alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
BY-LAWS

                             OF

                     THE ITALY FUND INC.

                   A Maryland Corporation



                          ARTICLE 1

                        STOCKHOLDERS


     SECTION 1. Annual Meetings.  The annual meeting of the
stockholders of The Italy Fund Inc. (the Corporation)
shall be held on a date fixed from time to time by the Board
of Directors within the thirty-one (31) day period ending
four (4) months after the end of the Corporation's fiscal
year.  An annual meeting may be held at any place in or out
of the State of Maryland as may be determined by the Board
of Directors as shall be designated in the notice of the
meeting and at the time specified by the Board of Directors.
Any business of the Corporation may be transacted at an
annual meeting without being specifically designated in the
notice unless otherwise provided by statute, the
Corporation's Articles of Incorporation or these By-Laws.
Stockholder proposals, including director nominations, must
be submitted to the Corporation no later than ninety (90)
days prior to the proxy mailing date for the prior year's
annual stockholder meeting.

     SECTION 2.  Special Meetings.  Special meetings of the
stockholders for any purpose or purposes, unless otherwise
prescribed by statute or by the Corporation's Articles of
Incorporation, may be held at any place within the United
States, and may be called at any time by the Board of
Directors, the Chairman of the Board or the President, and
shall be called by the Chairman of the Board, the President
or the Secretary at the request in writing of a majority of
the Board of Directors or at the request in writing of
stockholders entitled to cast at least twenty-five (25)
percent of the votes entitled to be cast at the meeting upon
payment by such stockholders to the Corporation of the
reasonably estimated cost of preparing and mailing a notice
of the meeting (which estimated cost shall be provided to
such stockholders by the Secretary of the Corporation).
Notwithstanding the foregoing, unless requested by the
stockholders entitled to cast a majority of the votes
entitled to be cast at the meeting, a special meeting of the
stockholders need not be called at the request of
stockholders to consider any matter  that is substantially
the same as a matter voted on at any special meeting of the
stockholders held during the preceding twelve (12) month.  A
written request shall state the purpose or purposes of the
proposed meeting.  Stockholder proposals must be submitted
to the corporation no later than sixty (60) days prior to
the special meeting, provided that if less than seventy (70)
days notice of the date of the special meeting is given to
shareholders, such shareholder notice must be received no
later than the close of business on the 10th day following
the day on which notice of the date of the special meeting
was given.
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Sunset Financial Resources, Inc., (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Stacy M. Riffe, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 (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.



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ Stacy M. Riffe     
|Stacy M. Riffe         
|Chief Financial Officer



November 14, 2005
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

ONLINE SATELLITE COMMUNICATION,

Appellant,

v.

GMPCS PERSONAL COMMUNICATION, INC.,

Appellee.

No. 4D14-2791

[July 15, 2015]

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Thomas Lynch, IV, Judge; L.T. Case No. 12-33465 (05).

Stephen R. Verbit of Stephen R. Verbit, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for 

appellant.

Diane H. Tutt of Conroy Simberg, Hollywood, and Robert S. Horwitz of 

Conroy Simberg, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We deny the motion for rehearing. Although appellant claims that the 

court took no evidence at the 8:45 hearing on the motion to quash service 

of process, the denial of which is the subject of this appeal, the order itself 

states:

THE COURT having considered the grounds for the Motion, taken 

testimony, heard argument and considered the applicable law, it is 

FOUND,

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

Motion to Quash Service and To Dismiss Complaint is denied.

(Emphasis supplied).

As the form order states that testimony was taken, it would 

be incumbent on the parties to strike that from the order if that 
2

was not applicable. Otherwise, this court must assume that 

the order means what it says, and without a transcript we 

cannot determine whether the evidence presented at the 

hearing was sufficient or insufficient to support the order 

denying the motion. Thus, affirmance based upon Applegate 

v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 1979), is 

proper.

