alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2010234EN.01001401.xml

| 28.8.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 234/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.8.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 234/14

---

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 8 July 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the High Court of Justice of England and Wales, Queen’s Bench Division (Administrative Court) — United Kingdom) — Afton Chemical Limited v Secretary of State for Transport

(Case C-343/09) (1)

1

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Validity - Directive 2009/30/EC - Article 1(8) - Directive 98/70/EC - Article 8a - Atmospheric pollution - Fuels - Use of metallic additives in fuels - Limit for methylcyclopentadienyl manganese tricarbonyl (MMT) content - Labelling - Impact assessment - Manifest error of assessment - Precautionary principle - Proportionality - Equal treatment - Legal certainty - Admissibility)

2010/C 234/20

Language of the case: English

Referring court

Referring court

High Court of Justice of England and Wales, Queen’s Bench Division (Administrative Court)

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Afton Chemical Limited

Applicant:

Defendant: Secretary of State for Transport

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — High Court of Justice of England & Wales, Queen’s Bench Division (Administrative Court) — Validity of Directive 2009/30/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 amending Directive 98/70/EC as regards the specification of petrol, diesel and gas-oil and introducing a mechanism to monitor and reduce greenhouse gas emissions and amending Council Directive 1999/32/EC as regards the specification of fuel used by inland waterway vessels and repealing Directive 93/12/EEC (OJ 2009 L 140, p. 88) — Validity with regard to the labelling requirement for fuels which contain metallic additives and with regard to the setting of a limit for methylcyclopentadienyl manganese tricarbonyl (MMT) — Manifest error of assessment — Infringement of the principles of proportionality, equal treatment and legal certainty

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Consideration of the questions referred has disclosed nothing capable of affecting the validity of Article 1(8) of Directive 2009/30/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 amending Directive 98/70/EC as regards the specification of petrol, diesel and gas-oil and introducing a mechanism to monitor and reduce greenhouse gas emissions and amending Council Directive 1999/32/EC as regards the specification of fuel used by inland waterway vessels and repealing Directive 93/12/EEC, in so far as it inserts a new Article 8a(2) and 8a(4) to (6) in Directive 98/70/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 1998 relating to the quality of petrol and diesel fuels and amending Council Directive 93/12/EEC.

---

(1)  OJ C 267, 7.11.2009

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                          <C>                <C>              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS             6-MOS             YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>            DEC-31-1998        DEC-31-1998      DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                 JUN-30-1998        JUN-30-1998      DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                               0              1,536            7,247
<SECURITIES>                         0                  0                0
<RECEIVABLES>                        0                  0                0
<ALLOWANCES>                         0                  0                0
<INVENTORY>                          0                  0                0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                     0             22,669           37,502
<PP&E>                               0                  0                0
<DEPRECIATION>                       0                  0                0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                       0             22,669            37,502
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                0          1,346,410         1,350,060
<BONDS>                              0                  0                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                0                  0                 0
<PREFERRED>                          0                  0                 0
<COMMON>                             0                  0                 0
<OTHER-SE>                           0         (1,323,741)       (1,312,558)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>         0             22,669            37,502
<SALES>                              0                  0                 0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                     0                  0                 0
<CGS>                                0                  0                 0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                        0                  0                 0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                13,992             27,167                 0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                     0                  0                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                   0                  0                 0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                  1,992            (11,183)                0
<INCOME-TAX>                     1,992            (11,183)                0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                  0                  0                 0
<DISCONTINUED>                       0                  0                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                      0                  0                 0
<CHANGES>                            0                  0                 0
<NET-INCOME>                     1,992            (11,183)                0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                        0                  0                 0
<EPS-DILUTED>                        0                  0                 0
        

</TABLE>
----

            DECISION No 593/2004/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL         

of 21 July 2004         

amending Council Decision 2000/819/EC on a multiannual programme for enterprise and entrepreneurship, and in particular for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) (2001-2005)

(Text with EEA relevance)

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 157(3) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,

Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee (1),

After consulting the Committee of the Regions,

Acting in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 251 of the Treaty (2),

Whereas:

HAVE ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

Decision 2000/819/EC is hereby amended as follows:

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the twentieth day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Article 3

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Strasbourg, 21 July 2004.

