alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Official Journal L 26/2017

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 26 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6031 January 2017 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 26

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6031 January 2017

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | GUIDELINES |
| | * | Guideline (EU) 2017/148 of the European Central Bank of 16 December 2016 amending Guideline ECB/2014/15 on monetary and financial statistics (ECB/2016/45) | 1 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

GUIDELINES

*

Guideline (EU) 2017/148 of the European Central Bank of 16 December 2016 amending Guideline ECB/2014/15 on monetary and financial statistics (ECB/2016/45)

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
II

Calendar No. 846

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 1162

IN THE SENATE OF UNITED STATES

MAY 5, 1999

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and

Public Works

SEPTEMBER 28 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 22), 2000

Reported by Mr. SMITH of New Hampshire, without amendment

AN ACT

To designate the bridge on United States Route 231 that

crosses the Ohio River between Maceo, Kentucky, and

Rockport, Indiana, as the ‘‘William H. Natcher Bridge’’.

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

4 The bridge on United States Route 231 that crosses

5 the Ohio River between Maceo, Kentucky, and Rockport,

6 Indiana, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘William

7 H. Natcher Bridge’’.
2

•HR 1162 RS

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

2 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the bridge

4 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference

5 to the ‘‘William H. Natcher Bridge’’.

Calendar No. 846

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 1162

AN ACT

To designate the bridge on United States Route

231 that crosses the Ohio River between Maceo,Kentucky, and Rockport, Indiana, as the ‘‘William H. Natcher Bridge’’.

SEPTEMBER 28 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 22), 2000

Reported without amendment
March 26, 2015



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

THE WILL I ARD LAW FIRM, L.P. , Appellant

NO. 14

- 14

- 00621

- CV V.

JOHN SEWELL , Appellee

________________________________ This cause, an appeal from the judgment in favor o f appellee, John Sewell, signed July 1, 2014, was heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find the trial court erred in awarding judgment favoring John Sewell

. We therefore order the judgment of the court below REVERSED and RENDER judgment that Sewell take nothing on his claims against The Will i ard Law Firm, L.P. We further order that all costs incurred by reason of this appeal be paid by

a ppellee, John Sewell.

We order this decision certified below for observance.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 22
- 0228 IN THE MATTER OF: J.G.F., A Youth Under the Age of 18. **ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including December 14, 2022, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

November 4 2022

11/04/2022

Case Number: DA 22-0228
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-20396

Summary Calendar

__________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

DAVID J. TOWNSEND,

Defendant-Appellant.

______________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Southern District of Texas

USDC No. CR-H-92-120-ALL

______________________________________________

February 7, 1996

Before KING, SMITH and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Court-appointed counsel for David J. Townsend has filed a

brief as required by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and

we have independently reviewed counsel's brief and the record, and

found no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, counsel is excused from

further responsibilities herein and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED.
Lamont L. BUSKEY, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-6371.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 27, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1179 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1179

        To restore the second amendment rights of all Americans.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 18, 1999

   Mr. Paul introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
        To restore the second amendment rights of all Americans.

    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 ``Second Amendment Protection Act of 
1999''.

SEC. 2. REPEAL OF FEDERAL HARASSMENT PERIOD.

    Public Law 103-159 is hereby replaced, and any provisions of law 
amended or repealed by such Act are restored or revived as if such Act 
had not been enacted.

SEC. 3. REPEAL OF UNCONSTITUTIONAL GUN BAN.

    Title XI of Public Law 103-322 is hereby repealed, and any 
provisions of law amended or repealed by such title are restored or 
revived as if such title had not been enacted.

SEC. 4. REPEAL OF UNCONSTITUTIONAL DISTINCTION.

    (a) Section 201 of title 11 of Public Law 90-618 is amended by 
striking ``which the Secretary finds is generally recognized as 
particularly suitable for sporting purposes,'' and ``which the owner 
intends to use solely for sporting purposes.''
    (b) Public Law 90-351, as amended, is amended as follows:
            (1) In section 902, strike ``which the Secretary finds is 
        generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting 
        purposes,'' ``which the owner intends to use solely for 
        sporting, recreational, or cultural purposes,'' ``a projectile 
        which the Secretary finds is primarily intended to be used for 
        sporting purposes,'' ``devoted to the collection, competitive 
        use, or other sporting use of firearms in the community,'' 
        ``determined by the Secretary of the Treasury to be 
        particularly suitable for sporting purposes and,'' ``(A) 
        determined by the Secretary to be generally recognized as 
        particularly suitable for sporting purposes, or determined by 
        the Department of Defense to be a type of firearm normally 
        classified as a war souvenir, and (B),'' ``and is generally 
        recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to 
        sporting purposes,'' and ``provided that such handguns are 
        generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily 
        adaptable to sporting purposes,''.
            (2) Strike ``lawful sporting purposes'' and insert in lieu 
        thereof ``lawful purposes''.

