alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1043/2014Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1043/2014 of 2 October 2014 establishing the standard import values for determining            the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1043/2014                     

# of 2 October 2014

# establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing                           a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79,                           (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007(1),                        

Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application                           of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors(2), and in particular Article 136(1) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations,                              the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products                              and periods stipulated in Annex XVI, Part A thereto.

(2)The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU)                              No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its                              publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

The standard import values referred to in Article 136 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are fixed in the Annex to                     this Regulation.                  

# Article 2U.K.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day 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, 2 October 2014.

*For the Commission,*                            

*On behalf of the President,*                            

Jerzy Plewa                            

*Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development*                            

## ANNEXU.K.Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671.                           

2

OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.
LINEBERGER v. NCDOC, et al.

No. 141A08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 19, 2008.

Elizabeth F. Parsons, Assistant Attorney General, for Dept. of Corrections, et al.

Ann B. Petersen, Chapel Hill, for Lineberger.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 13th day of August 2008 by Defendant for Extension of Time to File Brief:

"Motion Allowed. Defendant (Jeffrey Bernard Lineberger) shall have up to and including the 12th day of September 2008 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court. By order of the Court in conference this the 19th day of August 2008."
O'Marr S. REID v. GASTON COUNTY DSS, et al, North Carolina DHHS,

No. 15P08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 6, 2008.

O'Marr S. Reid, Pro Se.

Sherry Bradsher, for NCDHHS.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Plaintiff on the 11th day of January 2008 in this matter for a writ of mandamus, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court, Gaston County:

"Denied by order of the Court in Conference this the 6th day of March 2008."
STATE v. Darian J. McILWAIN.

No. 423P06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

November 16, 2006.

Kathleen U. Baldwin, Assistant Attorney General, Peter S. Gilchrist, III, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 10th day of August 2006 by Defendant for "Petition for Discretionary Review":

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference this the 16th day of November 2006."
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONOF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**PURSUANTTO RULE 13a-14(b) OR RULE 15d-14(b)**

**OF THESECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Crown Pacific Partners, L.P. (the “Partnership”)on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2004 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, StevenE. Dietrich, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of thePartnership, 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) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

          (2)The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership.

 

 
| /s/  Steven E. Dietrich       |   |
|-------------------------------|--------|
| Steven  E. Dietrich           |
| Senior  Vice President and    |
| Chief  Financial Officer      |
| Crown  Pacific Partners, L.P. |
| November  23, 2004            |

 

Thiscertification is made solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and notfor any other purpose.  A signed originalof this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to CrownPacific Partners, L.P. and will be retained by Crown Pacific Partners, L.P. andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
STATE v. Thomas Howard DUNCAN.

No. 91A08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 21, 2008.

Lisa M. Miles, Attorney at Law, for Duncan.

Rex Gore, District Attorney, for State.

Prior report: ___ N.C.App. ___, 656 S.E.2d 597.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 21st day of February 2008 by State of NC for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference this the 21st day of February 2008."
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3665 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3665

To amend chapter 63 of title 5, United States Code, to modify the rate 
  of accrual of annual leave for administrative law judges, contract 
             appeals board members, and immigration judges.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

            October 1 (legislative day, September 17), 2008

 Mr. Akaka (for himself and Mr. Pryor) introduced the following bill; 
which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend chapter 63 of title 5, United States Code, to modify the rate 
  of accrual of annual leave for administrative law judges, contract 
             appeals board members, and immigration judges.

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

SECTION 1. ACCRUAL RATE OF ANNUAL LEAVE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES, 
              CONTRACT APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS, AND IMMIGRATION JUDGES.

    (a) In General.--Section 6303 of title 5, United States Code, is 
amended by striking subsection (f) and inserting the following:
    ``(f) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, the rate 
of accrual of annual leave under subsection (a) shall be 1 day for each 
full biweekly pay period in the case of any employee who--
            ``(1) holds a position which is subject to--
                    ``(A) section 5372, 5372a, 5376, or 5383; or
                    ``(B) a pay system equivalent to a pay system to 
                which any provision under paragraph (1) applies, as 
                determined by the Office of Personnel Management; or
            ``(2) is an immigration judge as defined under section 
        101(b)(4) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
        1101(b)(4)).''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall take 
effect on the first day of the first applicable pay period beginning on 
or after 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 21


                   STIRLING COOKE BROWN HOLDINGS LIMITED

                                SUBSIDIARIES

The following subsidiaries are incorporated in Bermuda.

