alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2008154EN.01003201.xml

| 12.6.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 154/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.6.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 154/32

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 16/2008

of 1 February 2008

amending Annex XXI (Statistics) to the EEA Agreement

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, as amended by the Protocol adjusting the Agreement on the European Economic Area, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’, and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Annex XXI to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 170/2007 of 7 December 2007 (1). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Annex XXI to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 170/2007 of 7 December 2007 (1).

| (2) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 1165/2007 of 3 September 2007 establishing for 2007 the ‘Prodcom list’ of industrial products provided for by Council Regulation (EEC) No 3924/91 (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1165/2007 of 3 September 2007 establishing for 2007 the ‘Prodcom list’ of industrial products provided for by Council Regulation (EEC) No 3924/91 (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The following point shall be inserted after point 4ae (Commission Regulation (EC) No 294/2007) of Annex XXI to the Agreement:

| ‘4af. | 32007 R 1165: Commission Regulation (EC) No 1165/2007 of 3 September 2007 establishing for 2007 the ‘Prodcom list’ of industrial products provided for by Council Regulation (EEC) No 3924/91 (OJ L 268, 12.10.2007, p. 1).’ |
| --- | --- |

‘4af.

Article 2

The text of Regulation (EC) No 1165/2007 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 2 February 2008, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the Agreement have been made to the EEA Joint Committee (*1).

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 1 February 2008.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Alan SEATTER

---

(1)  
  OJ L 124, 8.5.2008, p. 38.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 268, 12.10.2007, p. 1.

2

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
Wade Patrick WRIGHT, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-5190.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
cbim_ex108.htm

EXHIBIT 10.8
  
 Contract for Sale of Goods
  
 This Contract for Sale of Goods is made this 18 day of October, 2017 by and between VTV Robot, China (“Seller”) and CASTLE BRIDGE IMPACT MEDIA INC, 3 Banyatelep, Visegrad 2025 Hungary (“Buyer”), for the purchase of the goods made by Seller. 
  
 1. Term. This Contract shall begin on October 18th, 2017, and end by October 30th, 2018, unless the parties agree otherwise. 
  
 2. Delivery. Buyer will give Seller 60 days’ advance notice regarding the quantity requested for delivery. Upon receipt of the request for delivery, Seller will arrange for delivery through a carrier chosen by Seller, the costs of which shall be F.O.B. 
  
 3. Appointment. Buyer hereby appoints Supplier, and Supplier accepts such appointment, to act as a non-exclusive supplier of the Products to buyer.
  
 4. Prices. The prices paid by buyer to seller for Products shall initially be as set forth in agreement between seller and buyer. Buyer shall have the right to purchase products at item prices. Prices are exclusive of all taxes, insurance, and shipping and handling charges, which are buyer’s sole responsibility.
  
 5. Acceptance. Buyer will have the right to inspect the goods upon receipt, Buyer must give notice to Seller of any claim for damages on account of condition, quality, or grade of the goods, and Buyer must specify the basis of the claim in detail. Failure of Buyer to comply with these conditions will constitute irrevocable acceptance of the goods by Buyer. All notices between the parties must be in writing and delivered by courier or by certified mail, return receipt requested. 
  
 6. Confidentiality. Each of the parties hereto agrees to hold confidential and proprietary information and trade secrets obtained from the other, and designated as such in writing by the disclosing party, in confidence and not to use or disclose such confidential and proprietary information and trade secrets to third parties without the consent of the other party, except that each of parties may disclose such information to their respective employees and agents who need to know such information for the purposes of operating their respective businesses. The parties agree that the provisions contained in this paragraph shall survive the termination of this Agreement.
  
 7. Warranty. Seller warrants that the goods sold hereunder are new and free from substantive defects in workmanship and materials. Seller's liability under the foregoing warranty is limited to replacement of goods or repair of defects or refund of the purchase price at Seller's sole option. No other warranty, express or implied, is made by Seller, and none shall be imputed or presumed. 
  
 8. Governing Law. This Contract shall be governed by the laws of the State of NV. Any disputes hereunder will be heard in the appropriate federal and state courts located in NV. 
  
 Buyer 
 /s/ Mester Frigyes 
  
 Seller
 /s/ Tnr
Tahreel M. TOWNSEND, petitioner, v. Robert GILMORE, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution at Greene, et al.

No. 17-7286.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 19, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                AND SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     In connection with the Report of REZConnect Technologies Inc on Form 10-QSB
     for the period ending March 31, 2003 filed herewith (the "Report"), I,
     Michael Y. Brent, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, that to
     the best of my knowledge:

     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 the Company.

     This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
     Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by
     the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes
     of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.


     Dated: as of May 14, 2003

     /s/ Michael Y. Brent
         Michael Y. Brent, Chief Executive Officer
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 Skystar Bio-Pharmaceutical Company, (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Bennet
P. Tchaikovsky, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the
date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the
United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:
 
 (1) The
Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13 (a) or 15 (d), as
applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
 
 (2) The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and result of operations of the Company at the dates and
for the periods indicated.
  /s/
      Bennet P. TchaikovskyBennet
      P. Tchaikovsky
                Chief
      Financial Officer
                March
      31, 2010
   A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### C. Smith *v.*The State.

