alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2009180EN.01003303.xml

| 1.8.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 180/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.8.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 180/33

---

Action brought on 28 May 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Cyprus

(Case C-190/09)

2009/C 180/57

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: I. Khatzigiannis, A. Margelis, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Republic of Cyprus

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The Court is asked to:

| — | declare that, by prohibiting the distribution and sale of biofuels produced from genetically modified plants and by enacting section 6 of Law 66(I) of 2005 without previous notification to the European Commission, the Republic of Cyprus is in breach of its obligations under Article 28 EC and Article 8(1) of Directive 98/34/EC (1); |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that, by prohibiting the distribution and sale of biofuels produced from genetically modified plants and by enacting section 6 of Law 66(I) of 2005 without previous notification to the European Commission, the Republic of Cyprus is in breach of its obligations under Article 28 EC and Article 8(1) of Directive 98/34/EC (1);

1

| — | order the Republic of Cyprus to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Republic of Cyprus to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Cypriot Law No 66(I) of the promotion of the use of biofuels or other renewable fuels for transport transposes into Cypriot law Directive 2003/30/EC on the promotion of the use of biofuels or other reusable fuels for transport. However, section 6 of that Cypriot law contains a clause pursuant to which the distribution and sale of biofuels produced from genetically modified plants is prohibited.

The cultivation of approved varieties of genetically modified (GM) plants in the European Union is lawful on the basis of Directive 2001/18/EC and Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003. Nevertheless, processed fuels produced from genetically modified plants do not fall within the scope of application of that legislation and consequently the compatibility of the clause with Articles 28 to 30 of the EC Treaty falls to be examined.

As regards infringement of Articles 28 to 30 of the EC Treaty, the Commission considers, first, that the Cypriot prohibition is not necessary to protect any kind of public interest and, second, that the national rules which prohibit a product absolutely are contrary to the principle of proportionality.

As regards infringement of Directive 98/34/EC, the Commission considers that section 6 of Law No 66(I) 2005 constitutes a technical regulation within the meaning of Article 1 thereof, and does not fall within the exemption of Article 10(1), first indent. Consequently, the Cypriot authorities were required to inform the Commission of the above provision. Since the Cypriot authorities enacted the provision without prior notification, they were in breach of their obligation under Article 8(1) of Directive 98/34/EC.

---

(1)  OJ L 204 of 21.7.1998, p. 37.

1

---
Dennis MARTIN, petitioner, v. Carl BEAR, Warden.

No. 16-9489.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 4, 2017.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Exhibit 32.2**Certification pursuant to****Securities Exchange Act Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b)**I, Edward J. Puisis, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Dayton SuperiorCorporation (the “Company”), do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period endingJune 29, 2007 (the “Periodic 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)) andThe information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.Dated: August 10, 2007         /s/ Edward J. Puisis   Edward J. Puisis   Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 99.2

     FINANCIAL FEDERAL CORPORATION DECLARES QUARTERLY DIVIDEND
        AND ANNOUNCES INCREASE IN SHARE REPURCHASE PROGRAM


NEW YORK, NY:  March 5, 2007 - Financial Federal Corporation (NYSE:
FIF) today announced its Board of Directors declared a $0.15 per
share quarterly dividend on its common stock.  The dividend is
payable April 10, 2007 to stockholders of record at the close of
business on March 22, 2007.  The dividend rate is the same as the
prior quarter.

The Company also announced its Board of Directors increased the
amount available under its common stock and convertible debt
repurchase program to $20.0 million from $17.4 million.  The
Company may repurchase its common stock and convertible debt at
times and prices the Company considers appropriate based on market
conditions.  The Company currently has 27.5 million shares of
common stock and $175 million of convertible debt outstanding.  The
repurchase program was established in August 1996 and 1.1 million
shares of common stock (as adjusted for stock splits) have been
repurchased for $16.1 million and $8.8 million principal amount of
convertible debt has been repurchased for $7.2 million.

