alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2006366EN.01006601.xml

| 21.12.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 366/66 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 366/66

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 129/2006

of 27 October 2006

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 82/2006 of 7 July 2006 (1). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Annex II to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 82/2006 of 7 July 2006 (1).

| (2) | Commission Decision 2006/257/EC of 9 February 2006 amending Decision 96/335/EC establishing an inventory and a common nomenclature of ingredients employed in cosmetic products (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Commission Decision 2006/257/EC of 9 February 2006 amending Decision 96/335/EC establishing an inventory and a common nomenclature of ingredients employed in cosmetic products (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The following shall be added in point 10 (Commission Decision 96/335/EC) of Chapter XVI of Annex II to the Agreement:

‘, as amended by:

| — | 32006 D 0257: Commission Decision 2006/257/EC of 9 February 2006 (OJ L 97, 5.4.2006, p. 1).’ |
| --- | --- |

—

32006 D 0257: Commission Decision 2006/257/EC of 9 February 2006 (OJ L 97, 5.4.2006, p. 1).’

Article 2

The texts of Decision 2006/257/EC 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 October 2006, 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 October 2006.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Oda Helen SLETNES

---

(1)  
  OJ L 289, 19.10.2006, p. 14.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 97, 5.4.2006, p. 1.

2

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
```
   
 
CRUDE OIL, LIGHT SWEET - ICE FUTURES EUROPE                          Code-067411
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 09/29/09          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 1,000 BARRELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:      482,793
COMMITMENTS
  38,860   33,917   75,920  348,304  349,623  463,084  459,460   19,709   23,333

CHANGES FROM 09/22/09 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      1,603)
  -8,238    7,103    5,509    3,016  -18,324      287   -5,712    1,316    7,315

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
     8.0      7.0     15.7     72.1     72.4     95.9     95.2      4.1      4.8

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      100)
      15       22       29       49       61       84       94
```

----

Updated October 2, 2009
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.11

                                           ****CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT REQUESTED:
                                               OMITTED PORTIONS HAVE BEEN FILED
                                               SEPARATELY WITH THE COMMISSION

                     Sybase / Intershop Reseller Agreement

                          Summary of Principle Terms


Parties:      Sybase GmbH
              Intershop Communications GmbH

Date:         March 1996

Purpose:      Allows Intershop to develop e-commerce solutions that utilize
              embedded runtime versions of Sybase database technology, and to
              sublicense derivatives of the Sybase product through its
              distributors.

Upgrades:     Sybase agrees to pay Intershop commissions under certain
              circumstances if a user upgrades to a full Sybase database
              license.

Support:      Intershop to receive front line support from Sybase.

Payment:      Intershop agrees to pay Sybase the fees for runtime versions,
              runtime support and transaction fees 30 days after the end of the
              month during which Intershop has sent out the copy of the Sybase
              derivative. Following July 1, 1996, Intershop paid Sybase nine
              installments for the bulk purchase of runtime licenses, a total of
              ****

Audit:        Sybase can audit Intershop only once a year to determine the
              correct usage and the number of sublicensed copies of Sybase
              programs.

Term:         The original contract was scheduled to expire on March 28 1998,
              but was extended and amended on March 20 1998. The extension
              acknowledged the relocation of Intershop's headquarters to San
              Francisco and extended the account status to global. License fees
              for the entire year of 1998 were increased to *** payable in four
              installments.

Disclosure:   If Sybase desires, the parties will determine the wording of the
              announcement of their cooperation. Both parties have permission
              that Intershop participates in the Sybase VAR program and that
              Intershop develops and offers solutions that include Sybase
              programs.


Warranty:     The Sybase warranty is good for one year starting with the date of
              delivery to Intershop and assures that the program was developed
              according to the current state of technology, thoroughly tested
              and is in compliance to the functionality described in the
              documentation. The warranty includes only Sybase product. Sybase
              does not warrant the product developed and distributed by
              Intershop.

Pricing:      In this contract extension, Sybase offered Intershop the annual
              option to purchase licenses at the same pricing for the following
              three years.
Robert Gene BAILEY, petitioner, v. C.C. BLAKE, et al.

No. 17-8578.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 25, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
In Re David PANNELL, petitioner.

No. 17-5810.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 6, 2017.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied, and petition for writ of mandamus and/or prohibition dismissed. See Rule 39.8. As petitioner has repeatedly abused this Court's process, the Clerk is directed not to accept any further petitions in noncriminal matters from petitioner unless the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) is paid and petition submitted in compliance with Rule 33.1. See *Martin v.*

*424*District of Columbia Court of Appeals,*506 U.S. 1, 113 S.Ct. 397, 121 L.Ed.2d 305 (1992) (*per curiam* ).
# C_2006079EN.01S00301.xml

| 1.4.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 79/s3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.4.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 79/s3

---

NOTICE

NOTICE

On 4 April 2006, in Official Journal of the European Union C 80 A, the ‘Common catalogue of agricultural plant species — First supplement to the 24th complete edition’ will be published.

