alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2016062EN.01000101.xml

| 9.3.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 62/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.3.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 62/1

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2016/326

of 25 February 2016

entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications [Frankfurter Grüne Soße/Frankfurter Grie Soß (PGI)]

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Germany's application to register the name ‘Frankfurter Grüne Soße’/‘Frankfurter Grie Soß’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Germany's application to register the name ‘Frankfurter Grüne Soße’/‘Frankfurter Grie Soß’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

| (2) | As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Frankfurter Grüne Soße’/‘Frankfurter Grie Soß’ should therefore be entered in the register, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Frankfurter Grüne Soße’/‘Frankfurter Grie Soß’ should therefore be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name ‘Frankfurter Grüne Soße’/‘Frankfurter Grie Soß’ (PGI) is hereby entered in the register.

The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.6. — Fruit, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed, as listed in Annex XI to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 (3).

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 25 February 2016.

For the Commission,

On behalf of the President,

Phil HOGAN

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ C 350, 22.10.2015, p. 10.

2

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).

3

---
LASHANI v. HANHAN.

No. COA04-988.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed April 19, 2005.

Certification Date May 9, 2005.

Appeal from Guilford (03CVD10117).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

# TIME AND DATE: 

10:28 a.m. on Tuesday, June 21, 2022.

# PLACE: 

The meeting was held in the Board Room located on the sixth floor of the FDIC Building located at 550 17th Street NW, Washington, DC.

# STATUS: 

Closed.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 

In calling the meeting, the Board determined, on motion of Director Michael J. Hsu (Acting Comptroller of the Currency), seconded by Director Rohit Chopra (Director, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau), and concurred in by Acting Chairman Martin J. Gruenberg, that the public interest did not require consideration of the matters in a meeting open to public observation; and that the matters could be considered in a closed meeting by authority of subsections (c)(2), (c)(4), (c)(6), (c)(8), (c)(9)(A)(ii), and (c)(9)(B) of the “Government in the Sunshine Act” (5 U.S.C. 552b (c)(2), (c)(4), (c)(6), (c)(8), (c)(9)(A)(ii), and (c)(9)(B).

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Requests for further information concerning the meeting may be directed to Debra A. Decker, Executive Secretary of the Corporation, at 202-898-8748.

 Dated this the 21st day of June, 2022.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

James P. Sheesley,

Assistant Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2022-13595 Filed 6-21-22; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
DOUGLAS v. EASLEY.

No. 222P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 4, 2005.

William P. Hart, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 26th day of April 2005 by Plaintiff for Sentence Reduction Credits, Pursuant to G.S. 7A-245(A)(2), G.S. 15A-1355(d) (2001), G.S. 1-2:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference this the 4th day of May 2005."
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5016 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5016

          To suspend temporarily the duty on S-Abscisic Acid.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 16, 2008

Mrs. Tauscher introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
          To suspend temporarily the duty on S-Abscisic Acid.

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

SECTION 1. S-ABSCISIC ACID.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.01.00      [S-(Z,E)]-5-(1-     Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         Hydroxy-2,6,6-                                                     31/2011
                         trimethyl-4-oxo-2-
                         cyclohexen-1-yl)-
                         3-methyl-2,4-
                         pentanedienoic
                         acid (CAS No.
                         14375-45-2)
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         2916.20.5000)....

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 32.1


CERTIFICATIONS

         The undersigned officer of Empire Resources, Inc. (the "Company")
hereby certifies that this Amendment No. 1 to the Company's annual report on
Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2004 (the "Report"), as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company. This certification is provided solely
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall not be deemed to be a part of the Report
or "filed" for any purpose whatsoever.



Date:   April 12, 2005          By:  /s/ Nathan Kahn
                                     -----------------------------
                                         Nathan Kahn,
                                         Chief Executive Officer and President
HANSON AGGREGATES SOUTHEAST, INC. v. CITY OF RALEIGH.

COA03-1270.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed August 3, 2004.

Certification Date August 23, 2004.

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
Exhibit 32.1
 Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350,
as Adopted Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  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(a) or 78o(d)); and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 Date: November 5, 2010
    /s/ PAMELA H. PATSLEYPamela H. PatsleyChairman and Chief Executive Officer 41
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. Topics
3. Ocean

Our Ocean Explore our curated list of ocean topics to learn about NOAA's role in protecting, exploring, and conserving this vast resource.


