alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2020351EN.01000301.xml

| 21.10.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 351/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.10.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 351/3

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.9483 — Engie/Powerlines)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2020/C 351/03)

On 20 September 2019, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32019M9483. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32019M9483. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-QSB AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                                         <C>
PERIOD-TYPE>                                3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           AUG-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                              SEP-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                NOV-30-1998
<CASH>                                      12
<SECURITIES>                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                               0
<ALLOWANCES>                                0
<INVENTORY>                                0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           12
<PP&E>                                     0
<DEPRECIATION>                             0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             12
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      324
<BONDS>                                     0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      0
<PREFERRED>                                0
<COMMON>                                   145
<OTHER-SE>                                 (312)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               12
<SALES>                                    0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           0
<CGS>                                      0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           8
<LOSS-PROVISION>                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (8)
<INCOME-TAX>                               0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (8)
<DISCONTINUED>                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                            0
<CHANGES>                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                              (8)
<EPS-BASIC>                            (.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                            (.00)


23



1


15



</TABLE>
# Official Journal L 300/2019

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 300 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6221 November 2019 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 300

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6221 November 2019

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | DECISIONS |
| | * | Council Decision (EU) 2019/1932 of 18 November 2019 on the position to be taken, on behalf of the European Union, within the ACP-EU Committee of Ambassadors as regards the adoption of a decision to adopt transitional measures pursuant to Article 95(4) of the ACP-EU Partnership Agreement | 1 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

DECISIONS

*

Council Decision (EU) 2019/1932 of 18 November 2019 on the position to be taken, on behalf of the European Union, within the ACP-EU Committee of Ambassadors as regards the adoption of a decision to adopt transitional measures pursuant to Article 95(4) of the ACP-EU Partnership Agreement

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.
ST. JAMES SCHOOL, Petitioner v. Darryl BIEL, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Kristen Biel

No. 19-348

Supreme Court of the United States.

December 18, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granted. The case is consolidated, and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument.
CHESTNUT HILL SOUND INC., Petitioner v. APPLE INC., et al.

No. 19-591

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 13, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied.
<PAGE>

                                                                  Exhibit 4.4(a)

           LIST OF PURCHASERS WHO ENTERED INTO STOCK PURCHASE WARRANT
                  REFERENCED IN EXHIBIT 4.4 WITH THE REGISTRANT

