alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2017268EN.01000401.xml

| 12.8.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 268/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.8.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 268/4

---

Notice of the impending expiry of certain anti-dumping measures

(2017/C 268/04)

1.   As provided for in Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Union (1), the Commission gives notice that, unless a review is initiated in accordance with the following procedure, the anti-dumping measures mentioned below will expire on the date mentioned in the table below.

1

2.   Procedure

Procedure

Union producers may lodge a written request for a review. This request must contain sufficient evidence that the expiry of the measures would be likely to result in a continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury. Should the Commission decide to review the measures concerned, importers, exporters, representatives of the exporting country and Union producers will then be provided with the opportunity to amplify, rebut or comment on the matters set out in the review request.

3.   Time limit

Time limit

Union producers may submit a written request for a review on the above basis, to reach the European Commission, Directorate-General for Trade (Unit H-1), CHAR 4/39, 1049 Brussels, Belgium (2) at any time from the date of the publication of the present notice but no later than three months before the date mentioned in the table below.

2

4.   This notice is published in accordance with Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036.

| Product | Country(ies) of origin or exportation | Measures | Reference | Date of expiry (3) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Threaded tube or pipe cast fittings, of malleable cast iron | The People’s Republic of China
  Thailand | Anti-dumping duty | Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 430/2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of threaded tube or pipe cast fittings, of malleable cast iron, originating in the People’s Republic of China and Thailand and terminating the proceeding with regard to Indonesia (OJ L 129, 14.5.2013, p. 1). | 15.5.2018 |

Product

Country(ies) of origin or exportation

Measures

Reference

Date of expiry (3)

3

Threaded tube or pipe cast fittings, of malleable cast iron

The People’s Republic of China

Thailand

Anti-dumping duty

Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 430/2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of threaded tube or pipe cast fittings, of malleable cast iron, originating in the People’s Republic of China and Thailand and terminating the proceeding with regard to Indonesia (OJ L 129, 14.5.2013, p. 1).

15.5.2018

---

(1)  OJ L 176, 30.6.2016, p. 21.

1

(2)  TRADE-Defence-Complaints@ec.europa.eu

2

(3)  The measure expires at midnight of the day mentioned in this column.

3

---
The Attorney General of Texas 

June 16, 1982 

MARK WHITE 

Attorney General 

Supreme Court Building 

P. 0. BOX 12546 

Austin. TX. 76711. 2548 

512/475-2501 

Telex 91W674.1367 

Telecopier 51214750266 

1607 Main St.. Suite 1400 

Dall*s. TX. 75M14709 

2141742.6944 

4624 Alberta Ave.. Suite 160 

El Paso. TX. 79905-2793 

9151533-3404 

1220 Dallas Ave., Suite 202 

liousto”. TX. 770026966 

713/6- 

806 Broadway. Suite 312 

Lubbock. TX. 79401379 

80617473236 

4309 N. Tenth. Swte 6 

McAllen, TX. 76501.,665 

51215824547 

200 Main Plan. suite 400 

San Antonio. TX. 702052797 

512n25d191 

An Equal Opportwmtyl 

Affirmative Action Employer 

Honorable Reynaldo S. Cantu. Jr. 

Criminal District Attorney 

Cameron County 

Hall of Justice 

974 E. Harrison Street 

Brownsville, Texas 78520 

opinion No. NW-480 

Re: Whether a municipal 

regulation is a criminal 

Dear Mr. Cant": 

You have asked whether a municipal regulation governing 

in metered spaces is a criminal law in Texas. 

parking 

law 

parking 

Your office informs us that citations for illegalparking are 

issued pursuant to city regulations. The:citstdons are attached by 

city personnel to illegally parked cars and charge their owners with 

parking in violation of city regulations. The owner arust appear in 

municipal court to answer to the charge. Brownsville. Tex., Ordinance 

Code 032-317. You inform us that these parking violations are 

resolved, as are all other Class C misdemeanors, in Municipal Court 

through payment of a fine -- not rendition of a civil judgment. 

Under the bifurcated Texas appellate court system, convictions 

for violation of parking regulations are appealed to the Texas Court 

of Criminal Appeals. Snell v. State, 518 S.W.2d 382 (Tex. Grim. App. 

- 1975); Ashworth V. State, 357 S.W.2d 573 (Tex. Crim. App. - 1962)'. 

The issuance of a parking citation sets lo motion criminal 

proceedings against an individual who has parked in violation of the 

local law. In our opinion, a municipal parking regulation enacted 

under the city's police power authority constitutes a criminal law. 

