alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2017115EN.01005001.xml

| 4.5.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 115/50 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.5.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 115/50

---

COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2017/775

of 25 April 2017

appointing an alternate member, proposed by the Republic of Finland, of the Committee of the Regions

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal of the Finnish Government,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 26 January 2015, 5 February 2015 and 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116 (1), 2015/190 (2) and 2015/994 (3) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 26 January 2015, 5 February 2015 and 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116 (1), 2015/190 (2) and 2015/994 (3) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020.

| (2) | An alternate member's seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Ms Katri KULMUNI, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

An alternate member's seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Ms Katri KULMUNI,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following is hereby appointed as an alternate member of the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2020:

| — | Ms Merja LAHTINEN, Jämsän kaupunginvaltuuston jäsen. |
| --- | --- |

—

Ms Merja LAHTINEN, Jämsän kaupunginvaltuuston jäsen.

Article 2

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

Done at Luxembourg, 25 April 2017.

For the Council

The President

I. BORG

---

(1)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/116 of 26 January 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 20, 27.1.2015, p. 42).

1

(2)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/190 of 5 February 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 31, 7.2.2015, p. 25).

2

(3)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/994 of 23 June 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 159, 25.6.2015, p. 70).

3

---
STATE v. BURNETTE.

No. COA05-228.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed December 20, 2005.

Certification Date January 9, 2006.

Appeal from Chatham (03CRS2233)

Case without published opinion. Affirmed.
# L_2012134EN.01000601.xml

| 24.5.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 134/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.5.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 134/6

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 434/2012

of 16 May 2012

entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Chelčicko — Lhenické ovoce (PGI))

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 7(4) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) and in accordance with Article 17(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, the Czech Republic’s application to register the name ‘Chelčicko – Lhenické ovoce’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) and in accordance with Article 17(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, the Czech Republic’s application to register the name ‘Chelčicko – Lhenické ovoce’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

| (2) | As no statement of objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, that name should therefore be entered in the register, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

As no statement of objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, that name should therefore be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name contained in the Annex to this Regulation is hereby entered in the register.

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, 16 May 2012.

For the Commission, On behalf of the President,

Dacian CIOLOȘ

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12.

1

(2)  
  OJ C 271, 14.9.2011, p. 22.

2

---

ANNEX

Agricultural products intended for human consumption listed in Annex I to the Treaty:

Class 1.6.   Fruit, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed

CZECH REPUBLIC

Chelčicko — Lhenické ovoce (PGI)

---
EXHIBIT 32.2

            Section 1350 Certification of the Chief Financial Officer

I, Gunther Braun, Chief Financial Officer of Rofin-Sinar Technologies Inc. (the
"Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to my knowledge:

1. The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the annual period ended
September 30, 2003 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


Date:    December 19, 2003

                                                 /s/  Gunther Braun
                                                 -----------------------
                                                 Gunther Braun
                                                 Chief Financial Officer
Nebraska Court of Appeals Memorandum Opinions

NOT Selected for Posting to Court Website

(released the week prior to February 12, 2019)

The following memorandum opinions were filed by the Nebraska Court of 

Appeals and can be viewed using SSCALES:

None Available

The above-listed memorandum opinions can be viewed online through the 

appellate court case search available by subscription through Nebraska.gov:

http://www.nebraska.gov/subscriber/.

Current subscribers to Nebraska.gov can search appellate court cases here:

https://www.nebraska.gov/courts/sccales/.
86 Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation — Defense Spending by State, FY 2021

NORTH DAKOTA 

#45

$0.9 B SPENT IN 

#33 

1.4% OF STATE GDP

0.2%

OF TOTAL U.S. 

$1,165

PER RESIDENT 

#49

$0.2 B CONTRACT 

#39 

13,925 NUMBER OF 

#40

$0.7 B PERSONNEL 

STATE DEFENSE SPENDING SPENDING PERSONNEL SPENDING 

, DEFENSE CONTRACTS

By Type 

Supplies and Construction: 13%

Equipment: 16% 

Service: 64%

By Service 

Army

26%

Navy/Marines

8%

Air Force

Other Defense

9%

DEFENSE PERSONNEL 

Allocations, By Type

56%

Reserve: 3%

National 

Guard: 30%

Active Duty: 54%

Civilian: 13%

Allocations, By Service 

Army

27%

Navy/Marines

1%

Air Force

71%

Other Defense

0%

Research and

Development: 8% 

Top Defense Contractors 

Four Tribes Enterprises LLC

Strata Corp.

Earthmovers, Inc.

Gast Construction Co., Inc.

Pro-Mark Services

Ideal Aerosmith, Inc.