Official Journal of the European Union

Subscribers to the Official Journal may obtain the same number of copies and language versions of this Official Journal as those to which they subscribe free of charge. They are requested to return the attached order form, duly completed and bearing their subscription registration number (code appearing on the left of each label and beginning with: O/..........). This Official Journal will remain available free of charge for one year from the date of its publication.

Non-subscribers can order this Official Journal against payment from one of our sales offices (see http://publications.eu.int/others/sales_agents_en.html).

This Official Journal — like all Official Journals (L, C, CA, CE) — can be consulted free of charge online at http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex.

Image

---
Lauren GOHL, as Next Friend of J.G., petitioner, v. LIVONIA PUBLIC SCHOOLS SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al.

No. 16-1001.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
In Re Raymond L. ROGERS, petitioner.

No. 17-6152.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 30, 2017.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied, and the petition for writ of habeas corpus dismissed. See Rule 39.8.

Justice GORSUCH took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion and this petition.
Jeffrey Vincent McGEE, petitioner, v. GEORGIA.

No. 17-5613.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 16, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Georgia denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4275 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 4275

  To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to reauthorize the 
 Lake Pontchartrain Basin Restoration Program, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 10, 2019

 Mr. Graves of Louisiana (for himself and Mr. Richmond) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation 
                           and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to reauthorize the 
 Lake Pontchartrain Basin Restoration Program, 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. LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN BASIN RESTORATION PROGRAM 
              REAUTHORIZATION.