This press release contains certain "forward-looking" statements
within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act
of 1995 subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual
results to differ materially from those contained in the forward-
looking statements.  Please read the Company's Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended July 31, 2006 filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission including Part I, Item 1A. "Risk
Factors" for a description of these risks and uncertainties.  These
risk factors include (i) an economic slowdown (ii) the inability to
collect finance receivables and the sufficiency of the allowance
for credit losses (iii) the inability to obtain capital or maintain
liquidity (iv) rising short-term market interest rates and adverse
changes in the yield curve (v) increased competition (vi) the
inability to retain key employees and (vii) adverse conditions in
the construction and road transportation industries.


Financial Federal Corporation is an independent financial services
company specializing in financing construction, road transportation
and waste services equipment through installment sales and leasing
programs for dealers, manufacturers and end users nationwide.  For
more information, please visit www.financialfederal.com.


CONTACT:  Steven F. Groth
          Chief Financial Officer
          (212) 599-8000
Exhibit 31.3

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, PATRICIA GRAHAM, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this amended quarterly report on Form 10-QSB/A of Global
Aircraft Solutions, Inc.

2. Based on my knowledge, this amended quarterly report does not contain any
untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary
to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such
statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
quarterly report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this amended quarterly report, fairly present in all
material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows
of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly
report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the
Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):

a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls
which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's
auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and

6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
quarterly report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or
in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to
the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.


Date: February 15, 2006



                                           /s/  Patricia Graham
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Patricia Graham,
                                           Principal Financial Officer
Michael FIORITO, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-8545.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
A.R. THANE RITCHIE, et al., petitioners, v. HUIZENGA MANAGERS FUND, LLC.

No. 17-610.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 16, 2018.

Motion of Jeffrey W. Bullock, et al. for leave to file a brief as *amici curiae* granted. Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District denied.
_________________________________________ 

 

_________________________________________ 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

January 10, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 134445 Maura D. Corrigan 

134446 Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

ERIC A. BRAVERMAN, Successor Personal 

Representative of the Estate of Patricia Swann, 

Deceased, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 SC: 134445, 134446 

v COA: 264029, 264091 

Wayne CC: 05-502345-NH 

GARDEN CITY HOSPITAL, a/k/a GARDEN 

CITY HOSPITAL, OSTEOPATHIC, 

 Defendant, 

and 

JOHN R. SCHAIRER, D.O., GARY 

YASHINSKY, M.D., ABHINA V. RAINA, M.D., 

and PROVIDENCE HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL 

CENTERS, INC., 

 Defendants-Appellants. 

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion by Michigan Association for Justice for 

extension of the time for filing their brief amicus curiae is considered and it is 

GRANTED. 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

January 10, 2008 

 Clerk
Dale Lee NORMAN, petitioner, v. FLORIDA.

No. 17-68.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 27, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Florida denied.
<PAGE>

[LOGO OF KPMG]

              Stamford Square
              3001 Summer Street
              Stamford, CT  06905



                        Consent of Independent Auditors
                        -------------------------------




The Board of Directors
Cornerstone Bancorp, Inc:


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Form S-8 (No. 333-73129) and Form S-3 (No. 333-73131) of our report dated
January 25, 2000 relating to the consolidated statements of condition of
Cornerstone Bancorp, Inc. and subsidiary as of December 31, 1999 and 1998, and
the related consolidated statements of income, changes in stockholders' equity,
and cash flows for the years then ended, which report appears in the December
31, 1999 Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Cornerstone Bancorp, Inc.


/s/ KPMG LLP


Stamford, Connecticut
March 15, 2000
FILED

July 10, 1996

Cecil W. Crowson

Appellate Court Clerk

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

MIDDLE SECTION AT NASHVILLE

RAY DEAN BURGESS, )

 )

Plaintiff/Appellant, )

 )

 ) Putnam Circuit

VS. ) No. J-4736

 )

 ) Appeal No.