For the European Parliament

The President

J. P. BORREL            

For the Council

The President

A. NICOLAÏ            

----

(1)  Opinion delivered on 30 June 2004 (not yet published in the Official Journal).

(2)  Opinion of the European Parliament of 22 April 2004 (not yet published in the Official Journal) and Council Decision of 19 July 2004.

(3)OJ L 310, 13.11.1997, p. 28.

(4)OJ L 155, 29.5.1998, p. 43.

(5)OJ L 333, 29.12.2000, p. 84. Decision amended by the 2003 Act of Accession.

(6)OJ C 279 E, 20.11.2003, p. 78.

(7)OJ C 25 E, 29.1.2004, p. 384.

----
Lavond HILL, petitioner, v. Kevin KAUFFMAN, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution at Smithfield, et al.

No. 15-9203.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 3, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
II-01208

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

David Williams <dwilliams2214@yahoo.com>

Wednesday, December 1, 2010 3:33 PM

dfadefinitions <dfadefinitions@CFTC.gov>

Re: No loopholes in Dodd-Frank

1) Securities and Exchange Commission/Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Commercial Risk (CFTC PIN

3235-AK65, SEC File Number $7-12-10)

Dear Commissioners Shapiro and Gensler: Don’t let the American Bankers Association (ABA) redefine important terms like

"commercial risk" to keep banks that engage in risky derivatives trading from complying with transparency and business

conduct requirements. Commercial risk should not be expanded to include financial risk. Accepting the ABA argument

would open the door for exemptions for risky hedge funds and insurance companies.

2) Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Position Limits (PIN 3038-AD 17 )

Dear Commissioner Gensler: The CFTC needs to set strong position limits to crack down on the energy and food commodity

speculation that serves no productive purpose. I urge the Commission to define limits that will address not only manipulation,

but also excessive speculation, which will require a stricter approach.

3) U.S. Department of the Treasury, Re: FX Swaps (75 FR 66426 Document Number 2010-27274)

Dear Secretary Geithner: Just say "no" to foreign exchange traders who want to exempt foreign currency derivatives from the

clearing and transparency requirements of the

Dodd-Frank Act. $4 trillion dollars a day is traded in these highly-leveraged swaps and this number may increase to over $10

trillion in a decade. As the head of the Financial

Stability Oversight Board your job is to decrease risk in the system, not encourage off-book trading and opaque markets.

David Williams

4826 FM 2214

Ranger, TX 76470
CIRCUIT COURT OF FAIRFAX COUNTY

#### Mohammed Rahman v. Baikunth Singh

March 2, 1992

Case No. (Law) 103541

By Judge William G. Plummer

This matter came before the Court on Defendant Baikunth Singh’s plea of the statute of limitations. Having heard arguments and reviewed Singh’s memorandum of law, the Court overrules the plea of the statute of limitations.

Singh contends that the tolling provisions of the Medical Malpractice Act, Code §§ 8.01-581.1 et seq., are inapplicable to Plaintiff Mohammed Rahman’s wrongful death action. Citing *Dodson v. Potomac Mack Sales & Service, Inc.,*241 Va. 89, 400 S.E.2d 178 (1991), Singh stresses that a wrongful death action is a specific statutory creation, *see*Code § 8.01-244(B), and concludes that its specific limitations period and discreet tolling provisions prevail over the provisions of the Medical Malpractice Act.

As the present controversy involves interaction between two specific statutes, i.e., the wrongful death statute and the Medical Malpractice Act, the Court finds that the *Dodson*case does not support Singh’s position. While Code § 8.01-244(B) provides that one must bring a wrongful death action within two years after the death of the injured person, where such an action is based upon a claim of medical malpractice, the Medical Malpractice Act controls certain rights and obligations of the parties. *Horn*v. *Abernathy,*231 Va. 228, 343 S.E.2d 318 (1986).

In *Horn v. Abernathy,*the Court found that the Medical Malpractice Act tolled the two-year statute of limitations for a wrongful death claim. *Id.*at 235-36. Specifically, the Court found that Code *160§ 8.01-581.9 suspended the two-year limitations period for 120 days from the date notice was given pursuant to Code § 8.01-581.2. *Id.*Accordingly, contrary to Singh’s arguments, the two-year limitations period for a wrongful death claim is not unaffected by the Medical Malpractice Act.

