alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2012024EN.01008001.xml

| 28.1.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/80 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.1.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/80

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Amended proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down standards for the reception of asylum seekers (recast)’

COM(2011) 320 final — 2008/0244 (COD)

2012/C 24/16

On 19 July 2011, the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, on the

Amended proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down standards for the reception of asylum seekers (Recast)

Amended proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down standards for the reception of asylum seekers (Recast)

COM(2011) 320 final — 2008/0244 (COD).

Since the Committee has already set out its views on the subject of the proposal in question in its opinion on the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down minimum standards for the reception of asylum seekers (recast), adopted on 16 July 2009 (1), it decided, at its 475th plenary session of 26 and 27 October 2011 (meeting of 26 October), by 148 votes to 1 with 12 abstentions, not to draw up a new opinion on the subject, but to refer to the position it had taken in the above-mentioned document.

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down minimum standards for the reception of asylum seekers (recast)

1

Brussels, 26 October 2011.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Staffan NILSSON

---

(1)  EESC opinion Minimum standards for the reception of asylum seekers, OJ C 317, 23.12.2009, p. 110.

1

Minimum standards for the reception of asylum seekers

---
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-13-0005742

03-JUN-2014

08:33 AM
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
Life Sciences Research, Inc. (“LSR”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December
31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the “Report”), I, Richard Michaelson, Chief Financial Officer of LSR
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 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
      LSR.














Date:  March
      13, 2009
            /s/
      Richard Michaelson______________________Richard
      MichaelsonChief
      Financial Officer
AEGIS SEF | 2829 Technology Forest Boulevard, Suite 260 | The Woodlands, Texas 77381

Chapter 1035

Natural Gas Basis Swap - Socal Citygate - Natural Gas Intelligence

DESCRIPTION

A monthly cash settled swap based upon the mathematical result of subtracting the price of the 

NYMEX Henry Hub Natural Gas futures contract, as defined in Floating Price B, from the monthly 

price published by Natural Gas Intelligence for the location specified in Floating Price A.

FLOATING PRICE A

The Floating Price for each contract month will be equal to the Natural Gas Intelligence Socal 

Citygate published price for the corresponding contract month.

FLOATING PRICE B

The Floating Price for each contract month will be equal to the NYMEX Henry Hub Natural Gas 

futures contract final settlement price for the corresponding contract month on the last trading 

day for that contract month.

CONTRACT UNIT AND VALUE

The contract unit shall be MMBtus (million British thermal units). Each shall be valued as the 

contract quantity multiplied by the settlement price.

LISTING CYCLE

Up to 120 consecutive monthly contract periods.

PRICES AND FLUCTUATIONS

Prices shall be quoted in U.S. dollars and cents per MMBtu. The minimum price fluctuation shall 

be $0.001 per MMBtu. The minimum price increment will be $0.0001. There shall be no 

maximum price fluctuation.

TERMINATION OF TRADING

Posting of transactions shall cease on the last business day prior to the contract month.

FINAL SETTLEMENT

Delivery under the contract shall be by cash settlement. Final settlement, following termination 

of posting for a contract month, will be based on the Floating Price. The final settlement price 

will be the Floating Price calculated for each contract month.
# C_2010013EN.01001101.xml

| 20.1.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 13/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.1.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 13/11

---

Commission communication on the body authorised to issue certificates of authenticity under Regulation (EC) No 620/2009

2010/C 13/03

By Council Regulation (EC) No 617/2009 of 13 July 2009, published in
  Official Journal of the European Union L 182 of 15 July 2009, an import tariff quota for high quality beef has been opened.

Official Journal of the European Union

Under Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 620/2009 of 13 July 2009, the release for free circulation of the goods imported under that quota is conditional upon presentation of a certificate of authenticity.