ANTHONY S. HARLEY, ) 01-A-01-9502-CV-00045

 )

Defendant )

 )

and )

 )

PUTNAM COUNTY HIGHWAY )

DEPARTMENT and PUTNUM )

COUNTY, A BODY POLITIC, )

 )

Defendants/Appellees. )

SEPARATE CONCURRING OPINION

Concurring in the result reached, I respectfully assert my conviction that, when a

Defendant moves for summary judgment the burden of producing evidence to support

evidence of every aspect of his case does not pass to the Plaintiff until Defendant has

produced or pointed out evidence to negative every aspect of the case. The burden shifts to

the Plaintiff only to contradict the evidence offered or pointed out by Defendant.

Of course, evidence that Plaintiff cannot prove one or more aspects of his case does

shift the burden to Plaintiff to show how he can prove such aspects, but proof of such

inability must come from Plaintiff’s admissions or equally substantive evidence. As stated in

Byrd v. Hall, (Tenn.1995), 847 SW2d, 213, “a conclusory assertion that the non-moving

party has no evidence is clearly insufficient.” 

Respectfully submitted,

______________________________________

HENRY F. TODD

PRESIDING JUDGE, MIDDLE SECTION
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

JUDGMENT

Dennis Eugene Allen, Appellant

No. 06

- 13

- 00176

- CR v.
The State of Texas, Appellee Appeal from the 6th District Court of Red River County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. CR01916 ). Memorandum Opinion delivered b y Justice Carter, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice Moseley participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court

below

. We affirm the judgment of the trial court

. We further order that the appellant, Dennis Eugene Allen, pay all costs of this appeal.

RENDERED JUNE 13, 2014 BY ORDER OF THE COURT JOSH R. MORRISS, III CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
Lisa WHITNUM-BAKER, petitioner, v. James J. BAKER.

No. 16-8757.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 10, 2017.

Petition for rehearing denied.
```
 
 
CRUDE OIL, LIGHT SWEET - ICE FUTURES EUROPE                          Code-067411
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 01/19/10                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 1,000 BARRELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:      506,178
COMMITMENTS
  45,787   31,003   84,103  358,721  371,583  488,611  486,689   17,567   19,489

CHANGES FROM 01/12/10 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:    -17,009)
  -1,623    1,869   -3,352  -15,186  -18,759  -20,161  -20,242    3,152    3,233

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
     9.0      6.1     16.6     70.9     73.4     96.5     96.1      3.5      3.9

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      111)
      25       17       34       58       66       98      104
```

----

Updated January 22, 2010
Henry Korvett BAMS, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-6637.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 4, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Abuwi M. WAHEED, petitioner, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK, et al.

No. 17-5547.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 8, 2018.

Petition for rehearing denied.
ALASKA, petitioner, v. UNITED COOK INLET DRIFT ASSOCIATION, et al.

No. 16-1044.

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.
LABOR AND INDUSTRY REVIEW COMMISSION OF WISCONSIN, petitioner, v. Tracey COLEMAN.

No. 17-579.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 16, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
#### City of Hernando, a Municipal Corporation, and J. M. Colley, its Marshal, Appellants, v. John D. Robertson, J. L. Young and C. T. Young, *Appellees.*

Division B.

Opinion filed July 27, 1927.

Petition for rehearing denied January 15, 1929.

*E. O. May,*for Appellants;

*H. M. Hampton,*for Appellees.

Per Curiam.

In this case bill was filed to enjoin the collection of municipal tax and praying for a decree that the act of the Legislature authorizing the assessment of the tax complained of be held unconstitutional and void. Demurrer was filed on the ground that the bill was bad in substance.

Motion was made to dismiss upon the ground that the bill contained no equity.'

On hearing the demurrer was overruled. The motion to dismiss was denied and a temporary restraining order was granted wherein and whereby the collection of the tax complained of was restrained. The order overruling the demurrer and the temporary restraining order should be reversed on authority of the opinion in the case of State ex rel. Johnson v. Johns, which was filed in this Court July 6, 1926, and is reported in 109 So. R. 228, and it is so ordered.

Reversed.

*1084Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell, and Buford, J. J., concur.

Ellis, C. J., and Strum and Brown, J. J., concur in the opinion.

Brown, J.

I concur in the reversal of this case because I am of the opinion that the remedy of the appellees was by *quo warranto*proceedings, rather than by injunction. See State ex rel. Johnson, Atty. Gen., v. City of Sarasota, 109 So. R. 473; particularly that portion of the opinion on pages 478 and 479.