Bringing Ocean Data to Your Fingertips
 Corals
  Ocean Data Standards
  Sanctuaries
 Marine Protected Areas
  Earth Day and Our Ocean
  Celebrate 30 Days of Ocean in June
 Weird Ocean Phenomena
  Common Misconceptions about the Ocean
  5 Ocean Terms
 How can you help our ocean?
  The Arctic: Ocean & Coasts


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
IN RE D.M.H., JR.

No. COA03-31-2.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed October 18, 2005.

Certification Date November 7, 2005.

Appeal from Burke (02J57).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed in part, remanded in part.
# L_2017157EN.01002201.xml

| 20.6.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 157/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.6.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 157/22

---

Corrigendum to Regulation (EU) 2016/2134 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 November 2016 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005 concerning trade in certain goods which could be used for capital punishment, torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 338 of 13 December 2016
  )

On page 31, Annex IV, new Annex VII, form, box ‘3 Authorisation No’ in the line ‘Based on Article’:

for:

‘7d’,

read:

‘7e’.

---
#### WILLIAM H. BANKS WAREHOUSES, Inc., et al., Appellants, v. George L. WATT et al., Appellees.

No. 13112.

United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit.

June 15, 1953.

Writ of Certiorari Denied Oct. 12, 1953.

See 74 S.Ct. 43.

J. L. Eberle, T. H. Eberle and W. D. Eberle, Boise, Idaho, L. Duncan Lloyd, Wm. H. Hillier, Chicago, Ill. (Richards, Haga & Eberle, Boise, Idaho, Lord, Bissell & Kadyk, Chicago, Ill., of counsel), for appellants.

Ray D. Agee, Frank L. Stephan, Beck-with & Langley, Parry, Keenan, Robertson & Daly, Twin Falls, Idaho, for appellees.

William R. Wallace, Jr., Maynard Garrison, William R. Ray and John R. Pascoe, San Francisco, Cal., amici curiæ.

Before MATHEWS, HEALY and BONE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

On or about April 18, 1952, a division of this court consisting of Circuit Judges Mathews, Healy and Bone was duly designated and assigned to hear and'decide this case. For that purpose, the division constituted the court. The division heard the case on May 8, 1952, and decided it on May 15, 1952.1

On June 9, 1952, appellants filed a petition for a rehearing and a rehearing en banc. On June 19, 1952, the division made and entered an order denying the petition. On April 13, 1953, the Supreme Court granted certiorari, vacated the order of June 19, 1952, and remanded the case to this court2 for further proceedings in the light of Western Pacific R. R. Corp. v. Western Pacific R. R. Co., 345 U.S. 247, 73 S.Ct. 656.

On May 27, 1953, this court’s Rule 23 (formerly Rule 25) was amended by adding thereto two new paragraphs reading as follows :

> “All petitions for rehearing shall be addressed to and be determined by the court as constituted in the original hearing.

> “Should a majority of the court as so constituted grant a rehearing and either from a suggestion of a party or upon its own motion be of the opinion that the case should be reheard en banc, they shall so inform the Chief Judge. The Chief Judge shall thereupon convene the active judges of the court and the court shall thereupon determine whether the case shall be reheard en banc.”

Pursuant to the Supreme Court’s decision of April 13, 1953, and this court’s Rule 23, as amended, the petition for a rehearing and a rehearing en banc has been considered by this court as constituted in the original hearing, and this court as so constituted being of the opinion that the case should not be reheard en banc or otherwise, it is now hereby ordered by this court as so constituted that the petition be and is hereby denied.

1

. William H. Banks Warehouses v. Watt, 9 Cir., 196 F.2d 1018.

2

. Id.,345 U.S. 932, 73 S.Ct. 793.
Jamie REEP et al. v. BECK.

No. 345PA04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 16, 2005.

Elizabeth F. Parsons, Assistant Attorney General, James Peeler Smith, Special Counsel, for Beck.

James W. Carter, for Reep.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 14th day of February 2005 by Plaintiff for Extension of Time to File Brief:

"Motion Allowed. Plaintiff (Reep) shall have up to and including the 25th day of March 2005 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court. By order of the Court in conference this the 16th day of February 2005."
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 June 11, 2014

jam

Order 

Clerk

June 11, 2014

149459 (25)

IN RE WALTHALL

__________________________________

LARRY WALTHALL, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 149459

COA: 319793

WAYNE CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE, 

Defendant-Appellee.