The following authority is authorised to issue certificates of authenticity under this Regulation:

| Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF) of the Australian Government |
| --- |
| 18 Marcus Clarke Street |
| Canberra City ACT 2601 |
| AUSTRALIA |

Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF) of the Australian Government

18 Marcus Clarke Street

Canberra City ACT 2601

AUSTRALIA

---
UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

---

FORM 8-K

---



CURRENT REPORT

Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of The Securities Exchange Act of 1934



Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): October 18, 2006

---

THE VALSPAR CORPORATION

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)



|Delaware                                       | 1-3011                   | 36-2443580                          
|---------------------------------------------- | ------------------------ | ------------------------------------
|(State or other jurisdiction
of incorporation) | (Commission
File Number) | (I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)



|1101 Third Street South, Minneapolis, Minnesota | 55415     
|----------------------------------------------- | ----------
|(Address of principal executive offices)        | (Zip Code)



Registrants telephone number, including area code:(612) 332-7371



Not Applicable

(Former name or former address, if changed since last report.)

---

Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions (see General Instruction A.2. below):



|o | Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)
|- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|o | Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)
|- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|o | Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))
|- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|o | Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))
|- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





---

Item 7.01
        Regulation FD Disclosure.




On October 19, 2006, The Valspar Corporation issued a press release relating to the acquisition of the powder coatings business of H.B. Fuller Company. A copy of the press release is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission and is attached as Exhibit 99.1 to this Form 8-K.



Item 9.01
        Financial Statements and Exhibits.




(d)
        Exhibits




99.1
        Press Release dated October 19, 2006








SIGNATURE



Pursuant to the requirements of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned
thereunto duly authorized.





|       |                  | THE VALSPAR CORPORATION
|------ | ---------------- | -----------------------
|       |                  |                        
|Dated: | October 19, 2006 |                        
|       |                  |                        





---
#### In the Matter of: David MOORE, doing business as Brushy Creek Kennel, Incorporated, doing business as Pinewood Kennel, doing business as Celtic Field Sports; Lisa Therese Moore, Debtors. Lisa Bushman, Plaintiff-Appellee v. David Moore; Lisa Theresa Moore, Defendants-Appellants.

No. 11-20688

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

April 3, 2012.

Ronald H. Tonkin, Esq., Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Alexander B. Wathen, Esq., Wathen *&*Associates, Houston, TX, for Defendants-Appellants.

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and HAYNES and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

EDITH H. JONES, Chief Judge: *

The court has carefully reviewed this appeal through the record of its tortuous and lengthy procedural career. We conclude that Appellants’ arguments are mer-itless, as the carefully wrought opinions of the bankruptcy and district courts patiently explain. There is no justification for prolonging this litigation, nor can we fruitfully add to the decisions already rendered.

AFFIRMED.

*

 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.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Rashid Khan, Appellant.

[876 NYS2d 96]—

*968Appeal by the defendant from a resentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Eng, J.), dated January 9, 2006, pursuant to the Drug Law Reform Acts of 2004 and 2005 (L 2004, ch 738, § 23; L 2005, ch 643, § 1), imposed after a hearing, upon his conviction of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the first degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, and conspiracy in the second degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict.

Ordered that the resentence is affirmed.

The defendant originally was sentenced to indeterminate prison terms of 18 years to life upon his conviction of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the first degree, five years to life for criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, and 7 to 21 years for conspiracy in the second degree, with all sentences to run concurrently with each other. He also was sentenced to an indeterminate prison term of 6 to 18 years for a second count of conspiracy in the second degree, and that sentence was to run consecutively with the other terms.

At a resentencing hearing pursuant to the Drug Law Reform Acts of 2004 and 2005 *(see*L 2004, ch 738, § 23; L 2005, ch 643, § 1), the Supreme Court properly considered all the relevant factors in determining only to reduce the defendant’s sentence upon his convictions of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the first degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree to concurrent determinate terms of 11 years and 5 years, respectively *(see People v Flores,*50 AD3d 1156, 1156-1157 [2008]; *People v Stamps,*50 AD3d 827, 827-828 [2008]; *People v Bispo,*47 AD3d 641 [2008]; *People v Vega,*40 AD3d 1020, 1020 [2007]; *People v Sanders,*36 AD3d 944 [2007]). The Supreme Court properly considered the large quantity of drugs involved and the defendant’s conviction of conspiracy to import drugs in resentencing him to more than the minimum allowable by law *(see People v Stamps,*50 AD3d 827 [2008]; *People v Valencia,*30 AD3d 636, 637 [2006]).