See V.T.C.S. art. 1175. 5516, 18, 34; art. 6701d. 927(a)(l). See 

Ferally Ex Parte Harrison. 122 S.W.2d 314 (Tex. 1939); Cityof 

Austin v. Daniels, 322 S.W.2d 384 (Tex. Civ. App. - Austin 1959). 

aff'd. 335 S.W.Zd 753; City of Abilene v. Woodlock. 282 S.W.2d 736 

(Tex. Civ. App. - Eastland 1955) cert. denied, 351 U.S. 925 (1956); 

Harper v. City of Wichita Falls, 105 S.W.2d 743 (Tex. Civ. App. - Fort 

Worth 1937, writ ref'd). 

?. 1696 
Honorable Reynaldo S. Cantu, Jr. - Page 2 (MW-450) 

SUMMARY 

A municipal parking regulation is a criminal 

law. 

Ver truly y rs. * A& 

hARK WH‘ITE 

Attorney General of Texas 

JOEN W. FAINTER, JR. 

First Assistant Attorney General 

RIC~ARII E. GRAY III 

Executive Assistant Attorney General 

- 

Prepared by Susan L. Garrison 

Assistant Attorttey General 

APPROVEU: 

OPINION COhhITTEE 

Susan ~L.~ Garrison, Chairman 

Jon Bible 

Rick Gilpin 

Patricia Einojosa 

Reed Lo&hoof 

Jim Moellinger 

Bruce Youngblood 

P. 1697
**Exhibit 23.1**

**Consent of IndependentRegistered Public Accounting Firm**

Weconsent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-3/A(Nos. 333-121046 and 333-38482), Form S-3 (Nos.333-67138,333-62272) and Form S-8 (Nos. 333-134122, 333-50100, 333-41986,333-83639, 333-58023, 333-58021, 333-28957, 333-28955,333-05621, 33-94792, 33-94770, 33-79396, 33-79398)of BioSphere Medical, Inc. of our report dated March 20, 2007, withrespect to the consolidated financial statements of BioSphere Medical, Inc.included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,2006.
|                       | /s/ Ernst & Young LLP |   |   |
|-----------------------|-----------------------------------------------|--------|--------|
| Boston, Massachusetts |                                          |
| March 20,  2007  |                                          |

 

----
EXHIBIT 23.2


                                     CONSENT


We have issued our report dated  February 11,  1997,  accompanying  the 1996 and
1995 financial statements of Monroc, Inc., incorporated by reference or included
in the Annual Report of Monroc,  Inc., on Form 10-K for the year ended  December
31, 1997. We hereby consent to the  incorporation by reference of said report in
the  Registration  Statement of Monroc,  Inc.,  on Form S-8 (File No.  333-37549
filed June 15, 1994 and File No. 333- 37543 filed October 9, 1997).



                                    /s/  Grant Thornton LLP
                                         GRANT THORNTON LLP


Salt Lake City, Utah
April 14, 1998
Form of letter agreement entered into with certain officers



 Exhibit 10.55 
 [Corsair letterhead] 

[            ], 2012 
 Dear Mr. [            ], 

In connection with our IPO, you have executed a Lock-Up Letter Agreement (the “Agreement”) which, among other things, freezes your ability to
exercise vested stock options until the expiration thereof. In the event you are involuntarily terminated without cause prior to the expiration of the lock up period as described in that Agreement, you could be in a situation where the right to
exercise your vested stock options would expire prior to the expiration of the lock-up period. 
 In order to address this situation, the Board
of the Company has determined that in the event you are involuntarily terminated without cause during the lock-up period as described in the Agreement, the exercise period for vested options shall be extended through the date which is thirty
(30) days after the expiration of the lock-up period. 
 Please signify your agreement with this understanding in the space provided below
and return one fully executed agreement to the undersigned. 
 Sincerely, 
 CORSAIR COMPONENTS, INC. 
 [By:]
                                         
                
 [Its:]
                                         
                
  

			
	AGREED:	 	
		
	 	 	
	 [Andrew J. Paul/Nicholas B.
 Hawkins/Robert R. Weis/José R.
 Flahaux/Frederick M. Gonzalez/John K.

Allen]
Sean Wayne PIERCE, Petitioner, v. CALIFORNIA.

No. 19-7832.

Supreme Court of the United States.