Additionally, Singh cites *Morrison v. Bestler,*239 Va. 166, 387 S.E.2d 753 (1991), for the proposition that Rahman could have filed suit prior to 90 days after giving notice of a medical malpractice claim. The *Morrison*decision, however, merely provides that premature filing under Code § 8.01-581.2 does not divest the Court of subject matter jurisdiction. *Id.*at 173. The Court expressly held that the 90-day wait is a mandatory procedural requirement under the Medical Malpractice Act. *Id.*Rahman could not simply ignore this statutory mandate as suggested by Singh.

For these reasons, the Court overrules Singh’s plea of the statute of limitations.
Exhibit 23


GH&I                                         1200 Ashwood Parkway
------------------------------------         Suite 300
Gifford, Hillegass & Ingwersen, P.C.         Atlanta, GA  30338
------------------------------------         (770) 396-1100  Fax: (770) 393-0319

Certified Public Accountants                 233 Peachtree Street, Suite 815
                                             Harris Tower - Peachtree Center
                                             Atlanta, GA  30303-1506
                                             (404 586-0036  Fax: (404) 589-8082


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
of Apple Homes Corporation on Form 10-K of our report dated May 12, 2000, on our
audit of the consolidated financial statements of Apple Homes Corporation and
Subsidiaries as of March 31, 2000 and for the year then ended, which report is
incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.



                                        /s/ Gifford, Hillegass & Ingwersen, P.C.
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Gifford, Hillegass & Ingwersen, P.C.

Atlanta, Georgia
June 26, 2000
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 1640 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 1640

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                    September 23, 2010.
    Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution, it shall be in order to 
take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 5297) to create the Small Business 
Lending Fund Program to direct the Secretary of the Treasury to make capital 
investments in eligible institutions in order to increase the availability of 
credit for small businesses, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to 
provide tax incentives for small business job creation, and for other purposes, 
with the Senate amendment thereto, and to consider in the House, without 
intervention of any point of order, a motion offered by the chair of the 
Committee on Financial Services or his designee that the House concur in the 
Senate amendment. The Senate amendment and the motion shall be considered as 
read. The motion shall be debatable for one hour equally divided among and 
controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
Financial Services, the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
Small Business, and the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
Ways and Means. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the 
motion to final adoption without intervening motion.
    Sec. 2.  It shall be in order at any time through the legislative day of 
October 1, 2010, for the Speaker to entertain motions that the House suspend the 
rules. The Speaker or her designee shall consult with the Minority Leader or his 
designee on the designation of any matter for consideration pursuant to this 
section.
    Sec. 3.  The requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII for a two-thirds vote 
to consider a report from the Committee on Rules on the same day it is presented 
to the House is waived with respect to any resolution reported through the 
legislative day of October 1, 2010.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
**Exhibit 99.2**

 

**Certification Pursuant to****18 U.S.C.Section 1350****(AsAdopted Pursuant to Section 906 of****theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)**

 

I, Thomas J. Cowee, Chief Financial Officer of IESICorporation (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to my knowledge:

 

1.             theAnnual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2002(the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

 

2.             theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by theCompany and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staffupon request.

 

 
| Dated:  March  25, 2003 |
|------------------------------|
|                         |
|                         |   | /s/ Thomas J.  Cowee |   |
|                         | Thomas J. Cowee |
|                         | Chief Financial Officer |

 

 

----
Uel Joe FREEMAN, petitioner, v. Troy STEELE, Warden.

No. 16-6838.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2090/2004

of 8 December 2004         

establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 of 21 December 1994 on detailed rules for the application of the import arrangements for fruit and vegetables (1), and in particular Article 4(1) thereof,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The standard import values referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 shall be fixed as indicated in the Annex hereto.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 9 December 2004.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 8 December 2004.

For the Commission

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ            

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

----

(1)OJ L 337, 24.12.1994, p. 66. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1947/2002 (OJ L 299, 1.11.2002, p. 17).