The Supreme Court’s continued imposition of consecutive sentences was proper *(see People v Vaughan,*— AD3d —, 2009 NY Slip Op 02394 [2d Dept Mar. 24, 2009]). Rivera, J.P., Ritter, Covello and Angiolillo, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit
      32.1**





**Certification
      of Principal Executive Officer and Principal 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 Wentworth VI, Inc. (the "Company")
      on
      Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Kevin R. Keating,
      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
      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/
                Kevin R. KeatingKevin
                R. Keating
              Principal
                Executive Officer
              Principal
                Financial Officer
              October
                23, 2008
#### Byron HIBBERT, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ben CURRY, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 07-17044.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Sept. 13, 2010.*

Filed Oct. 7, 2010.

Byron Hibbert, Soledad, CA, pro se.

Patricia Webber Heim, Office of the California Attorney General, Sacramento, CA, for Respondent-Appellee.

Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Byron Hibbert appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253,1 and we affirm.

Hibbert contends that the Board’s 2004 decision to deny him parole was not supported by “some evidence” and therefore violated his due process rights. The state court did not unreasonably conclude that some evidence supports the Board’s decision. *See*28 U.S.C. § 2254(d); *see also Hayward v. Marshall,*603 F.3d 546, 563 (9th Cir.2010) (en banc).

Hibbert’s request for judicial notice is granted.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.

1

. We certify for appeal, on our own motion, the issue of whether the 2005 decision of the California Board of Prison Terms (“the Board”) to deny parole violated due process. We deny a certificate of appealability , as to Hibbert’s claim that the district court improperly denied his motion under Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
#### Digital Broadcast Corporation, Appellant, v Ladenburg, Thalmann & Co., Inc., et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants.

Submitted December 7, 2009;

decided February 11, 2010

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution.
EXHIIT 32

 

CERTIFICATION Pursuantto

18 U.S.C. Section 1350

 

Keith A. Guevara, asChief Executive Officer of NBO Systems, Inc. (the "Company"), and ChristopherFoley, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. § 1350, that

 

(1) the Company'sAnnual Report of Form 10-KSB/A for the period ended December 31, 2004, as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),fully complies with the applicable requirements of Section 13(a) or Section15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2) the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 

| Dated: April		29, 2005  |  /s/ Keith A. Guevara                                     |
|------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                    | Keith A. Guevara                                                                                                                                                                  |
|                    | Chief ExecutiveOfficer and President                                                                                                                                              |
|                              |
|                              |
| Dated: April 29, 2005   |  /s/ Christopher Foley                          |
|                    | Christopher Foley                                                                                                                                                                 |
|                    | Chief FinancialOfficer                                                                                                                                                            |
SUBMISSION COVER SHEET

IMPORTANT: Check box if Confidential Treatment is requested

Registered Entity Identifier Code (optional): 23-249

Organization: Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc. ("CME")

Filing as a: DCM SEF DCO SDR 

Please note - only ONE choice allowed.

Filing Date (mm/dd/yy): 06/12/23 Filing Description: Weekly Notification of Rule 

Amendments - Week of June 5, 2023

SPECIFY FILING TYPE 

Please note only ONE choice allowed per Submission.

Organization Rules and Rule Amendments

Certification § 40.6(a)

Approval § 40.5(a)

Notification § 40.6(d)

Advance Notice of SIDCO Rule Change § 40.10(a)

SIDCO Emergency Rule Change § 40.10(h)

Rule Numbers: N/A

New Product Please note only ONE product per Submission.

Certification § 40.2(a) 

Certification Security Futures § 41.23(a)

Certification Swap Class § 40.2(d)

Approval § 40.3(a)

Approval Security Futures § 41.23(b)

Novel Derivative Product Notification § 40.12(a)

Swap Submission § 39.5

Official Product Name:

Product Terms and Conditions (product related Rules and Rule Amendments)

Certification § 40.6(a) 

Certification Made Available to Trade Determination § 40.6(a)

Certification Security Futures § 41.24(a)

Delisting (No Open Interest) § 40.6(a) 

Approval § 40.5(a)

Approval Made Available to Trade Determination § 40.5(a)

Approval Security Futures § 41.24(c)

Approval Amendments to enumerated agricultural products § 40.4(a), § 40.5(a)

“Non-Material Agricultural Rule Change” § 40.4(b)(5)

Notification § 40.6(d)

 Official Name(s) of Product(s) Affected: 