WARNER, GROSS and CONNER, JJ., concur.

* * *
# Official Journal L 54/2011

| | ISSN 1725-2555
  doi:10.3000/17252555.L_2011.054.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 54 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 5426 February 2011 |

ISSN 1725-2555

doi:10.3000/17252555.L_2011.054.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 54

English edition

Legislation

Volume 5426 February 2011

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Commission Regulation (EU) No 142/2011 of 25 February 2011 implementing Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down health rules as regards animal by-products and derived products not intended for human consumption and implementing Council Directive 97/78/EC as regards certain samples and items exempt from veterinary checks at the border under that Directive (1) | 1 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Commission Regulation (EU) No 142/2011 of 25 February 2011 implementing Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down health rules as regards animal by-products and derived products not intended for human consumption and implementing Council Directive 97/78/EC as regards certain samples and items exempt from veterinary checks at the border under that Directive (1)

1

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

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

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.
**EXHIBIT 31.2****CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER****Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**     I, Denise Barton, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Atlantic Coast Entertainment Holdings,Inc. (the “Registrant”) for the period ended June 30, 2007 (the “Report”);2. Based on my knowledge, this Report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisReport;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis Report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this Report;4. The Registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) forthe Registrant and have:     a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the Registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this Report is beingprepared;     b) evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this Report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this Report based on such evaluation; and     c) disclosed in this Report any change in the Registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the Registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the Registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.5. The Registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of Registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):     a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theRegistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and     b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.       By: /s/Denise Barton  DeniseBarton    *Chief Financial Officer of Atlantic Coast*    *Entertainment Holdings, Inc.*Date:August 17, 2007
21
Courtney BIRD, Petitioner, v. HAWAII, et al.

No. 19-668

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 13, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
# C_2018245EN.01000101.xml

| 13.7.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 245/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.7.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 245/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8973 — Mitsui/Kansai/JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2018/C 245/01)

On 6 July 2018, 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:

1

| — | 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 32018M8973. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32018M8973. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

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

1

---
VIA EDGAR


Securities and Exchange Commission
Judiciary Plaza
450 Fifth Street NW
Washington, DC

ATTN:		Office of Filings, Information and Consumer Services

RE: 		Managed Municipals Portfolio Inc.
		File No. 33-47116

Gentlemen:

Pursuant to Rule 497(j) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, please 
accept this letter as certification that the prospectus and the statement of 
additional information for the above-referenced Portfolio does not differ from 
that contained in Post-Effective Amendment No. 7 (the "Amendment") to the 
Fund's Registration Statement on Form N-2.  This Amendment was filed 
electronically on September 30, 1996.

Any comments on this filing should be directed to me at 212-816-5770.

Please return an electronic transmittal as evidence of your receipt of this 
filing.


						Very truly yours,


						/s/Michael Kocur
						Michael Kocur
						Vice President and
						Assistant General Counsel
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-2000

CANDACE E. ALSTON, an individual on behalf of themselves and 

all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff – Appellant, 

and

NEIL F. LETREN, an individual on behalf of themselves and all 

others similarly situated, 

Plaintiff,

v.

EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC.,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Theodore D. Chuang, District Judge. 

(8:14-cv-03957-TDC)

Submitted: March 14, 2017 Decided: March 16, 2017

Before FLOYD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
2

Candace E. Alston, Appellant Pro Se. Meredith Campbell, Joy 

Catherine Einstein, SHULMAN, ROGERS, GANDAL, PORDY & ECKER, PA, 

Potomac, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

Candace E. Alston appeals the district court’s order 

dismissing her claims against Experian Information Solutions, Inc. 

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. 

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district 

court. Alston v. Experian Info. Sols., Inc., No. 8:14-cv-03957-

TDC (D. Md. Mar. 3, 2016). We dispense with oral argument because 

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

AFFIRMED
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1198 

To provide for American Samoa and the Commonwealth of the Northern 

Mariana Islands to be treated as States for certain criminal justice programs. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 14, 2013 

Mr. SABLAN (for himself and Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To provide for American Samoa and the Commonwealth of 

the Northern Mariana Islands to be treated as States 

for certain criminal justice programs. 

