alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# CE2013153EN.01016901.xml

| 31.5.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 153/169 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.5.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 153/169

---

Tuesday 15 November 2011EU-Jordan Euro-Mediterranean aviation agreement ***

P7_TA(2011)0480

European Parliament legislative resolution of 15 November 2011 on the draft decision of the Council and the representatives of the governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, on the conclusion of the Euro Mediterranean Aviation Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, of the other part (09189/2011 – C7-0122/2011 – 2010/0180(NLE))

2013/C 153 E/27

(Consent)

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

| — | having regard to the draft decision of the Council and the representatives of the governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council (09189/2011), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the draft decision of the Council and the representatives of the governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council (09189/2011),

| — | having regard to the Euro Mediterranean Aviation Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, of the other part (14366/2010), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the Euro Mediterranean Aviation Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, of the other part (14366/2010),

| — | having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 100(2), Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a)(v) and Article 218(8), first subparagraph, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7-0122/2011), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 100(2), Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a)(v) and Article 218(8), first subparagraph, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7-0122/2011),

| — | having regard to Rule 81 and 90(7) of its Rules of Procedure, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Rule 81 and 90(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

| — | having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A7-0347/2011), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A7-0347/2011),

| 1. | Consents to the conclusion of the Agreement; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Consents to the conclusion of the Agreement;

| 2. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.

---
143 So. 553

#### CRAIG et al. v. SWADER et al.

7 Div. 120.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

Oct. 6, 1932.

C. A. Wolfes, of Ft. Payne, and J. Wiley Logan, of Birmingham, for appellants.

Haralson & Son, of Ft. Payne, for appellees.

ANDERSON, C. J.

Statutory ejectment for land. Parties claim under a common source, one Sharpe; plaintiffs under deed from said Sharpe, and defendants under tax deed, and the validity of said tax deed is the one and main ques; tion in this case.

 The short statute of limitations’ is not presented or involved, and, regardless of the prima facie recitals of the deed, the undisputed evidence shows that the notice of sale designated the land in beat or precinct 9, when, as a fact, it is located in 21. True, the description as per sectional subdivisions of the land was given, and ordinarily .tins might cure the error as to the precinct, but we cannot say that such was the case in the present instance, as the lawmakers, in the enactment of section 251 of the Act of 1919, p. 356, must have had a good reason for requiring that in the notice of sales of real estate for taxes the precinct in which the property is situated should be given. The purpose of the notice is to apprise the owner that his property will be sold for taxes, and the average man, in looking at the published notice of tax sales, will naturally look first to the beat or precinct in which his property is located, and, if it is not found under the head of said beat or precinct, will doubtless not go through the entire and perhaps lengthy list to ascertain by sectional description if his property is included. It has been the universal holding of this court that statutes, governing tax sales must be strictly construed when it involves the divestiture of the title of the true owner.

Section 240 of the act (page 352) requires that the tax collector must report that he was unable to collect the tax assessed against the land, and that a sale of same is necessary to collect the tax. This does not appear to have been done, and a failure to do so was fatal to the validity of the sale. Pollak v. Milam, 190 Ala. 569, 67 So. 381.

The appellant has suggested other defects in connection with the tax sale, but, as the ones heretofore discussed are fatal to the *367defendants’ title, it is unnecessary to discuss other questions.

The trial court erred in not excluding the tax deed and in giving the general charge for the defendants, and the judgment of the circuit court is reversed, and the cause is remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

GARDNER, BOULDIN, and FOSTER, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the
undersigned officer of Strategic Storage Trust, Inc., or the Company, hereby certifies, to his knowledge, that:



| | (i) | the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended June 30, 2008 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                |  |  |  |     |  |                                                                              
|--------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|August 14, 2008 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ H. Michael Schwartz                                                      
|Date            |  |  |  |     |  | H. Michael Schwartz President, CEO and Director (Principal Executive Officer)
Exhibit 32.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       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 Quarterly Report of Baron Energy Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ended April 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Lisa P. Hamilton,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350,
as adopted pursuant to ss.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 result of operations of
          the Company.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
21st day of June 2010.