Strum, J., concurs.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4244 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 4244

   To provide for a pathway for chemically synthesized insulin to be 
approved under an abbreviated new drug application submitted under the 
     Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 9, 2019

  Mr. Kelly of Pennsylvania introduced the following bill; which was 
            referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To provide for a pathway for chemically synthesized insulin to be 
approved under an abbreviated new drug application submitted under the 
     Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, 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 ``Market Access for Generic Insulin 
Competition'' or the ``MAGIC Act''.

SEC. 2. PROVIDING FOR A PATHWAY FOR APPROVAL OF CHEMICALLY SYNTHESIZED 
              INSULIN UNDER AN ABBREVIATED NEW DRUG APPLICATION.

    (a) In General.--Section 7002(e)(2) of the Patient Protection and 
Affordable Care Act (42 U.S.C. 262 note) is amended--
            (1) in subparagraph (B), by redesignating clauses (i) and 
        (ii) as subclauses (I) and (II), respectively, and moving the 
        margins of such subclauses (as so redesignated) two ems to the 
        right;
            (2) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``such biological 
        product'' and inserting ``(i) such biological product'';
            (3) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as clause (ii) and 
        moving the margin of such clause (as so redesignated) two ems 
        to the right;
            (4) in clause (ii) (as so redesignated), by striking the 
        period at the end and inserting ``; or''; and
            (5) by adding at the end the following:
                    ``(B) notwithstanding paragraphs (3) and (4), the 
                application is submitted under subsection (j) of such 
                section for chemically synthesized insulin or any 
                analogue of chemically synthesized insulin for which 
                the listed drug is a biological product that is, 
                pursuant to paragraph (4), deemed to be licensed under 
                section 351 of the Public Health Service Act.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply with respect to applications submitted on or after January 1, 
2020.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>   1
                                                                  EXHIBIT 3.1(i)


                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                                       OF
               AMENDED AND RESTATED CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION
                                       OF
                          ARONEX PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.


         Aronex Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the "Corporation"), organized and
existing under and by virtue of the General Corporation Law of the State of
Delaware (the "DGCL") does hereby certify:

         FIRST: That the Board of Directors of the Corporation duly adopted
resolutions setting forth the following amendment to the Amended and Restated
Certificate of Incorporation of the Corporation (the "Amendment"), declaring the
Amendment to be advisable and calling for the submission of the proposed
Amendment to the stockholders of the Corporation for consideration thereof. The
resolution setting forth the proposed Amendment is as follows:

         ARTICLE IV of the Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of
Aronex Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a Delaware corporation, is hereby amended by
deleting Section A, and inserting the following as Section A:

         A. Classes of Stock

            The number of shares of all classes of capital stock that the
Corporation shall be authorized to issue is 45,000,000 shares, divided into the
following: (i) 5,000,000 shares of preferred stock, par value $.001 per share
("Preferred Stock"), and (ii) 40,000,000 shares of common stock, par value $.001
per share ("Common Stock").

         SECOND: That thereafter pursuant to a resolution of the Board of
Directors, a meeting of the stockholders of the Corporation was duly called and
held, upon notice in accordance with Section 222 of the DGCL at which meeting
the necessary number of shares as required by statute were voted in favor of the
Amendment.

         THIRD: That the Amendment was duly adopted in accordance with the
provisions of Section 242 of the DGCL.

         FOURTH: That the Amendment shall be effective on the date this
Certificate of Amendment is filed and accepted by the Secretary of State of the
State of Delaware.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Corporation has caused this certificate to be
signed by Geoffrey F. Cox, its Chief Executive Officer, and attested by Terance
A. Murnane, its Secretary, this 24th day of May, 1999.


                                         ARONEX PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.



                                         By: /s/ GEOFFREY F. COX, PH.D.
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Geoffrey F. Cox, Ph.D.
                                             Chief Executive Officer

ATTEST: /s/ TERANCE A. MURNANE
       ------------------------------
        Terance A. Murnane
        Secretary