1. Cranshire Capital, L.P.

2. Omicron Master Trust

3. Vertical Ventures LLC

4. Truk International Fund, LP

5. Truk International Opportunity Fund, LLC

6. AS Capital Partners, LLC

7. Basso Equity Opportunity Holding Fund Ltd.

8. SRG Capital, LLC

9. Crescent International LTD

10. Bristol Investment Fund, Ltd
R. Ray FULMER, II, Petitioner v. FIFTH THIRD EQUIPMENT FINANCE COMPANY, et al.

No. 19-555

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 13, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
[ARTICLE] 6
[CIK] 0000091157
[NAME] U.S. GOVERNMENT SECURITIES FUND - CLASS B
[SERIES]
   [NUMBER] 002
   [NAME] SMITH BARNEY FUNDS, INC.
<TABLE>
<S>                             <C>
[PERIOD-TYPE]                   YEAR
[FISCAL-YEAR-END]                          DEC-31-1999
[PERIOD-END]                               DEC-31-1999
[INVESTMENTS-AT-COST]                      239,543,111
[INVESTMENTS-AT-VALUE]                     232,299,084
[RECEIVABLES]                                1,463,432
[ASSETS-OTHER]                                       0
[OTHER-ITEMS-ASSETS]                                 0
[TOTAL-ASSETS]                             233,762,516
[PAYABLE-FOR-SECURITIES]                             0
[SENIOR-LONG-TERM-DEBT]                              0
[OTHER-ITEMS-LIABILITIES]                      582,434
[TOTAL-LIABILITIES]                            582,434
[SENIOR-EQUITY]                                      0
[PAID-IN-CAPITAL-COMMON]                   247,589,401
[SHARES-COMMON-STOCK]                        1,068,747
[SHARES-COMMON-PRIOR]                        1,107,363
[ACCUMULATED-NII-CURRENT]                    1,652,496
[OVERDISTRIBUTION-NII]                               0
[ACCUMULATED-NET-GAINS]                    (8,817,788)
[OVERDISTRIBUTION-GAINS]                             0
[ACCUM-APPREC-OR-DEPREC]                   (7,244,027)
[NET-ASSETS]                               233,180,082
[DIVIDEND-INCOME]                                    0
[INTEREST-INCOME]                           17,617,813
[OTHER-INCOME]                                       0
[EXPENSES-NET]                               2,331,025
[NET-INVESTMENT-INCOME]                     15,286,788
[REALIZED-GAINS-CURRENT]                   (8,181,916)
[APPREC-INCREASE-CURRENT]                  (8,320,262)
[NET-CHANGE-FROM-OPS]                      (1,215,390)
[EQUALIZATION]                                       0
[DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-INCOME]                      702,365
[DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-GAINS]                             0
[DISTRIBUTIONS-OTHER]                                0
[NUMBER-OF-SHARES-SOLD]                        307,144
[NUMBER-OF-SHARES-REDEEMED]                    384,807
[SHARES-REINVESTED]                             39,047
[NET-CHANGE-IN-ASSETS]                    (51,133,733)
[ACCUMULATED-NII-PRIOR]                        (5,989)
[ACCUMULATED-GAINS-PRIOR]                            0
[OVERDISTRIB-NII-PRIOR]                              0
[OVERDIST-NET-GAINS-PRIOR]                           0
[GROSS-ADVISORY-FEES]                        1,260,250
[INTEREST-EXPENSE]                                   0
[GROSS-EXPENSE]                              2,331,025
[AVERAGE-NET-ASSETS]                        14,254,676
[PER-SHARE-NAV-BEGIN]                            13.42
[PER-SHARE-NII]                                   0.70
[PER-SHARE-GAIN-APPREC]                         (0.79)
[PER-SHARE-DIVIDEND]                              0.64
[PER-SHARE-DISTRIBUTIONS]                         0.00
[RETURNS-OF-CAPITAL]                              0.00
[PER-SHARE-NAV-END]                              12.69
[EXPENSE-RATIO]                                   1.33
</TABLE>
Amendment No






EXHIBIT 10.1





Amendment No. 2 to the

Harman International Industries, Inc.

Deferred Compensation Plan





Pursuant to action by the Board of Directors, the Harman International Industries, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan, as amended and restated effective June 1, 1997, as amended October 1, 1999 (the “Plan”),
is hereby amended in the following respects, effective December 16, 2003.





1.         Section 1.9 of the Plan, which defines “Change in Control,” shall be amended so that in the first parenthetical phrase in Section 1.9(i), the term
“Exchange Act” is replaced by “Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”)”.


2.         Section 1.38 of the Plan, which defines “Trust,” shall be amended to include the following clause immediately before the end of the section:  “,
including any successor trustee and any successor trust”.


3.         Section 16.16(b) of the Plan is deleted.


Executed this 6th day of January, 2004, but effective as provided above.


HARMAN INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIES, INC.





                                                                      By:    
/s/ Frank Meredith                               


                                                                      Title: Executive
Vice President
Charles G. KINNEY, petitioner, v. Roger W. BOREN, et al.

No. 18-504.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
To the Shareholders and Board of Trustees of
Capital Appreciation Fund:

In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements
of Capital Appreciation Fund (the "Fund") of Travelers Variable
Products Funds for the year ended December 31, 1998, we
considered its internal control, including control activities
for safeguarding securities, in order to determine our auditing
procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the
financial statements and to comply with the requirements of Form
N-SAR, not to provide assurance on the internal control.

The management of the Fund is responsible for establishing and
maintaining internal control.  In fulfilling this
responsibility, estimates and judgments by management are
required to assess the expected benefits and related costs of
controls.  Generally, controls that are relevant to an audit
pertain to the entity's objective of preparing financial
statements for external purposes that are fairly presented in
conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. Those
controls include the safeguarding of assets against unauthorized
acquisition, use, or disposition.

Because of inherent limitations in internal control, errors or
fraud may occur and not be detected.  Also, projection of any
evaluation of internal control to future periods is subject to
the risk that it may become inadequate because of changes in
conditions or that the effectiveness of the design and operation
may deteriorate.