Summit Technical Solutions

Dakco Distributors

Packet Digital LLC

Johnson Controls

Contract Awards Performed (By Fiscal Year, billions)

FY14

$0.3 $0.3

$0.2 $0.2 $0.2 $0.2

FY20

$0.2

$0.1

FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY21

$691.2 MILLION 13,925

TOTAL PAYROLL TOTAL PERSONNEL 

Top Defense Personnel Locations

(M = millions)

$20.6 M

$15.7 M

$15.3 M

$13.4 M

$11.9 M

$9.0 M

$8.6 M

$8.4 M

$7.1 M

$5.2 M

County

Ward

Grand Forks

Cass

Burleigh

Ramsey

Richland

Stutsman

Barnes

Stark

Lamoure

Active Civilian National

Duty Guard

5,705 713 302 

1,724 371 347 

20 328 1,614

ND 270 973 

0 64 352 

ND 0 162

0 ND 116

0 20 88 

0 ND 74 

0 ND 63

Reserve

28 

58 

160

40 

0 

63

0 

0 

0 

0 

Total

6,748

2,500

2,122

ND 

416

ND 

ND 

108 

ND 

ND 
(M=millions)

NORTH DAKOTA FISCAL YEAR 2018 FISCAL YEAR 2018

FISCAL YEAR 2021 

Ramsey

McLean

Barnes

TOP DEFENSE PERSONNEL SPENDING LOCATIONS 

Pembina

Mountrail

Benson

McKenzie

Burleigh Stutsman Cass

LaMoure

TOP DEFENSE CONTRACT SPENDING LOCATIONS (K = thousands, M = millions)

Ward

Grand Forks

Cass

Pembina

LaMoure

Stutsman

Burleigh

Benson

Mountrail

McKenzie

(M = millions)

$99.6 M

$42.6 M

$26.0 M

$13.2 M

$6.2 M

$4.2 M

$3.6 M

$1.6 M

$1.3 M

$850.5 K

Ward

Grand Forks

Cass

Burleigh

Ramsey

McLean

Pembina

Richland

Barnes

Stutsman

$389.2 M

$137.0 M

$73.9 M 

$54.3 M

$14.0 M

$5.0 M

$3.4 M

$3.4 M

$3.2 M

$2.4 M

Grand Forks

Ward

Richland

Burleigh Stutsman Cass

Grand Forks

Ward

Pembina

Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation — Defense Spending by State, FY 2021 8

AF Active AF Guard AF Reserve Army Active Army Guard Army Reserve MC Active Navy Active WHS

7
STATE v. DAVIS.

No. COA05-552.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed February 21, 2006.

Certification Date March 13, 2006.

Appeal from Mecklenburg (01CRS2156, 01CRS2157).

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

August 5, 2016

No. 04

- 16

- 00085

- CV

WHATABURGER, INC., CA Development LLC, CA Real Estate LLC, Cinco Aguilas LLC, Tres Aguilas Enterprises LLC, Tres Aguilas Manage ment LLC, Whataburger International LLC, Whataburger Real Estate LLC, Whataburger Restaurants LLC, et al., Appellants

v.

WHATABURGER OF ALICE, LTD., Appellee

From the 131st Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2016

- CI

- 01431

Honor able Gloria Saldana, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

Appellee’s Unopposed Second Motion for Extension of Time is hereby GRANTED. NO

FURTHER EXTENSIONS OF TIME WILL BE ALLOWED. Time is extended to September 6,

2016.

_________________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 5th day of August, 2016

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
**EXHIBIT 31.1****SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION**I, George A. Burnett, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Dex Media West LLC;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 controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;(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 fourth fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and5. 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 the registrant’s board of directors or (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol 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 who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date:August 8, 2005       /s/ George A. Burnett         George A. Burnett    President and Chief Executive Officer    (Principal Executive Officer)
### UNPUBLISHED



# UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT



#  T ERRY W. S TEWART ,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v. No. 02-1466



#  M ICHAELT HOMAS ; M ARTHA W ILLIAMS , Defendants-Appellees. 

# 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. William L. Osteen, District Judge, sitting by designation.

(CA-02-57-3-WLO) Submitted: September 20, 2002 Decided: November 19, 2002 Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed in part and vacated and remanded in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.