Realm Investments Ltd.
Raydon Underwriting Management Company Limited
Realm Captive Management Company Limited
Realm Underwriting Management Ltd
Stirling Cooke Brown Insurance Brokers (Bermuda) Limited
Comp Indemnity Reinsurance Company Limited
Realm Insurance Services Limited



The following subsidiaries are incorporated in the United Kingdom:

Stirling Cooke Brown Holdings (UK) Limited
Stirling Cooke Brown Insurance Brokers Limited
Stirling Cooke Brown Reinsurance Brokers Limited

The following subsidiaries are incorporated in the United States:

Stirling Cooke North American Holdings Ltd., a Delaware corporation
Stirling Cooke Insurance Services Inc., a Florida corporation
Stirling Cooke (Texas) Inc., a Texas corporation
Stirling Cooke Risk Management Services, Inc., a Florida corporation
Stirling Cooke Brown North American Reinsurance Intermediaries, Inc.,
  a New York corporation
Employers and Providers Resource Group Inc., a Delaware corporation
North American Risk Inc., a Texas corporation
Realm National Insurance Company, a New York Insurance corporation
Stirling Cooke Southeast, Inc., an Alabama corporation
World Trade Services Inc., a New York corporation
Stirling Cooke New York Insurance Services Agency Inc., a New York corporation
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order
Lansing, Michigan



### December 27, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice 

### 129411 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan 

### PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices



### v SC: 129411 COA: 260557 Oakland CC: 1999-168010-FH DAVID GEORGE BORETTI, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, th e application for leave to appeal the August 16, 2005 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishi ng entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).

p1219 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.

December 27, 2005

Clerk
BRADLEY v. MAXIM HEALTHCARE SERVICES.

No. COA07-1052.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed August 5, 2008.

Certification Date August 25, 2008.

Appeal from NC Industrial Commission (I.C. NO. 483665).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 169 (Thursday, September 1, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 52116]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-17384]



[[Page 52116]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[USCG-2005-21093]


Notification of the Removal of Conditions of Entry for Certain 
Vessels Arriving to the United States

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of policy.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard announces that conditions of entry are no 
longer being imposed on vessels arriving from the country of Nauru.

DATES: The policy announced in this notice is effective on August 1, 
2005

ADDRESSES: The Docket Management Facility maintains the public docket 
for this notice. This notice will be available for inspection or 
copying at room PL-401 on the Plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 
Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, except Federal holidays. You may also find this docket, 
including this notice, on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice, 
call Lieutenant Galia Kaplan, Coast Guard, telephone 202-366-2591.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background and Purpose

    Section 70110 of the Maritime Transportation Security Act provides 
that the Secretary of Homeland Security may impose conditions of entry 
into the United States from ports that are not maintaining effective 
anti-terrorism measures. The Coast Guard has been delegated the 
authority by the Secretary to carry out the provisions of this section. 
On May 2, 2005, the Coast Guard published a Notice of policy in the 
Federal Register, (70 FR 22668) announcing that it had determined that 
ports in Nauru, among other countries, were not maintaining effective 
anti-terrorism measures, and imposed conditions of entry. Based on 
recent information, the Coast Guard has determined that Nauru is now 
maintaining effective anti-terrorism measures, and is accordingly 
removing the conditions of entry announced in its previously published 
notice of policy.

    Dated: August 9, 2005.
C.E. Bone,
Rear Admiral, USCG, Director of Port Security.
[FR Doc. 05-17384 Filed 8-31-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
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 Annual Report of ImproveNet, Inc., a Delaware corporation
( "ImproveNet") on Form 10-KSB/A, for the year ended December 31, 2004, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report") I,
Homayoon Farsi, Acting Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

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 ImproveNet.

ImproveNet, Inc.

/s/ Homayoon Farsi
------------------------------
Homayoon Farsi
Acting Chief Financial Officer

July 5, 2005
STATE v. Robert Donald TURNER.

No. 134P08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 11, 2008.

LaToya B. Powell, Assistant Attorney General, Garry W. Frank, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 26th day of March 2008 by Defendant for "Notice of Appeal":

"Motion Dismissed ex mero motu by order of the Court in conference this the 11th day of June 2008."
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION

November 7, 2008 Revision

Cause number: 01-13-00805-CR

Style: Rodney Carnell Mays v. The State of Texas

Date motion filed*: December 10, 2014

Type of motion: Third Motion to Extend Time to File Appellant’s Brief

Party filing motion: Appellant

Document to be filed: Appellant’s Brief

Is appeal accelerated? No

If motion to extend time:

Original due date: February 19, 2015

Number of extensions granted: 2 Current Due Date: May 11, 2015

Date Requested: June 10, 2015

Ordered that motion is:

 Granted

If document is to be filed, document due: June 10, 2015

 No further extensions of time will be granted.