/s/ Lisa P. Hamilton
----------------------------------------------------
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit
31.1**
 
 **CERTIFICATION-Chief
Executive Officer**
 
 I, Bryan
K. Bedford, certify that:
 
 1. I have
reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Republic Airways Holdings Inc.;
 
 2. Based
on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual report;
 
 3. Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this annual 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 annual report;
 
 4. The
registrant’s other certifying officers 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 we 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 annual report is being prepared;
 
 b)
evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this annual 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;
 
 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 reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
 
 5. The
registrant’s other certifying officers 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 registrant’s board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent function):
 
 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
 
 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.
 
 **COMPANY NAME
      CORPORATION**Date: March 29,
2005
    By:
    /s/ Bryan K.
  BedfordTitle President, Chief
      Executive Officer and Chairman of the
Board
IV 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 1005 

Commemorating the 65th anniversary of the Battle of the Bulge in World 

War II, honoring the sacrifices of members of the United States Armed 

Forces, and recognizing the Allied victory. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 12, 2010 

Mr. MASSA (for himself, Mr. DRIEHAUS, Mr. SKELTON, Mr. TAYLOR, Mr. 

SNYDER, Mr. REYES, Mr. MURPHY of New York, Mr. SESTAK, and Mr. 

KISSELL) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Armed Services 

RESOLUTION 

Commemorating the 65th anniversary of the Battle of the 

Bulge in World War II, honoring the sacrifices of members of the United States Armed Forces, and recognizing 

the Allied victory. 

Whereas, on December 16, 1944, at the height of World War 

II, the Battle of the Bulge, began across Belgium, Luxembourg, and Germany; 

Whereas the Battle of the Bulge was the largest battle fought 

by United States soldiers during World War II; 

Whereas the United States had over 800,000 men committed 

and lost over 19,000 in the Battle of the Bulge; 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 1005 IH 

Whereas there were 47,500 wounded and 23,000 captured or 

missing United States soldiers; 

Whereas Allied forces in the region, consisting of United 

States, British, and Canadian troops, refused to surrender to 500,000 German soldiers and 1,800 German 

tanks; and 

Whereas the Allied forces exhibited valor, honor, and tactical 

superiority including air-based combat bombings which 

shut down German fuel supplies and stranded the German tanks, thereby securing victory in the Battle of the 

Bulge: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives com2 memorates the 65th anniversary of the Battle of the Bulge 

3 in World War II, honors the sacrifices of members of the 

4 United States Armed Forces, and commemorates the Al5 lied victory. 

Æ 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
##### 



Exhibit 12.2 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Russell Chenu, certify that:  1.
    
    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of James Hardie Industries N.V.;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;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4.
    
    The company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 company 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 company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by
others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the companys disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this 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; andc)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the companys internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the companys internal control over
financial reporting; and  5.
    
    The companys other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the companys auditors and the
audit committee of the company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 companys ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the companys internal control over financial reporting. /s/ Russell ChenuRussell ChenuDate: July 1, 2005
    Chief Financial Officer
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

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

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Titan Machinery Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q forthe quarter ended July 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission (the “Report”), I, David J. Meyer, Chairman and Chief ExecutiveOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adoptedpursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

The Report fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

The information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Company.

 

Date: September 8, 2010

 

 
|   | /s/ David J. Meyer                    |
|--------|---------------------------------------|
|   | David J. Meyer                        |
|   | Chairman and Chief  Executive Officer |

 

----
# C_2010271EN.01002801.xml

| 7.10.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 271/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.10.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 271/28

---

Notice of the expiry of certain anti-dumping measures

2010/C 271/08

Further to the publication of a notice of impending expiry (1) following which no request for a review was lodged, the Commission gives notice that the anti-dumping measure mentioned below will shortly expire.

1

This notice is published in accordance with Article 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of 30 November 2009 (2) on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community.