Our consideration of the internal control would not necessarily
disclose all matters in the internal control that might be
material weaknesses under standards established by the American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants.  A material weakness
is a condition in which the design or operation of one or more
of the internal control components does not reduce to a
relatively low level the risk that misstatements caused by error
or fraud in amounts that would be material in relation to the
financial statements being audited may occur and not be detected
within a timely period by employees in the normal course of
performing their assigned functions.  However, we noted no
matters involving the internal control and its operation,
including controls for safeguarding securities that we consider
to be material weaknesses as defined above.

This report is intended solely for the information and use of
management, the Board of Trustees of the Fund, and the
Securities and Exchange Commission.





February 8, 1999
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, July 22, 2021. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, July 22, 2021 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A21D0401. IN THE INTEREST OF C. C. E., A CHILD (MOTHER) .
Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of this order. The Clerk of Juvenile Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record transmitted to the Court of Appeals.
LC NUMBERS: 12920J106
Craig BASSETT, Petitioner, v. Ron DESANTIS, Governor of Florida.

No. 18-9351

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 07, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Angela KRASNY, Petitioner v. Jacob KRASNY

No. 19-5867

Supreme Court of the United States.

November 12, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Superior Court of New Jersey, Ocean County, Chancery Division denied.
IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2020 ND 310

NBS Consulting, Inc. dba On Point

Management and Whitney Racine, Plaintiff and Appellee

v.

Peirce Harris aka Pierce Harris, Defendant and Appellant 

and 

All Other Occupants, Defendants

No. 20200203

Appeal from the District Court of Ward County, North Central Judicial 

District, the Honorable Gary H. Lee, Judge.

AFFIRMED .

Per Curiam.

Remington M. Kostenko and Dean A. Frantsvog, Minot, ND, for plaintiff and 

appellee; submitted on brief.

Pierce Harris, self-represented, Minot, ND, defendant and appellant; 

submitted on brief.

FILED 

IN THE OFFICE OF THE 

CLERK OF SUPREME COURT 

DECEMBER 17, 2020 

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
1

NBS Consulting v. Harris

No. 20200203

Per Curiam.

[¶1] Pierce Harris appealed from an order and a judgment evicting him from 

a property in Minot. Harris argues he was wrongfully evicted and improperly 

served. Harris failed to provide a transcript, which leaves us with little record 

to review. “If the record on appeal does not allow a meaningful and intelligent 

review of the alleged error, we decline to review it.” City of West Fargo v. Olson, 

2007 ND 48, ¶ 1, 734 N.W.2d 342 (quoting State v. Stockert, 2004 ND 146, ¶ 

13, 684 N.W.2d 605). Harris failed to provide us the opportunity to review his 

claims in a meaningful and intelligent manner. Therefore, we summarily 

affirm the district court under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7).

[¶2] Jon J. Jensen, C.J.

Gerald W. VandeWalle

Daniel J. Crothers

Lisa Fair McEvers

Jerod E. Tufte
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 6
<CIK> 0000919557
<NAME> Travelers Managed Income Portfolio
<SERIES>
   <NUMBER>006
   <NAME>Travelers Series Fund Inc.

