Chief Executive Officer and
                                           Chairman of the Board of Directors

Date: March 25, 2003
EXHIBIT 32 
Section 1350 Certifications  STATEMENT FURNISHED PURSUANT TO 
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 The undersigned is the Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer of Vision Industries Corp. This Certification is made pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. This Certification accompanies the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Vision Industries Corp. for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 The undersigned certifies that such 10-Q Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such 10-Q Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Vision Industries Corp. as of September 30, 2010. This Certification is executed as of November
22, 2010. By:/s/MARTIN SCHUERMANNMartin Schuermann
President, Chief Executive Officer and Treasurer 
(Principal Executive Officer and  Principal Financial Officer)    A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Vision Industries Corp. and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Presidential Documents

3851

Federal Register

Vol. 66, No. 10

Tuesday, January 16, 2001

Title 3—

The President

Memorandum of March 3, 2000

Delegation of Authority To Transmit Report on Cooperative

Projects With Russia

Memorandum for the Secretary of Defense

By authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws

of the United States of America, including section 301 of title 3, I hereby

delegate to the Secretary of Defense the duties and responsibilities vested

in the President by section 2705(d) of Division G of the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1999 (Public Law

105–277; 112 Stat. 2681–844). Such duties and responsibilities shall be

exercised subject to the concurrence of the Secretary of State.

The reporting requirements delegated by this memorandum to the Secretary

of Defense may be redelegated not lower than the Under Secretary level.

The Department of Defense shall obtain clearance on the report from the

Office of Management and Budget prior to its submission to the Congress.

Any reference in this memorandum to the provisions of any Act shall

be deemed to be referenced to such Act or its provisions as may be amended

from time to time.

You are authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal

Register

THE WHITE HOUSE,

Washington, March 3, 2000

.

œ–

[FR Doc. 01–1340

Filed 1–12–01; 8:45 am]

Billing code 5001–10–M
# EXHIBIT 32

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

In connection with the
Quarterly Report of CyberOptics Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2006 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Kathleen P.
Iverson, Chief Executive Officer, and Jeffrey A. Bertelsen, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. §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 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.
| | -- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | /s/   Kathleen P. Iverson                            
| | -----------------------------------------------------
| | Kathleen P. IversonChief Executive OfficerMay 8, 2006

| | /s/   Jeffrey A. Bertelsen                            
| | ------------------------------------------------------
| | Jeffrey A. BertelsenChief Financial OfficerMay 8, 2006

---