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

3 SECTION 1. TREATMENT AS A STATE FOR AMERICAN 

4 SAMOA AND THE CNMI. 

5 Section 901(a)(2) of Omnibus Crime Control and 

6 Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3791(a)(2)) is 

7 amended by striking ‘‘Islands:’’ and all that follows 

8 through the period and inserting ‘‘Islands;’’. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT, et al., Petitioners v. ALLIANCE FOR OPEN SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL, INC., et al.

No. 19-177

Supreme Court of the United States.

December 13, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit granted.

Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
Gregory Stanley ROBERTS, Petitioner, v. INSERVCO INSURANCE SERVICES.

No. 18-9480

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1389 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1389

   To amend title 10, United States Code, regarding restrictions on 
     abortions at medical facilities of the Department of Defense.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 21, 2013

Ms. Slaughter (for herself, Mr. Rangel, Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney of New 
 York, Ms. Norton, Ms. Moore, Ms. Lee of California, Mr. Grijalva, Ms. 
  DeGette, Mr. Capuano, Mrs. Napolitano, Ms. Edwards, Ms. Pingree of 
 Maine, Ms. Lofgren, Ms. DeLauro, Mr. Conyers, Ms. Castor of Florida, 
   Mr. McNerney, Mr. Quigley, Mr. Johnson of Georgia, Mr. Clay, Mr. 
    Markey, Mr. Honda, Ms. Speier, Ms. Schakowsky, Ms. Tsongas, Mr. 
Blumenauer, Mr. Higgins, Mr. Holt, Mr. Ellison, Ms. Chu, Mrs. Davis of 
California, Mrs. Capps, and Ms. Matsui) introduced the following bill; 
         which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend title 10, United States Code, regarding restrictions on 
     abortions at medical facilities of the Department of Defense.

    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 ``Military Access to Reproductive Care 
and Health for Military Women Act'' or the ``MARCH for Military Women 
Act''.

SEC. 2. RESTORATION OF PREVIOUS POLICY REGARDING RESTRICTIONS ON USE OF 
              DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE MEDICAL FACILITIES.

    Section 1093 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) by striking subsection (b); and
            (2) in subsection (a), by striking ``(a) Restriction on Use 
        of Funds.--''.
                                 <all>
```
Board of Trustees of
the Smith Barney Sector Series Inc.:

In planning and performing our audits of the financial statements of Smith
Barney Health Sciences Fund, Smith Barney Financial Services Fund, and  Smith
Barney Technology Fund of Smith Barney Sector Series Inc. (the "Funds") for
the period February 28, 2000 (commencement of operations) to October 31, 2000,
we considered its internal control, including control procedures 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 Funds 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 accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America.  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 as of October 31, 2000.

This report is intended solely for the information and use of management, the
Board of Trustees of the Funds, and the Securities and Exchange Commission and
is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these
specified parties.



New York, New York
December 11, 2000
Independent Auditors' Report



To the Shareholders and Board of Directors
of Smith Barney Investment Funds Inc.:

In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements of the Smith
Barney Premier Selections All Cap Growth Fund of Smith Barney Investment Funds
Inc. (the "Fund") for the year ended April 30, 2001, 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 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 accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America. Those controls include the
safeguarding of assets against unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition.

Because of inherent limitations in internal control, error 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 internal control would not necessarily disclose all
matters in 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 internal control and its operation, including controls for
safeguarding securities, that we consider to be material weaknesses as defined
above as of April 30, 2001.

This report is intended solely for the information and use of management, the
Board of Directors of the Fund, and the Securities and Exchange Commission and
is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these
specified parties.




New York, New York
June 8, 2001