----

ANNEX

to Commission Regulation of 8 December 2004 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

----

(1)  Country nomenclature as fixed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2081/2003 (OJ L 313, 28.11.2003, p. 11). Code ‘            999            ’ stands for ‘of other origin’.

----
Exhibit 99.2

                   CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORT
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002  (subsection (a) and
(b)  of  Section  1350,  Chapter  63 of  Title  18,  United  States  Code),  the
undersigned officer of The Pepsi Bottling Group, Inc. (the "Company")  certifies
to his knowledge that:

     (1)  The  Amendment  No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company
          for the year ended  December 28, 2002 (the  "Amended Form 10-K") fully
          complies  with  the  requirements  of  Section  13(a)  or 15(d) of the
          Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Act"); and

     (2)  The information contained in the Amended Form 10-K fairly presents, in
          all  material  respects,  the  financial  conditions  and  results  of
          operations of the Company as of the dates and for the periods referred
          to in the Amended Form 10-K.


                                                   /s/ Alfred H. Drewes
                                                   --------------------
                                                   Alfred H. Drewes
                                                   Chief Financial Officer
                                                   May 22, 2003

The foregoing  certification  (the  "Certification")  is being furnished  solely
pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002  (subsection (a) and
(b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code).

A signed original of the Certification has been provided to the Company and will
be retained  by the Company in  accordance  with Rule  12b-11(d)  of the Act and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its Staff upon request.
784.

#### TOWLER, administratrix, *v.*CARITHERS.

1. The courts recognize the initials “N. *P.”*as the usual and ordinary abbreviation for the official title of a notary public.

2. A person holding title under a mortgagor and having notice, actual or constructive, of the existence of the mortgage can acquire no interest in the property adverse to the rights of the mortgagee. A person who obtains the property otherwise than through or under the mortgagor, and holds it in adverse possession for the statutory period, gains thereby a prescriptive title superior to the lien of the mortgage.

Claim, from city court of Monroe — Judge Arnold. September 9, 1907..

Argued April 21,

Decided July 25, 1908.

*518*Napier & Cox,*for plaintiff in error. *G. A.*Johns, contra.

Powell, *J.*

In 1891 one Sturdivant mortgaged the mule in controversy to Carithers, the defendant in error. The mortgage was attested by “C. W. Harris, N. P.,” and duly recorded. In 1896 Towler bought this mule from the firm of Nunnally, Breedlove & Company without any notice of the mortgage, other than the constructive notice arising from its having been recorded. Towler remained in- adverse possession of the mule until the foreclosure of the mortgage in 1906; to which foreclosure he filed claim. The judgment in the city court was adverse to him, and he excepted; though the case is now proceeding in the name of his administratrix, he having died during the pendency of the case in this court. It did not appear, in the evidence, that Nunnally, Breedlove & Co., from whom Towler purchased, claimed title through or under Sturdivant; indeed it is not disclosed how they obtained the property.

1. One of the exceptions is that the court erred in admitting in evidence Carithers’ mortgage, over the objection that it was not properly attested. The court will take judicial cognizance that the initials “N. P.” are the usual and ordinary abbreviation of the title “Notary Public.” The presumption, therefore, is that this officer acted legally, and that the probate is legal. See also Civil Code, §5221.

2. A person holding title under the mortgagor and having notice, actual or constructive, of the existence of the mortgage can acquire no interest adverse to the mortgagee. A person acquiring the property otherwise than through or under the mortgagor, and holding it in adverse possession for the statutory period, gains thereby a prescriptive title superior to the lien of the mortgage. This is logical and is also thoroughly in accord with the following authorities. *Fry*v. Shehee, 55 *Ga.*208; *Stokes*v. Maxwell, 53 *Ga.*638; *Parker*v. *Jones, 57 Ga.*204. It not appearing that the claimant was in privity with the mortgagor, and it appearing that he had been in adverse possession of the property for more than four years prior to the foreclosure of the mortgage, he was entitled to prevail.

*Judgment reversed.*
In re David Andrew CHRISTENSON, petitioner.

No. 16-6278.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 28, 2016.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied. Petitioner allowed until December 19, 2016, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with Rule 33.1 of the Rules of this Court.