2

| Product | Country(ies) of origin or exportation | Measures | Reference | Date of expiry |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Trichloroisocyanuric acid | United States of America | Anti-dumping duty | Council Regulation (EC) No 1631/2005 (OJ L 261, 7.10.2005, p. 1) | 8.10.2010 |

Product

Country(ies) of origin or exportation

Measures

Reference

Date of expiry

Trichloroisocyanuric acid

United States of America

Anti-dumping duty

Council Regulation (EC) No 1631/2005 (OJ L 261, 7.10.2005, p. 1)

8.10.2010

---

(1)  OJ C 104, 23.4.2010, p. 15.

1

(2)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 51.

2

---
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Paul Tillman, Appellant.

Submitted December 12, 2011;

decided January 5, 2012

Reported below, 82 AD3d 509.

Motion for an extension of the time within which to apply for permission to appeal pursuant to CPL 460.20 granted and motion papers treated as a timely CPL 460.20 application.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Juan Carlos Luciano, Appellant.

[876 NYS2d 258] —

Appeal from a *1330new sentence of the Onondaga County Court (William D. Walsh, J.), rendered October 11, 2006 imposed upon defendant’s conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree. Defendant was resentenced pursuant to the 2005 Drug Law Reform Act upon his 2006 conviction.

It is hereby ordered that the sentence so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law and the matter is remitted to Onondaga County Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following memorandum: Defendant appeals from a new sentence upon his 2006 conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree (Penal Law § 220.18 [1]) imposed pursuant to the 2005 Drug Law Reform Act ([DLRA-2] L 2005, ch 643, § 1). We conclude that County Court erred in failing to set forth written findings of fact and the reasons for its determination to impose a determinate term of imprisonment of six years and a five-year period of postrelease supervision *(see People v Peterson,*50 AD3d 1588, 1589 [2008]). We therefore reverse the sentence and remit the matter to County Court to determine defendant’s application in compliance with DLRA-2.

In view of our determination, we do not address defendant’s remaining contentions. Present—Smith, J.P., Centra, Fahey, Green and Pine, JJ.
# C_2010237EN.01002101.xml

| 2.9.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 237/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.9.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 237/21

---

DECISION No 297

of 12 May 2010

terminating the procedure for granting authorisation for the prospection and exploration of oil and natural gas, being subsurface resources as defined in Article 2(1)(3) of the Subsurface Resources Act, in Block 1-5 ‘Devetaki’, located in the provinces of Lovech, Pleven and Gabrovo

2010/C 237/05

REPUBLIC OF BULGARIA

COUNCIL OF MINISTERS

Pursuant to Article 50(2), in conjunction with Articles 23(4) and 46(2)(2), of the Subsurface Resources Act and having regard to an infringement noted in the conduct of the procedure, resulting in a tenderer who does not meet the mandatory requirements laid down in the Subsurface Resources Act and the tender dossier being deemed eligible to take part in the procedure,

THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS HAS DECIDED THAT:

| 1. | The procedure for granting authorisation for the prospection and exploration of oil and natural gas, being subsurface resources as defined in Article 2(1)(3) of the Subsurface Resources Act, in Block 1-5 ‘Devetaki’, located in the provinces of Lovech, Pleven and Gabrovo, shall be terminated. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The procedure for granting authorisation for the prospection and exploration of oil and natural gas, being subsurface resources as defined in Article 2(1)(3) of the Subsurface Resources Act, in Block 1-5 ‘Devetaki’, located in the provinces of Lovech, Pleven and Gabrovo, shall be terminated.

| 2. | The Minister for the Economy, Energy and Tourism shall take the necessary steps to return the deposits to the tenderers after this Decision has entered into force. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The Minister for the Economy, Energy and Tourism shall take the necessary steps to return the deposits to the tenderers after this Decision has entered into force.

| 3. | This Decision shall be subject to appeal before the Supreme Administrative Court within 14 days following its communication to the tenderers. |
| --- | --- |

3.

This Decision shall be subject to appeal before the Supreme Administrative Court within 14 days following its communication to the tenderers.

Prime Minister

Boyko BORISOV

Chief Secretary of the Council of Ministers

Rosen ZHELYAZKOV

---