    Section 121(f) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 
U.S.C. 1273(f)) is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``2001 through 2012 and 
        the amount appropriated for fiscal year 2009 for each of fiscal 
        years 2013 through 2017'' and inserting ``2020 through 2024''; 
        and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(3) Administrative expenses.--The Administrator may use 
        for administrative expenses not more than 5 percent of the 
        amounts appropriated to carry out this section.''.
                                 <all>
```
NO. 07-11-0398-CV

	IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

	FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	AT AMARILLO

	PANEL B

	NOVEMBER 9, 2011

	______________________________

	In re: LUIS S. LAGAITE, JR.,

				Relator

	_______________________________

***On Original Proceeding for Writ of Mandamus***

	_______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.

	Pending before the court is the application of Luis S. Lagaite, Jr., for a writ of mandamus.  He asks us to order the Honorable Ana Estevez, 251st District Court, to schedule a hearing and act upon various motions pending in a suit he initiated.  The motions include “Motion Requesting Assistance of Counsel [Exhibit A],” “Motion for Hearing on the Merits of the Case[Exhibit B],” “Bench Warrant [Exhibit C],” “Writ of Habeas Corpus Ad Testificandum [Exhibit D],” and various other pleadings attacking the finding by the trial court that appellant is a vexatious litigant.  We dismiss the petition as moot.

	On October 26, 2011, we directed Judge Estevez to respond to relator’s petition for mandamus.  On November 4, 2011, Judge Estevez filed her response wherein she attached copies of the following orders:  1) order denying appointment of counsel, 2) order denying bench warrant, and 3) order setting aside September 13, 2011 order wherein the relator was found to be a vexatious litigant and setting the matter for hearing on January 4, 2012.  A copy of the documents evincing the actions are attached to this opinion as Exhibit A.       

	Accordingly, we do not reach the merits of the issues raised, and the petition for writ of mandamus is dismissed as moot.  *See In re Duncan,*62 S.W.3d 333, 334 (Tex. App.*–*Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, orig. proceeding).   

							Per Curiam

5

# image1.png

# image2.png

# image3.png
_____________ No. 95-3695MN

_____________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the District * of Minnesota. Erick Dewray Russell, also * known as Kenyatta Dewray Khalid,* [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. *

_____________ Submitted: March 14, 1996 Filed: May 10, 1996

_____________ Before FAGG, JOHN R. GIBSON, and WOLLMAN, Circuit Judges.

_____________ PER CURIAM.
Erick Dew ray Russell appeals his conviction of being a felon i n possession of a firearm. See 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) (1994). We affirm.
After a g ang member shot at Russell, Russell broke into Charle s Stead's h ome to take cover. Stead jumped out of a bedroom window an d called the police. S everal police officers responded to Stead's call and found Russell looking out of an upstairs window. The officers ordere d Russell to come downstairs, and then Russell wal ked down the steps and was arrested. After Russ ell was placed in a police car, Russell told Officer Jason King that his l eg hurt. King responded by asking, "What happened?" Russell then explained he may have been shot. Although Russell did have a s uperficial gun shot wound on his lower leg, King testified that h e examined Russell's leg and did not see any blood or a wound. A few minute s

### -2-

later, Russell told two different police officers he had fired shots at th e gang member with his own handgun. When the police searched Stead's home they found a loaded handgun and several expended shells in an upstair s bedroom.
Russel l contends the district court should have suppressed hi s statements about the handgun because they were not made voluntarily. We reject Russell's cont ention because the police officers did not engage in any coercive conduct. United States v. Hatten , 68 F.3d 257, 262 (8th Cir. 1995), cert. denied , 116 S. Ct. 1026 (1996). Indeed, the record is clear that Russell volunteered the information about possessing a handgun. We also reject Russell's contention that his statements were inadmissibl e because he had not be en given Miranda warnings. Officer King's questions were necessary to decide if Russell needed medical attention, and the othe r off icers simply asked Russell for his name and other routine backgroun d info rmation. See Pennsylvania v. Muniz , 496 U.S. 582, 601-02 (1990 ) (pluralityopinion); United States v. McLaughlin , 777 F.2d 388, 391 (8th Cir. 1985). Thus, th e officers were not required to give Russell Miranda warnings because none of their questions were reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response. Rhode Island v. Innis , 446 U.S. 291, 301-0 2 (1980). Finally, Russell contends the district court improperly restricte d his cross-examination of homeowner Stead. We disagree. The district cour t proper lylimited Russell's cross-examination based on concerns o f releva nce, harassment, confusion of the issues, and because many o f Rus sell's questions were cumulative. United States v. Durham , 868 F.2 d 1010, 1013 (8th Cir.), cert. denied , 493 U.S. 954 (1989).
We thus affirm Russell's conviction.

### -3- A true copy.

Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
EX-4.1



 Exhibit 4.1 

Incorporated in the Cayman Islands 

Cango Inc. 
 This is to certify that 

is / are the registered shareholders of: 
  

							
	No. of Shares	  	Type of Share	  	Par Value	 
		  	Class A Ordinary	  	 	USD    0.0001	 
	 Date of Record
	  	Certificate Number	  	 	% Paid	 

 The above shares are subject to the Memorandum and Articles of Association of the Company and transferrable in accordance
therewith. 
  

			
	  
	  	Director
In Re Masoud BAMDAD, petitioner.

No. 17-6304.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 6, 2017.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied, and the petition for writ of mandamus dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Interpore
International, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the Company), hereby certifies, to his knowledge, that:

| | (i)     the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2003, (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.                                                                                                                     

| | Dated: August 8, 2003 | /s/ RICHARD L. HARRISON                                               | 
| | --------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
| |                       |                                                                       | 
| |                       | Richard L. Harrison Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer | 

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Interpore International, Inc. and will be retained by Interpore International, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
# L_2013081EN.01001201.xml

| 21.3.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 81/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.3.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 81/12

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 212/2012

of 7 December 2012

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 (‘the EEA Agreement’), and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EU) No 757/2010 of 24 August 2010 amending Regulation (EC) No 850/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council on persistent organic pollutants as regards Annexes I and III (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EU) No 757/2010 of 24 August 2010 amending Regulation (EC) No 850/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council on persistent organic pollutants as regards Annexes I and III (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.

| (2) | Annex II to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Annex II to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following indent shall be added in point 12w (Regulation (EC) No 850/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council) of Chapter XV of Annex II to the EEA Agreement:

| ‘— | 32010 R 0757: Commission Regulation (EU) No 757/2010 of 24 August 2010 (OJ L 223, 25.8.2010, p. 29).’. |
| --- | --- |

‘—

32010 R 0757: Commission Regulation (EU) No 757/2010 of 24 August 2010 (OJ L 223, 25.8.2010, p. 29).’.

Article 2

The text of Regulation (EU) No 757/2010 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 8 December 2012, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA 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, 7 December 2012.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Atle LEIKVOLL

---

(1)  
  OJ L 223, 25.8.2010, p. 29.

1

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
Emma NATION, petitioner, v. SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, HUMBOLDT COUNTY, et al.

No. 17-6384.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 11, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, First Appellate District denied.
# L_2014248DE.01002901.xml

| 22.8.2014 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 248/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.8.2014

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 248/29

---

Berichtigung des Beschlusses des Gemeinsamen EWR-Ausschusses Nr. 233/2013 vom 13. Dezember 2013 zur Änderung des Anhangs XIII (Verkehr) des EWR-Abkommens

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 154 vom 22. Mai 2014
  )

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 154 vom 22. Mai 2014

Auf Seite 36, Artikel 2:

anstatt:

„Verordnung (EU) Nr. 1079/2011“

muss es heißen:

„Verordnung (EU) Nr. 1079/2012“.

---