May 4, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of California denied.
### In The C ou rt o f A p p ea ls Si x t h Appe l l at e Di st r i c t o f Te x as a t Te x ar ka na

______________________________ No . 0 6- 09 -0 00 03 -C R

______________________________ KAREN ROB ERTS, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appea l from the 76th J udicial District Court

Titus Count y , Texas Trial Court No. CR 14443

B e f o r e M o r r i s s , C

. J. , C a

rt e r an d M o s e l e y , JJ. Memorandum Opinion by J ustice Moseley2 MEMORANDUM OPI

NI ON Kar en Roberts appea ls f

rom her c onviction of indece ncy with a child. SeeT EX . P EN A L C ODE ANN . § 21.11(a) (1) ( Ver non 2003). She was s en t en ced to ten y ear s' confine ment and a f ine of $1 0, 00 0. 00 . Ro be rt s is no t in dig e nt. Roberts filed her

notice of a

ppeal Nove mber 7, 2008. T h e cl erk's r ecor d was filed Fe bruar y 13, 2009, and the r eporte r's re co rd was due Dec ember 19, 2008, and has not be en filed. Rob e rt s' s r e ta ine d atto rn e y fi le d a mot ion to withd ra w, statin g that he ha d b e e n e nti re ly un a ble to convince Roberts to cooper ate, c ommunicate, st ay in contac t with him, or si g n the ce rtification of rig ht to appeal. Counsel further detailed in his motion the difficulties he enc ountere d in attempting to contact Rober

ts, or to obtain direc tion from her conce rning the continuation or t ermination of he r appea l. Counsel mailed a co p y of that motion to Roberts, and also met all the re quirements of Rule 6.5 of the Te x as Rules of Appe llate Proce dure. SeeT EX . R. A PP . P. 6.5. On Febr uary 24, 2009, this Court g rante d counsel' s motion to withdraw. On that same date, this Court also mailed a letter to the last known addre ss Robe rts had provided to c ounsel providing Roberts with ten day s in which to retain diff

ere nt counsel to pursue the appea l or to take other acti o n s h o wi n g her c ontinuing int e nti on to e ff e c tiv e ly purs ue thi s app e a l, an d inf or me d Robe rt s that if she ha d n ot c on ta c te d th is Court wi thi n te n d ay s o f t

he date of our l e tte r w ithsu c h in fo rm a tio n, the a pp e a l w ou ld b e su

bje c t to dismiss al for w ant of prose cution.3

Rob e rt s has no t c on ta c te d th is C ourt . T he re po rt e r' s r e c or d is no w o ve r t hr e e months pa st due, and she has not contacte d the re porter to make arr ang ements to pay for the r ecor d. She has not filed a br ief ba sed on the c lerk' s rec ord alone

. She has not r etained differ ent counse l to repre sent her

on a pp e a l. Acc ording ly , we dismiss t h i s appeal for wa nt of prosec ution. Se e Sta v ino ha v . S tate , 82 S.W. 3d 69 0, 69 1 ( Te x. Ap p. —Wa co 20 02 , no p e t.) ; Bu sh v . S tate , 8 0 S. W. 3 d

1 9 9 , 2 0 0 ( T e x. Ap p. —Wa c o 2 00 2, no pe t.) ; se e als o M c Da nie l v . S

tate , 7 5 S. W. 3 d 6 0 5 , 6 05–06 ( T e x. Ap p. —T e xar

ka na 20 02 , n o p e t.) ; Ro dr igu e z v . S tate , 97 0 S.W. 2d 13 3, 13 5 ( Te x. Ap p. —A mari llo 1998, pet. re f' d).

Ba iley C. Moseley J ustice Date Submitted: April 9, 2009 Date D ecide d: April 10, 2009 Do No t Pu

bli sh
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 19-0422

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

JACK ELDON JARVEY,

Defendant and Appellant.

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 January 27, 2021, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

December 8 2020

12/08/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0422
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

MARSHALL DIVISION 

XR COMMUNICATIONS, LLC, dba 

VIVATO TECHNOLOGIES, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS, INC., AND 

CELLCO PARTNERSHIP D/B/A VERIZON 

WIRELESS 

 Defendants. 

 Case No. 2:23-cv-00470-JRG-RSP 

 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 

VERIZON’S CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 

Pursuant to Rule 7.1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendants Verizon 

Communications Inc. and Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless submit this notice of party 

with financial interest. 

Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless is indirectly wholly-owned by Verizon 

Communications Inc. 

Verizon Communications Inc. is a publicly held company. No publicly held corporation 

owns 10% or more of the stock of Verizon Communications Inc. 