<S>                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>              Year
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   Oct-31-2001
<PERIOD-END>                        Oct-31-2000
<INVESTMENTS-AT-COST>               151,082,654
<INVESTMENTS-AT-VALUE>              148,771,918
<RECEIVABLES>                         2,310,890
<ASSETS-OTHER>                              867
<OTHER-ITEMS-ASSETS>                          0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                      151,083,675
<PAYABLE-FOR-SECURITIES>                      0
<SENIOR-LONG-TERM-DEBT>                       0
<OTHER-ITEMS-LIABILITIES>               249,026
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES>                     249,026
<SENIOR-EQUITY>                               0
<PAID-IN-CAPITAL-COMMON>            148,968,169
<SHARES-COMMON-STOCK>                13,030,335
<SHARES-COMMON-PRIOR>                 9,837,825
<ACCUMULATED-NII-CURRENT>             8,560,037
<OVERDISTRIBUTION-NII>                        0
<ACCUMULATED-NET-GAINS>              (4,382,821)
<OVERDISTRIBUTION-GAINS>                      0
<ACCUM-APPREC-OR-DEPREC>             (2,310,736)
<NET-ASSETS>                        150,834,649
<DIVIDEND-INCOME>                             0
<INTEREST-INCOME>                     9,459,870
<OTHER-INCOME>                                0
<EXPENSES-NET>                          899,833
<NET-INVESTMENT-INCOME>               8,560,037
<REALIZED-GAINS-CURRENT>             (1,514,578)
<APPREC-INCREASE-CURRENT>            (1,248,737)
<NET-CHANGE-FROM-OPS>                 5,796,722
<EQUALIZATION>                                0
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-INCOME>             4,865,205
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-GAINS>                      0
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OTHER>                         0
<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-SOLD>               3,320,803
<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-REDEEMED>             555,065
<SHARES-REINVESTED>                     426,772
<NET-CHANGE-IN-ASSETS>               37,793,835
<ACCUMULATED-NII-PRIOR>               4,865,481
<ACCUMULATED-GAINS-PRIOR>            (2,868,243)
<OVERDISTRIB-NII-PRIOR>                       0
<OVERDIST-NET-GAINS-PRIOR>                    0
<GROSS-ADVISORY-FEES>                   846,508
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            0
<GROSS-EXPENSE>                         899,833
<AVERAGE-NET-ASSETS>                129,699,285
<PER-SHARE-NAV-BEGIN>                    11.490
<PER-SHARE-NII>                           0.760
<PER-SHARE-GAIN-APPREC>                  (0.240)
<PER-SHARE-DIVIDEND>                      0.430
<PER-SHARE-DISTRIBUTIONS>                 0.000
<RETURNS-OF-CAPITAL>                      0.000
<PER-SHARE-NAV-END>                      11.580
<EXPENSE-RATIO>                            0.69



</TABLE>
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

206 CAF 10-02049 PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, AND MARTOCHE, JJ.

IN THE MATTER OF JUSTAIN R. AND SHANE R.

------------------------------------------- MONROE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PETITIONER-RESPONDENT;

JUAN F., RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.

FARES A. RUMI, ROCHESTER, FOR RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.

DAVID VAN VARICK, COUNTY ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (CAROL L. EISENMAN OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER-RESPONDENT.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Monroe County (Joseph G. Nesser, J.), entered September 28, 2010 in a proceeding pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b. The order, among other things, adjudged that the subject children were permanently neglected by respondent and committed the guardianship and custody of the subject children to petitioner.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: Respondent father appeals from an order terminating his parental rights pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b on the ground of permanent neglect. We affirm. Petitioner met its burden of proving “by clear and convincing evidence that it made diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the relationship between [the father] and the child[ren]” ( Matter of Ja-Nathan F. , 309 AD2d 1152;

see § 384-b [7] [a]; Matter of Rachael N. , 70 AD3d 1374, lv denied 15 NY3d 708). Contrary to the contention of the father, the evidence at the hearing establishes that, despite petitioner’s diligent efforts to reunite him with the children, he continued to use drugs; lived in numerous temporary or rundown rooms or apartments that were unsuitable for children; continued to demonstrate problems with aggression in general and domestic violence against the children’s mother in particular; and refused to participate in counseling of any kind until either immediately before or immediately after the termination petition was filed. Thus, petitioner established that the father “failed to address successfully the problems that led to the removal of the child[ren] and continued to prevent the child[ren]’s safe return” ( Ja-Nathan F. , 309 AD2d 1152; see Matter of Brittany K. , 59 AD3d 952, 953, lv denied 12 NY3d 709).
We reject the father’s contention that termination of his-2- 206 CAF 10-02049
parental rights was not in the best interests of the children. The minimal “ ‘progress made by [the father] in the months preceding the dispositional determination was not sufficient to warrant any further prolongation of the child[ren]’s unsettled familial status’ ” ( Matter of Roystar T ., 72 AD3d 1569, 1569, lv denied 15 NY3d 707; see Matter of Sean W. , 87 AD3d 1318, 1319, lv denied 18 NY3d 802). Finally, weconclude that Family Court properly refused to allow any posttermination contact between the father and the children ( see Matter of Atreyu G. , 91 AD3d 1342; Matter of Cayden L.R. , 83 AD3d 1550, 1551; Matter of Christopher J. , 60 AD3d 1402, 1403).

Entered: March 16, 2012 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court