Theft—Evidence.—See this case for evidence held insufficient to show a, felonious intent, notwithstanding the accused participated in the killing of the stolen beef, and afterwards falsely denied possession of part of the meat.

Appeal from the District Court of Navarro. Tried below before the Hon. D. M. Prendergast.

The facts are stated in the opinion.

*478No brief for the appellant.

*H. H. Boone,*Attorney General, and *W. B. Dunham,*for the State.

White, J.

The defendant was indicted jointly with one W. R. Wharton and one W. P. Coombs for the theft of a yearling whose owner was unknown. This appellant was alone tried, and the trial resulted in his conviction, with the punishment assessed at two years in the penitentiary.

The evidence shows that the appellant was a negro boy, under age, who lived with his mother upon a tract of land adjoining the Mays farm, upon which latter farm Wharton and Coombs, and Dougherty and Coleman Smith, the defendant, were working; and that Mays, who owned the land, professed to have a claim upon a bunch of wild cattle that were running in the river bottom, and had promised Wharton and Coombs, who were white men, that they might kill one of his beeves during some of their leisure time.

On the Sunday evening before the yearling was killed, Coombs and Dougherty went over to the house occupied by Coleman Smith and his mother to get Coleman to go with them and help kill the beef. Coleman’s mother refused to let him go until they gave her assurances that the beef they intended killing belonged to Mays, and that he had consented that they might kill it.

The next evening, after dark, Wharton, Coombs, and the defendant went out and killed the yearling, the defendant taking part of the meat home to his mother, and Wharton taking the balance.

The above facts are undisputed, and there is no evidence establishing the fact that defendant went along and participated in the killing of the beef, knowing the unlawful intent of the others who were with him and who induced him to go. His criminality is made to depend solely upon the fact *479that he aided in the killing of the beef at night, and on the next morning, when the party searching for the offenders came to his mother’s house and said they were officers and came to search for beef, that defendant denied that it was there, but, when his mother immediately spoke out and said the beef was there, the defendant told all about the killing. His denial is the only evidence in the case against him.

Taking all the particular circumstances and surroundings of the case, we are not satisfied of the correctness of the verdict and judgment. The guilt of the accused is not. made to appear with that certainty which should be required in cases of felony.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

*Reversed and remanded.*
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3975 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3975

   To amend the Fairness to Contact Lens Consumers Act to modernize 
  verification of contact lens prescriptions, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 25, 2019

 Mr. Rush (for himself and Mr. Burgess) introduced the following bill; 
       which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend the Fairness to Contact Lens Consumers Act to modernize 
  verification of contact lens prescriptions, and for other purposes.

    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 ``Contact Lens Prescription 
Verification Modernization Act''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS.