SEC. 5. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The provisions of this Act shall take effect immediately upon 
enactment.
                                 <all>
```
---

Exhibit 99.8

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. §1350, AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the annual report of Gammon Gold Inc. (the
Company) on Form 40-F for the period ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Rene
Marion, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

|May 13, 2010 | /s/ Rene
      Marion              
|------------ | -----------------------------------
|             | Rene Marion                        
|             | President & Chief Executive Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906 has been provided to Gammon Gold Inc. and will be retained by Gammon Gold
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.

---

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. §1350, AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the annual report of Gammon Gold Inc. (the
Company) on Form 40-F for the period ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Scott
Perry, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

|May 13, 2010 | /s/ Scott
      Perry  
|------------ | -----------------------
|             | Scott Perry            
|             | Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906 has been provided to Gammon Gold Inc. and will be retained by Gammon Gold
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.

---
Rubin Dexter BAXTER, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-6991.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 25, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Michael VILLECO, petitioner, v. VAIL RESORTS, INC., dba Grand Teton Lodge, et al.

No. 17-7037.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 20, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.
```
 
 
WHEAT - KANSAS CITY BOARD OF TRADE                                   Code-001612
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 08/24/10                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:      206,225
COMMITMENTS
  73,814    6,194   18,663   85,695  147,266  178,172  172,123   28,053   34,102

CHANGES FROM 08/17/10 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:     -4,240)
   3,431   -1,349   -1,253   -4,458      943   -2,280   -1,659   -1,960   -2,581

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    35.8      3.0      9.0     41.6     71.4     86.4     83.5     13.6     16.5

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      206)
      79       16       45       67       90      156      144
```

----

Updated August 27, 2010
Seifullah ABDUL-SALAAM, petitioner, v. PENNSYLVANIA.

No. 17-9022.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Eastern District denied.
# Official Journal C 251/2023

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 251 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6617 July 2023 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 251

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6617 July 2023

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2023/C 251/01 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.11115 – ADNOC / ÖBAG /OMV) (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2023/C 251/01

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.11115 – ADNOC / ÖBAG /OMV) (
  1
  )

1

1

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2023/C 251/02 | Euro exchange rates – 14 July 2023 | 2 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2023/C 251/02

Euro exchange rates – 14 July 2023

2

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY |
| | European Commission |
| 2023/C 251/03 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.11176 – LONE STAR / CENTROMOTION) – Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 3 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

2023/C 251/03

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.11176 – LONE STAR / CENTROMOTION) – Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

3

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
Miguel ROBINSON, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-7095.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 19, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
In Re Jean COULTER, petitioner.

No. 17-1581.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of prohibition denied.
# Official Journal L 147I/2022

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 147I |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6530 May 2022 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 147I

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6530 May 2022

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/836 of 30 May 2022 implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1686 imposing additional restrictive measures directed against ISIL (Da'esh) and Al-Qaeda and natural and legal persons, entities or bodies associated with them | 1 |
| | | DECISIONS |
| | * | Council Decision (CFSP) 2022/837 of 30 May 2022 amending Decision (CFSP) 2016/1693 concerning restrictive measures against ISIL (Da'esh) and Al-Qaeda and persons, groups, undertakings and entities associated with them | 3 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/836 of 30 May 2022 implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1686 imposing additional restrictive measures directed against ISIL (Da'esh) and Al-Qaeda and natural and legal persons, entities or bodies associated with them

1

DECISIONS

*

Council Decision (CFSP) 2022/837 of 30 May 2022 amending Decision (CFSP) 2016/1693 concerning restrictive measures against ISIL (Da'esh) and Al-Qaeda and persons, groups, undertakings and entities associated with them

3

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
NO. 07-00-0291-CR

	IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

	FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	AT AMARILLO

	PANEL D

	DECEMBER 5, 2000

	______________________________

	U. G. BERRY,

			Appellant

	v.

	THE STATE OF TEXAS, 

			Appellee

	_________________________________

	FROM THE 181ST DISTRICT COURT OF RANDALL COUNTY;

	NO. 10,407-B; HON. MARVIN MARSHALL, PRESIDING

	_______________________________

Before BOYD, C.J., QUINN and REAVIS, JJ.

	U. G. Berry (appellant) appeals his felony conviction of indecency with a child.  Appellant pled guilty to the offense charged in the indictment.  The trial court initially deferred appellant’s adjudication of guilt and placed him on community supervision.  The State subsequently moved to adjudicate him guilty.  The court granted the State’s motion, adjudicated appellant guilty, and again placed him on community supervision.  Thereafter, the State moved to revoke appellant’s community supervision, which motion the trial court granted after conducting a contested hearing.   The trial court sentenced appellant to ten years imprisonment.  Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal. 

	Appellant’s appointed counsel filed an Anders1 brief, representing to us that he believed the appeal to be meritless.  In addition, counsel filed a motion to withdraw based upon the foregoing reasoning.   Appellant was informed by this Court, via letter dated October 31, 2000, of his right to review the record and file a pro se brief by November 29, 2000.   To date, appellant has failed to file a response.2

	In his Anders brief, appellant’s counsel explained why he concluded that no arguable basis for appeal existed.  He considered such things as the voluntariness of appellant’s plea, the validity of the indictment and sentence, the existence of evidence supporting the finding of guilt, the provision of statutory admonishments, and the performance of counsel.  So too did he determine that no error occurred during the hearing to revoke appellant’s community supervision.

	After conducting an independent review of the record to assess the accuracy of counsel’s representation, see Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (requiring same), we too find no arguable error.  Accordingly, appellate counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted and the judgment is affirmed. 

								Per Curiam

 Do not publish.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7497

STEPHEN RICHARD BROWN,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director of the Virginia Department of 

Corrections,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District 

Judge. (2:14-cv-00007-RAJ-TEM)

Submitted: February 25, 2015 Decided: March 2, 2015

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Stephen Richard Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Matthew P. Dullaghan, 

Senior Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Stephen Richard Brown seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 

denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The 

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues 

a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A)

(2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a 

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies 

relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by 

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the 

district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is 

debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 

(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). 

When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the 

prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural 

ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable 

claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. 

at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that 

Brown has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny 

a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma 

pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 
3

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED