alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2016201EN.01000101.xml

| 27.7.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 201/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.7.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 201/1

---

COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2016/1218

of 18 July 2016

on the conclusion of a Protocol to the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an Association between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Lebanon, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania to the European Union

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 217, in conjunction with point (a) of Article 218(6) and Article 218(8) thereof,

Having regard to the 2005 Act of Accession, and in particular Article 6(2) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,

Having regard to the consent of the European Parliament,

Whereas:

| (1) | The Protocol to the Euro-Mediterranean Association Agreement establishing an Association between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Lebanon, of the other part, (‘Protocol’) was signed on behalf of the Union and its Member States on 18 June 2015. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

The Protocol to the Euro-Mediterranean Association Agreement establishing an Association between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Lebanon, of the other part, (‘Protocol’) was signed on behalf of the Union and its Member States on 18 June 2015.

| (2) | The Protocol should be approved, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The Protocol should be approved,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The Protocol to the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an Association between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Lebanon, of the other part, is hereby approved on behalf of the Union and its Member States to take account of the accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania to the Union (1).

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

Done at Brussels, 18 July 2016.

For the Council

The President

F. MOGHERINI

---

(1)  The Protocol attached to the Decision on signature.

1

---
Exhibit 23.1



CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM



We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of our reports dated June
24, 2005 relating to the financial statements and the effectiveness of the internal controls over financial reporting of Viisage Technology, Inc. (the Company) appearing in the Companys Amended Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the
year ended December 31, 2004 into the Companys previously filed Registration Statements on Form S-8 (No.s 333-28695, 333-42485, 333-90177, 333-36734 and 333-120156).



|                     
|---------------------
|/s/ BDO Seidman, LLP 
|                     
|Boston, Massachusetts
|February 13, 2006
STATE v. ROSS

No. COA04-595.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed March 1, 2005.

Certification Date March 21, 2005.

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-10746

Summary Calendar

IN THE MATTER OF LOYD REX CONNER,

Debtor,

___________________________________________________________

LOYD REX CONNER

Appellant,

v.

FIRST NATIONAL BANK, HASKELL,

Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Northern District of Texas

3:07-CV-294

Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

February 5, 2009

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 08-10746

2

After reviewing the record and considering the briefs of the parties, we

conclude that the district court correctly affirmed the bankruptcy court order

modifying the debtor’s plan. Based on the district court’s July 11, 2008 thorough

Amended Memorandum Opinion and Order, we affirm its judgment.

AFFIRMED.
Ginger HUBER v. NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY; Ralph Harper, Director of Public Safety, North Carolina State University; Jeff Mann, Associate Vice Chancellor for Business, North Carolina State University; George L. Worsley, Vice Chancellor of Finance & Business, North Carolina State University; Dave Rainer, Associate Vice Chancellor for Environmental Health and Public Safety, North Carolina State University.

No. 255P04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 12, 2004.

Thomas J. Ziko, Special Deputy Attorney General, Katherine C. Galvan, Assistant Attorney General, for State.

Jonathan D. Sasser, Raleigh, for Ginger Huber.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 25th day of May 2004 by Attorney General in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

> "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 12th day of August 2004."
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**Certification Pursuant To18 U.S.C. Section 1350As Adopted Pursuant ToSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

        Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Hospira, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the period ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Thomas E. Werner, Senior Vice President,Finance and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

 

(1)          The Report fully complies with the requirements ofsection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)          The information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 
| /s/  THOMAS  E. WERNER    |   |
|-------------------------------------|--------|
| Thomas E. Werner                    |   |
| Senior Vice President,  Finance and |   |
| Chief Financial Officer             |   |
| April 28, 2009                 |   |

 

----
STATE v. Justin Everett ROSE.

No. 296P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 9, 2005.

William P. Hart, Special Deputy Attorney General, G. Dewey Hudson, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 9th day of June 2005 by Defendant for Extension of Time to File Response to Petition for Discretionary Review:

"Motion Allowed. Defendant (Justin Everett Rose) shall have up to and including the 17th day of June 2005 to file and serve his/her response with this Court. By order of the Court in conference this the 9th day of June 2005."
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,
Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk December 28, 2011

y1219 

# Order

December 28, 2011

143514

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 143514 COA: 300563 ANTONIO PEREZ-CHICA, Ma comb CC: 2005-004731-FC Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 9, 2011 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishing ent itlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
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 Investment Funds Inc., consisting of the
Smith Barney Investment Grade Bond Fund, Smith Barney Special
Equities Fund, Smith Barney Contrarian Fund, Concert Peachtree
Growth Fund, and Smith Barney Government Securities Fund (the
"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 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 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 Directors of the Funds, and the
Securities and Exchange Commission.




February 8, 1999
Marcos PALOMAR, Petitioner v. Raymond MADDEN, Warden

No. 19-6801

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 21, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Cynthia ORTIZ, Petitioner v. Charles PERRY, et al.

No. 18-9170

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.
U.S. flag An official website of the United States government.
				Here's how you know we're official. **Official websites use .gov** A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure websites use HTTPS** A small lock or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to a .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Toggle navigation Toggle search National Ocean Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
 Search
					Search National Ocean Service


Home
				Ocean Facts

				Topics
					Explore All Topics 
                        Arctic 
                        Careers 
                        Economy 
                        Ecosystems 
                        Geodesy 
                        Hazards 
                        International
                        Navigation 
                        Observations 
                        Ocean 
                        Recreation 
                         Sea Level Rise 
                        Story Maps 
                        Tools
                
                			Education

				
				News
				Podcasts
				Video
				Images
				About Us


1. Home
2. Facts
3. Do fish sleep?

**Do fish sleep?**  While most fish **rest** by reducing their activity and metabolism, fish "sleep" is different from that of land mammals Image of a Pacific sand lance*A Pacific sand lance, shown here, employs a unique strategy of burrowing into sand to rest and conserve energy, and to avoid predation.* The nature of fish "sleep" is an area of active research. While fish do not sleep in the same way that land mammals sleep, most fish do rest. Research shows that fish may reduce their activity and metabolism while remaining alert to danger. Some fish float in place, some wedge themselves into a secure spot in the mud or coral, and some even locate a suitable nest. These periods of "suspended animation" may perform the same restorative functions as sleep does in people.
 More **Information** Fun Facts About Fascinating Fish (NOAA Fisheries)   Get **Social** Social
 **Last updated:** 01/20/23 **Author:** NOAA How to cite this article Contact Us


Feedback Provide Feedback
							Contact Us
							Report an error
 Social Instagram Logo/a>


*Science. Service.Stewardship.*
 About NOS About Us
							NOS Program Offices
							Media Inquiries
							Website Acknowledgements
                            Site Index
							Disclaimer
 More Resources Freedom of Information Act
							Accessibility
							Information Quality
							Privacy Policy
							NOS For Employees
							USA.gov
 Department of Commerce
									National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
									National Ocean Service
** **

** **

** **

** **

** **

**EXHIBIT 31.1**

**CERTIFICATIONS**

I, John R. Miller, certify that: 

     1. I havereviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of National Beef Packing Company,LLC; 

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

     3. Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report; 

     4. Theregistrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

     a)designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared; 

     b)evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and 

     c)disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscalquarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annualreport) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and 

     5. Theregistrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

     a)all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and 

     b)any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financialreporting. 

|     |  |                                         |
|-----|--|-----------------------------------------|
| By: |  | /s/ John R. Miller                      |
|     |  |                                         |
|     |  | John R. Miller*Chief Executive Officer* |

Date: January 10, 2005 

----
---

Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL
OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Solely for the purpose of complying with 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as
  adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, the undersigned
  Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Salamon Group, Inc. (the
  "Company"), hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the Quarterly Report
  on Form 10-QSB/A of the Company for the period ended June 30, 2007 (the "Report")
  fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities and
  Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents,
  in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
  of the Company.

|Dated: April 10, 2008 | By: | /s/ John E. Salamon    
|--------------------- | --- | -----------------------
|                      |     | John E. Salamon        
|                      |     | Chief Executive Officer
|                      |     | Chief Financial Officer

---
### PUBLISH IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-8244

D. C. Docket No. 4:80-CV-247

WILBURN DOBBS, Petitioner-Appellant,

versus A. G. THOMAS, Warden, Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Center, Respondent-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court For the Northern District of Georgia

(January 19, 1996) Before TJOFLAT, Chief Judge, HATCHETT and BIRCH, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: This case is remanded to the district court, and the district court is directed to conduct de novo hearings on all issues regarding ineffective assistance of counsel in the sentencing phase of this case. Following hearings, the district court shall make written findings of fact and conclusions of law. REMANDED2
Exhibit 21.1
                              List of Subsidiaries

Set forth below is a list of all current subsidiaries of UTG Communications
International, Inc., a Delaware corporation.


Name of Subsidiary                      Jurisdiction of Organization
------------------                      ----------------------------
UTG Communications Holding AG*          Switzerland

UTG Communications (Network) Ltd.**     United Kingdom

UTG Communications (Europe) AG**        Switzerland

United Telecom GmbH**                   Switzerland

UTG Communications Hungary Kft**        Hungary

UTG Communications Belgium NV**         Belgium

Multicom NV***                          Belgium

*    Wholly-owned subsidiary of UTG Communications International, Inc., other
     than director qualifying shares.
**   Wholly-owned subsidiary of UTG Communications Holding AG.
***  Wholly-owned subsidiary of UTG Communications Belgium NV.
<PAGE>   1


                                                                     Exhibit 21

                  List of Subsidiaries of CN Biosciences, Inc.
                  --------------------------------------------



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Subsidiary                                                    Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization
----------                                                    ---------------------------------------------
<S>                                                          <C>   
Calbiochem-Novabiochem Corporation                            California
                 Calbiochem-Novabiochem PTY Limited           Australia
                 Calbiochem-Novabiochem Japan Limited         Japan



Novagen Holdings, Inc.                                        Arkansas
                 Novagen, Inc.                                Arkansas



Calbiochem-Novabiochem GmbH                                   Germany



Calbiochem-Novabiochem (UK) Limited                           United Kingdom
               Calbiochem Limited                             United Kingdom



Calbiochem-Novabiochem AG                                     Switzerland
               Clinalfa AG                                    Switzerland
</TABLE>
CANNON v. MEINBERG.

No. COA04-483.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed March 15, 2005.

Certification Date April 4, 2005.

Appeal from the Forsyth (03CVS1167).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4788 

To address emergency shortages in food banks. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 18, 2007 

Mr. SPACE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Agriculture 

A BILL 

To address emergency shortages in food banks. 

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

3 SECTION 1. EMERGENCY FUNDING. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Out of any funds in the Treasury 

5 not otherwise appropriated, the Secretary of the Treasury 

6 shall transfer to the Secretary of Agriculture to carry out 

7 the emergency food assistance program established under 

8 the Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 (7 U.S.C. 

9 7501 et seq.) $40,000,000, to remain available until ex10 pended. 

11 (b) RECEIPT AND ACCEPTANCE.—The Secretary 

12 shall be entitled to receive, shall accept, and shall use to 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with BILLS
2 

•HR 4788 IH

1 carry out this section the funds transferred under sub2 section (a), without further appropriation. 

Æ 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with BILLS
<PAGE>







                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2




                            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 Annual Report of Riviera Tool Company (the
"Company") on Form 10-K/A for the year ending August 31, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Peter
Canepa, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
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; and



         (2)      The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Company.



Dated:   January 14, 2003          By: /s/ Peter Canepa
                                       ------------------------
                                   Peter Canepa
                                   Chief Financial Officer

This certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-K/A pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent
required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.