___________________________________

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion to waive fees is considered and it 

is DENIED because MCL 600.2963 requires that a prisoner pursuing a civil action be 

liable for filing fees. 

Within 21 days of the certification of this order, plaintiff shall pay to the 

Clerk of the Court the initial partial filing fee of $8.00, shall submit a copy of this order 

with the payment, and shall refile the copy of the pleadings which is being returned 

with this order. Failure to comply with this order shall result in the appeal not being 

filed in this Court.

If plaintiff timely files the partial fee and refiles the pleadings, monthly 

payments shall be made to the Department of Corrections in an amount of 50 percent of 

the deposits made to plaintiff’s account until the payments equal the balance due of 

$367.00. This amount shall then be remitted to this Court.

Pursuant to MCL 600.2963(8) plaintiff shall not file further appeals in civil 

actions in this Court until the entry fee in this case is paid in full. 

The Clerk of the Court shall furnish two copies of this order to plaintiff and 

return plaintiff’s pleadings with this order.
2
HomeOcean Facts

# What are PBDEs? 

## PBDEs, or polybrominated diphenyl ethers, are a class of **fire retardant chemicals**.

As part of NOAA's Mussel Watch Program, PBDEs are one of 150 different contaminants that are continually monitored by periodically sampling bivalves and sediment at 300 coastal sites around the nation. 

PBDEs are found in a variety of consumer products, from TVs and toasters to mattresses and drapes. These chemicals are intended to slow the rate of ignition and fire growth, allowing people more time to escape from a fire or extinguish it. In recent years, PBDEs have generated international concern over their widespread distribution in the environment, their potential to bioaccumulate in humans and wildlife, and their suspected adverse human health effects. In the U.S., PBDE levels in people are generally 10–100 times higher than levels measured in people in Europe and Asia.

Production of PBDEs in the U.S. began in the 1970s and peaked in the late 1990s. Flame retardant manufacturers in the U.S. voluntarily stopped producing the PentaBDE (used in furniture foam) and OctaBDE (used in electronic products) varieties of PBDEs in 2004 and have begun producing alternative flame retardants; however, DecaBDE continues to be produced and used in the U.S., primarily in television casings. DecaBDE is classified as a possible human carcinogen by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

###### **Search** Our Facts

###### Get **Social**

###### More **Information**

          - An Assessment  of PBDEs in Sediments and Bivalves of the U.S. Coastal Zone
          - NOAA’s  Mussel Watch Program

**Last updated:**   01/20/23**Author:** NOAAHow to cite this article

Contact Us

            - Provide Feedback 
            -  Contact Us 
            -  Report an error 

##### Science. Service.Stewardship.

###### 						About NOS 					

            - About Us
            - NOS Program Offices
            - Media Inquiries
            - Website Acknowledgements

###### 						Resources 					

            - Site Index
            - Disclaimer
            - Freedom of Information Act
            - Accessibility

###### 						More Resources 					

            - Information Quality
            - Privacy Policy
            - NOS For Employees
            - USA.gov

          -  National Ocean Service
          -  National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
          -  Department of Commerce

##### 						Social 					

            - 
            - 
            - 
            - 
            -
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

March 31, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

130379 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. JOANNE ROWLAND, a/k/a Stephen J. Markman, JOAN ROWLAND, Justices Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 130379 

 COA: 253210 

Washtenaw CC: 03-000128-NO 

WASHTENAW COUNTY ROAD 

COMMISSION,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 13, 2005 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is GRANTED. The parties shall 

include among the issues addressed: (1) whether appellant’s proposed overruling of 

Hobbs v Michigan State Highway Dep’t, 398 Mich 90, 96 (1976), and Brown v Manistee 

Co Rd Comm, 452 Mich 354, 356-357 (1996), is justified under the standard for applying 

stare decisis discussed in Robinson v City of Detroit, 462 Mich 439, 463-468 (2000); and 

(2) if so, whether a decision overruling Hobbs and Brown should have retroactive or 

prospective application under the standard discussed in Pohutski v City of Allen Park, 465 

Mich 675, 695-699 (2002). 

p0328 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

March 31, 2006 

Clerk