COUNSEL Terry W. Stewart, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).OPINION
PER CURIAM: Terry Stewart appeals the dismissal of his civil complaint and the imposition of sanctions. We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand for further proceedings on the issue of sanctions. We have reviewed the record and the judgment of the district courtfinding that Stewart’s complaint is frivolous, and we find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the rejection of Stewart’s claims on the reasoning of the district court. See Stewart v. Thomas , No. CA-02- 57-3-WLO (W.D.N.C. filed Mar. 28, 2002; entered Mar. 29, 2002).Stewart also asserts that the district court improperly imposed sanctions. While we express no opinion on the propriety of the imposition of sanctions, the court should have given Stewart proper notice that sanctions were under consideration and allowed him an opportunity to respond. In this case, the show cause order did not specifically inform Stewart that he might be subjected to sanctions if the court found that he filed his complaint without factual or legal basis. Rule11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that the court provide a party "notice and a reasonable opportunity to respond" before it imposes sanctions. While the hearing established that Stewart’s complaint was frivolous, the court should have notified Stewart that it was considering the pre-filing review order that it imposed. See Autry v. Woods , 106 F.3d 61, 63 (4th Cir. 1997) (noting that this Court issued show cause order before entering pre-filing review injunction). This would have given Stewart a chance to respond to the propriety of sanctions rather than simply opposing the dismissal of his complaint. Because the court did not provide Stewart adequate notice and an opportunity to respond before imposing sanctions, we vacate the sanctions order and remand for the court to do so. We express no opinion as to whether Stewart’s conduct merits sanctions or whether the chosen sanctions are appropriate.In sum, we vacate the sanctions order and remand for further proceedings as to sanctions after Stewart is given proper notice and affirm the court’s orders in all other respects. We dispense with oralargument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately pre2 S TEWART v. T HOMASsented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED IN PART; VACATED AND REMANDED IN PART 3 S TEWART v. T HOMAS
<PAGE>
EXHIBIT 99.1

                            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 Texas Petrochemicals LP (the "Company")
on Form 10-K for the annual period ending June 30, 2002, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, in the capacity and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies
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 results of operations of the
Company.


September 30, 2002                  /s/ B. W. WAYCASTER
                                    -------------------------------------
                                    B. W. Waycaster
                                    President and Chief Executive Officer
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5334 

To suspend temporarily the duty on product mixtures containing Methyl 

2-[({[(4,6-dimethoxy-2-pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl}amino)sulfonyl]-4- 

[(mesylamino)methyl]benzoate Methyl 4-iodo-2-[3-(4-methoxy-6-methyl1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)ureidosulfonyl]benzoate, sodium salt. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 8, 2008 

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on product mixtures containing Methyl 2-[({[(4,6-dimethoxy-2- 

pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl}amino)sulfonyl]-4- 

[(mesylamino)methyl]benzoate Methyl 4-iodo-2-[3-(4- 

methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2- 

yl)ureidosulfonyl]benzoate, sodium salt. 

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


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
2 

•HR 5334 IH

1 SECTION 1. PRODUCT MIXTURES CONTAINING METHYL 2- 

2 [({[(4,6-DIMETHOXY-2-PYRIMIDINYL)AMINO] 

3 CARBONYL}AMINO)SULFONYL]-4- 

4 [(MESYLAMINO)METHYL]BENZOATE METHYL 

5 4-IODO-2-[3-(4-METHOXY-6-METHYL-1,3,5- 

6 TRIAZIN-2-YL)UREIDOSULFONYL]BENZOATE, 

7 SODIUM SALT. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

9 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

10 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

11 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Product mixtures containing 

Methyl 2-[({[(4,6-dimethoxy2-pyrimidinyl)amino] carbonyl}amino)sulfonyl]-4- 

[(mesylamino)methyl]benzoate Methyl 4-iodo-2-[3-(4-methoxy-6- 

methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2- 

yl)ureidosulfonyl]benzoate, 

sodium salt (CAS No. 

208465–21–8 144550–36–7) 

(provided for in subheading 

3808.93.15) ........................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2011 ’’. 

12 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

13 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

14 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

15 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
IN RE C.G.F.

No. COA05-21.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed January 17, 2006.

Certification Date February 6, 2006.

Appeal from Wilkes (98J25).

Case reported without published opinion. Reversed and remanded.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                       2,153,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,069,000
<PP&E>                                      11,331,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                 440,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              23,588,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,561,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  10,976,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                23,588,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,374,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               11,127,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                13,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             352,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (10,118,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (10,118,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (10,118,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.14)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.14)
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                                 18 U.S.C. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of DESCORP, INC. (the "Company") on Form
10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, David Stephens,  Chief
Executive  Officer of the  Company,  certify,  pursuant  to 18 U.S.C.  1350,  as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

The  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all  material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


                                                 /s/ David Stephens
                                                 --------------------------
Date: November 9, 2004                           David Stephens
                                                 Chief Executive Officer
#### In the Matter of Daniel Wayne Pozefsky, an Attorney, Resignor.

[801 NYS2d 169]

Voluntary resignation accepted and name removed from roll of attorneys *(see Matter of Manown,*240 AD2d 83 [1998]). Present—Green, J.P., Scudder, Gorski, Pine and Lawton, JJ.