    Section 4 of the Fairness to Contact Lens Consumers Act (15 U.S.C. 
7603) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (a)--
                    (A) by redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) as 
                subparagraphs (A) and (B), respectively;
                    (B) by moving such redesignated subparagraphs 2 ems 
                to the right;
                    (C) by striking ``A seller may'' and inserting 
                ``(1) Sellers generally.--A seller may''; and
                    (D) by adding at the end the following new 
                paragraph:
            ``(2) Online sellers.--An online seller of contact lenses 
        shall provide a method that enables an individual to 
        electronically transmit, in accordance with HIPAA privacy 
        regulation (as defined in section 1180(b)(3) of the Social 
        Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1320d-9(b)(3))), a copy of a contact 
        lens prescription for such individual.
            ``(3) Encryption required.--Any protected health 
        information (as defined for purposes of the HIPAA privacy 
        regulation) that an online seller sends pursuant to this 
        section by email shall be encrypted.'';
            (2) in subsection (c)(6), by striking ``and telephone 
        number'' and inserting the following: ``, telephone number, and 
        email address''; and
            (3) in subsection (g), by striking the period at the end 
        and inserting the following: ``but does not include a call made 
        using an artificial or prerecorded voice.''.
                                 <all>
```
In the Matter of DISBARMENT OF Peggy M. Hairston ROBINSON.

No. D-3022.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 11, 2018.

Disbarment order entered.
Stacy WINTERS, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-5495.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 14, 2018.

On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* and petition for writ of certiorari granted. Judgment vacated, and case remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit for further consideration in light of *Sessions v. Dimaya,* 584 U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 1204, 200 L.Ed.2d 549 (2018).
# L_2007209EN.01002001.xml

| 9.8.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 209/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.8.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 209/20

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 12/2007

of 27 April 2007

amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, as amended by the Protocol adjusting the Agreement on the European Economic Area, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’, and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Annex II to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 148/2006 of 8 December 2006 (1). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Annex II to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 148/2006 of 8 December 2006 (1).

| (2) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 1451/2006 of 29 September 2006 amending Annexes I and II to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2377/90 laying down a Community procedure for the establishment of maximum residue limits of veterinary medicinal products in foodstuffs of animal origin, as regards fluazuron, sodium nitrite and peforelin (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1451/2006 of 29 September 2006 amending Annexes I and II to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2377/90 laying down a Community procedure for the establishment of maximum residue limits of veterinary medicinal products in foodstuffs of animal origin, as regards fluazuron, sodium nitrite and peforelin (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The following indent shall be added in point 14 (Council Regulation (EEC) No 2377/90) of Chapter XIII of Annex II to the Agreement:

| ‘— | 32006 R 1451: Commission Regulation (EC) No 1451/2006 of 29 September 2006 (OJ L 271, 30.9.2006, p. 37).’ |
| --- | --- |

‘—

32006 R 1451: Commission Regulation (EC) No 1451/2006 of 29 September 2006 (OJ L 271, 30.9.2006, p. 37).’

Article 2

The texts of Regulation (EC) No 1451/2006 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 28 April 2007, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the Agreement have been made to the EEA Joint Committee (*1).

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 27 April 2007.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Alan SEATTER

---

(1)  
  OJ L 89, 29.3.2007, p. 18.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 271, 30.9.2006, p. 37.

2

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
Ivory Lee HARRIS, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-8024.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 16, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Joseph B. SCARNATI, III, In His Capacity as Senate President Pro Tempore, appellant, v. Louis AGRE, et al.

No. 17-1368.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 4, 2018.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

*2603Appeal dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
# C_2009267EN.01005001.xml

| 7.11.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 267/50 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.11.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 267/50

---

Action brought on 15 September 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Hellenic Republic

(Case C-370/09)

2009/C 267/83

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: A. Margeli and M. Karanasou Apostolopoulou, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Hellenic Republic

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | declare that, by not adopting the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2006/21/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the management of waste from extractive industries and amending Directive 2004/35/EC, or in any event by not notifying those provisions to the Commission, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that, by not adopting the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2006/21/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the management of waste from extractive industries and amending Directive 2004/35/EC, or in any event by not notifying those provisions to the Commission, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

1

| — | order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The time-limit for transposition of Directive 2006/21/EC into domestic law expired on 1 May 2008.

---

(1)  OJ No L 102 of 11.4.2006, p. 15.

1

---
116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4018 

AN ACT 

To provide that the amount of time that an elderly offender 

must serve before being eligible for placement in home 

detention is to be reduced by the amount of good time 

credits earned by the prisoner, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 4018 EH

1 SECTION 1. GOOD CONDUCT TIME CREDITS FOR CERTAIN 

2 ELDERLY NONVIOLENT OFFENDERS. 

3 Section 231(g)(5)(A)(ii) of the Second Chance Act of 

4 2007 (34 U.S.C. 60541(g)(5)(A)(ii)) is amended by strik5 ing ‘‘to which the offender was sentenced’’ and inserting 

6 ‘‘reduced by any credit toward the service of the prisoner’s 

7 sentence awarded under section 3624(b) of title 18, 

8 United States Code’’. 

9 SEC. 2. DETERMINATION OF BUDGETARY EFFECTS. 

10 The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of 

11 complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, 

12 shall be determined by reference to the latest statement 

13 titled ‘‘Budgetary Effects of PAYGO Legislation’’ for this 

14 Act, submitted for printing in the Congressional Record 

15 by the Chairman of the House Budget Committee, pro16 vided that such statement has been submitted prior to the 

17 vote on passage. 

Passed the House of Representatives December 3, 

2019. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4018 

AN ACT 

To provide that the amount of time that an elderly 

prisoner, and for other purposes. the amount of good time credits earned by the placement in home detention is to be reduced by offender must serve before being eligible for
Rayshawn BETHANY, petitioner, v. NEW YORK.

No. 17-8030.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 16, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Division, Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Judicial Department denied.
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

OPTIS WIRELESS TECHNOLOGY, LLC,

Appellant

v.

KATHERINE K. VIDAL, UNDER SECRETARY OF 

COMMERCE FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY 

AND DIRECTOR OF THE UNITED STATES 

PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE,

Intervenor

______________________ 

2022-1858, 2022-1859

______________________ 

Appeals from the United States Patent and Trademark 

Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in Nos. IPR2018-

00653, IPR2018-00655.

______________________ 

JUDGMENT

______________________ 

CHRISTOPHER GRANAGHAN, Nelson Bumgardner 

Conroy PC, Fort Worth, TX, argued for appellant. Also represented by BRENT N. BUMGARDNER, ROBERT DELAFIELD. 

 MICHAEL TYLER, Office of the Solicitor, United States 

Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria, VA, argued for 

Case: 22-1858 Document: 53 Page: 1 Filed: 12/07/2023
intervenor. Also represented by PETER J. AYERS, MAITRANG DUC DANG, FARHEENA YASMEEN RASHEED. 

 ______________________ 

THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is 

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

 PER CURIAM (DYK, SCHALL, and REYNA, Circuit 

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

December 7, 2023

Date

Case: 22-1858 Document: 53 Page: 2 Filed: 12/07/2023
In re Steven Dwayne BROWN, petitioner.

No. 15-9350.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 3, 2016.

Petition for writ of mandamus denied.