Rule Numbers: 
300 Vesey Street New York, NY 10282 T 212 299 2200 F 212 301 4645 christopher.bowen@cmegroup.com cmegroup.com

1

Christopher Bowen 

Managing Director and Chief Regulatory Counsel

Legal Department

June 12, 2023

VIA ELECTRONIC PORTAL

Christopher J. Kirkpatrick

Office of the Secretariat

Commodity Futures Trading Commission

Three Lafayette Centre

1155 21st Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20581

RE: Weekly Notification of Rule Amendments

CME Clearing Submission No. 23-249

Dear Mr. Kirkpatrick:

Pursuant to Commission Regulation 40.6(d), the clearing house division of Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc. (“CME 

Clearing”) submits this Weekly Notification of the following rule amendments issued during the week of June 5, 2023: 

• Clearing House Advisory Notice 23-166 (June 7, 2023), European Union Allowance (EUA) Futures Delivery

- Effective June 7, 2023

• Clearing House Advisory Notice 23-168 (June 8, 2023), Performance Bond Requirements: Agriculture and 

Energy - Effective June 9, 2023

Copies of the above-referenced materials are available at www.cmegroup.com. If you require any additional 

information, please e-mail CMEGSubmissionInquiry@cmegroup.com or contact the undersigned at (212) 299-2200.

Sincerely,

/s/ Christopher Bowen

Managing Director and Chief Regulatory Counsel
Cite as 2017 Ark. App. 169

ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION IV 

No. CV-15-937

REBECCA K. MCMAHEN

APPELLANT

V.

KENNETH MACK ROBINSON AND 

AMERICAN EXPRESS CENTURION 

BANK

APPELLEES

OPINION DELIVERED: MARCH 15, 2017 

APPEAL FROM THE POPE

COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT 

[NO. 58CV-15-063] 

HONORABLE KEN D. COKER, JR., 

JUDGE

SUPPLEMENTAL ADDENDUM 

ORDERED

ROBERT J. GLADWIN, Judge

Rebecca McMahen appeals the August 14, 2015 order of the Pope County Circuit 

Court denying her petition for declaratory judgment. In denying the petition, the trial 

court determined that the three-year statute of limitations provided in Arkansas Code 

Annotated section 4-59-209 (Repl. 2011) did not apply to prevent appellee Kenneth Mack 

Robinson from obtaining, under the doctrine of laches, an order setting aside the August 

23, 2007 quitclaim deed appellant received from her husband, David McMahen. Rebecca 

argues that the trial court improperly applied the statute and erred in finding that David had 

a curtesy interest to which Robinson’s judgment lien could attach. We do not reach the 

merits of the argument because the addendum contained in the appellate brief does not meet 

the requirements under our rules.
Cite as 2017 Ark. App. 169

2 

On August 19, 2015, Rebecca filed a postjudgment motion citing Arkansas Rule of 

Civil Procedure 60 (2015). Robinson filed a response thereto on September 2, 2015, and 

the circuit court denied the motion by order filed September 10, 2015. None of these 

pleadings appear in the addendum of Rebecca’s brief, nor have they been supplemented by 

Robinson. 

Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-2(b)(8)(A)(i) (2016) provides that the addendum 

must include all motions, including posttrial and postjudgment motions, responses, and 

orders from which the appeal is taken. Rebecca’s notice of appeal filed September 18, 2015, 

purports to appeal the September 10, 2015 order denying Rebecca’s postjudgment motion. 

Rule 4-2 also provides that if this court determines that deficiencies or omissions in the 

abstract or addendum need to be corrected, but complete rebriefing is not needed, then the 

court will order appellant to file a supplemental abstract or addendum within seven calendar 

days to provide the additional materials from the record to the members of the appellate 

court. Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(b)(4).

Accordingly, we order appellant Rebecca McMahen to file a supplemental 

addendum within seven calendar days of the date of this opinion. We encourage careful 

and thorough review of our rules to ensure that no additional deficiencies are present.

 Supplemental addendum ordered. 

 HARRISON and MURPHY, JJ., agree. 

Jon R. Sanford, P.A., by: Jon R. Sanford, for appellant.

Niswanger Law Firm PLC, by: Stephen B. Niswanger and Benjamin M. Ross, for 

appellee.