Dated: December 11, 2023 Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ Matthew S. Yungwirth 

Matthew Sean Yungwirth 

msyungwirth@duanemorris.com

DUANE MORRIS LLP 

1075 Peachtree Street, NE 

Suite 1700 

Atlanta, GA 30309-3929 

Telephone: 404.253.6935 

Facsimile: 404.253.6901 

Case 2:23-cv-00470-JRG-RSP Document 17 Filed 12/11/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 712
 2 

Deron R. Dacus (TBN 00790553) 

ddacus@dacusfirm.com 

THE DACUS FIRM, P.C. 

821 ESE Loop 323 

Suite 430 

Tyler, Texas 75701 

Telephone: 903.705.1117 

Facsimile: 903.581.2543 

William Andrew Liddell 

waliddell@duanemorris.com 

DUANE MORRIS LLP

900 S. Capital of Texas Hwy 

Suite 300 

Austin, TX 78746 

Telephone: 512.277.2272 

Facsimile: 512.227.2301 

Counsel for Defendants Verizon 

Communications, Inc., Cellco Partnership 

dba Verizon Wireless

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

The undersigned certifies that all counsel of record who are deemed to have consented to 

electronic service are being served with a copy of this document via the Court’s CM/ECF system 

per Local Rule CV-5(a)(3) on December 11, 2023. 

/s/ Matthew S. Yungwirth 

Matthew S. Yungwirth 

Case 2:23-cv-00470-JRG-RSP Document 17 Filed 12/11/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 713
**Exhibit 32**
**      CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT**
     The  undersigned,  Norman W. Gayle,  III,  President and Chief Executive  Officer of Vesta Insurance Group,  Inc. (the "Company"),  andHopson B.  Nance,  Chief  Financial  Officer of the  Company,  certify,  pursuant to  Section 906  of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:
     (1)           the Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly  period ended September 30, 2003 (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)           the information  contained in the Report fairly presents,  in all material  respects,  the financial  condition and results of         operations of the Company.
Dated: November 12, 2003                                                                                                                                 */s/   Norman W. Gayle, III*                                                                                                                                    Norman W. Gayle, III                                                                                                                        *President and Chief Executive Officer*
# C_2019390EN.01015901.xml

| 18.11.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 390/159 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.11.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 390/159

---

P8_TA(2018)0093

EU-Mauritius Fisheries Partnership Agreement: fishing opportunities and financial contribution ***

European Parliament legislative resolution of 17 April 2018 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of a Protocol setting out the fishing opportunities and the financial contribution provided for by the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Mauritius (12476/2017– C8-0445/2017 – 2017/0223(NLE))

(Consent)

(2019/C 390/24)

The European Parliament,

| — | having regard to the draft Council decision (12476/2017) |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the draft Council decision (12476/2017)

| — | having regard to the Protocol setting out the fishing opportunities and the financial contribution provided for by the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Mauritius (12479/2017); |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the Protocol setting out the fishing opportunities and the financial contribution provided for by the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Mauritius (12479/2017);

| — | having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 43 and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a) and Article 218(7) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C8-0445/2017), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 43 and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a) and Article 218(7) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C8-0445/2017),

| — | having regard to Rule 99(1) and (4) and Rule 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Rule 99(1) and (4) and Rule 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

| — | having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Fisheries and the opinion of the Committee on Budgets (A8-0053/2018), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Fisheries and the opinion of the Committee on Budgets (A8-0053/2018),

| 1. | Gives its consent to conclusion of the Protocol; |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Republic of Mauritius. |
| --- | --- |

2.

---
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

PIERO A. BUGONI,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

GOOGLE, INC.; MICROSOFT

CORPORATION; YAHOO! INC.,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 21

- 15360

D.C. No. 4:20

- cv

- 02883

- HSG

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr., District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 15, 2022 * *

Before: FERNANDEZ, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.

Piero A. Bugoni appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing

his action alleging violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act and defamation

against search engine operators. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.

We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Watison v. Carter

,

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

FEB 24 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 21

- 15360

668 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 2012). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Bugoni’s action because defendants

have immunity for publishing third party conte nt under the Communications

Decency Act. See 47 U.S.C. § 230(c); Zango, Inc. v. Kaspersky Lab, Inc. , 568

F.3d 1169, 1174 (9th Cir. 2009) (affirming dismissal of action for injunctive relief

where the defendant “is a provider of an ‘interactive computer se rvice’ as defined

in the Communications Decency Act of 1996”).

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 32.2




CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,




SECTION 1350




In connection with the Annual Report of Mendocino Brewing Company, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Mahadevan Narayanan, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




(1)
The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) 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 results of operations of the Company.




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.




Date:  March 31, 2011




/s/ Mahadevan NarayananMahadevan Narayanan,Chief Financial Officer