 Denied

 Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot)

 Other: _____________________________________

Although appellant’s brief was originally due on February 19, 2015, this Court’s Order

on February 24, 2015, granted, in part, appellant’s motion to halt the briefing schedule

until 30 days after the supplemental reporter’s record was filed. After two volumes of 

the supplemental reporter’s record was filed on March 11, 2015, the Clerk of this Court

granted appellant’s second extension on April 10, 2015, but no warnings were given. 

Thus, appellant’s third extension is granted, but counsel is warned that no further 

extensions will be granted. Accordingly, if appellant’s brief is not filed by June 10,

2015, the Court may abate this appeal for a hearing. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b)(2).

Judge’s signature: /s/ Evelyn V. Keyes

 

Date: May 14, 2015
# Council Decision of 25 September 2014 appointing a Czech alternate member of the Committee of the Regions (2014/676/EU)

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Council Decision

# of 25 September 2014

# appointing a Czech alternate member of the Committee of the Regions

# (2014/676/EU)

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 CzechGovernment,

Whereas:

(1)On 22 December 2009 and on 18 January 2010, the Council adopted Decisions 2009/1014/EU(1) and 2010/29/EU(2) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2010 to 25 January                              2015. On 24 September 2012, by Council Decision 2012/524/EU(3), Mr Milan CHOVANEC was appointed alternate member until 25 January 2015.

(2)An alternate member's seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr                              Milan CHOVANEC,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

# Article 1U.K.

The following is hereby appointed as alternate member to the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term                     of office, which runs until 25 January 2015:                  
          -  Mr Václav ŠLAJS, *Hejtman Plzeňského kraje*.                         

# Article 2U.K.

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

Done at Brussels, 25 September 2014.

*For the Council*                            

*The President*                            

F. Guidi                            

1

OJ L 348, 29.12.2009, p. 22.                           

2

OJ L 12, 19.1.2010, p. 11.                           

3

OJ L 263, 28.9.2012, p. 41.
HOUSING AUTHORITY v. CREECH.

No. 114P07-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 25, 2008.

Robert Spence, Jr., Smithfield, for Smithfield Housing Authority.

*898The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 24th day of March 2008 by Defendant for "Dual Petitions for Temporary Stays and Extraordinary Process Writ of Supersedeas":

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference this the 25th day of March 2008."
PITT COUNTY v. DEJA VUE, INC., Deja Vue II, Charles Lee Cummings, Jr., Misty's, Marie Bradshaw Hudson, Rex Hudson, Silver Bullet Dolls, Inc., Matthew Earl Faulkner, Linda Faulkner, Dora Crawford Faulkner.

No. 496P07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 10, 2008.

David W. Silver, for Misty's & Rex Hudson.

Janis Gallagher, for Pitt County.

Leslie S. Robinson, Greenville, for Deja Vue, et al.

David C. Sutton, Greenville, for Silver Bullet Dolls & Faulkner.

Prior report: ___ N.C.App. ___, 650 S.E.2d 12.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 9th day of October 2007 by Defendants (Silver Bullet Dolls and Faulkner) 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:

*738"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 10th day of April 2008."
# **Exhibit32.2**

# **OFFICER’SCERTIFICATION**

Pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the Chief Financial Officer of Western SizzlinCorporation (the “Company”), hereby certifies that the Form 10-Q for the periodended June 30, 2007 and the financial statements contained therein, fullycomply with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the Form 10-Q and thefinancial statements thereto fairly present, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company as of June 30,2007, and the period then ended.
| /s/ Robyn B. Mabe |   | Date: August 14, 2007 |
|-------------------|--------|-----------------------|

 

 

----
# C_2023024EN.01005002.xml

| 23.1.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/50 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.1.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/50

---

Action brought on 11 November 2022 — Kingbird v Commission

(Case T-686/22)

(2023/C 24/67)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Applicant: Kingbird — Consultores e Serviços, Lda (Zona Franca da Madeira) (Funchal, Portugal) (represented by: S. Gemas Donário and S. Soares, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

| — | annul Commission Decision C(2020) 8550 final of 4 December 2020 on aid scheme SA.21259 (2018/C) (ex 2018/NN) implemented by Portugal for Zona Franca da Madeira (ZFM) — Regime III; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Commission Decision C(2020) 8550 final of 4 December 2020 on aid scheme SA.21259 (2018/C) (ex 2018/NN) implemented by Portugal for Zona Franca da Madeira (ZFM) — Regime III;

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on five pleas in law that are, essentially, identical or similar to those relied on in Case T-553/22, Thorn Investments v Commission.

---
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-60384 Conference Calendar

DAVID C. BROOKER, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus ANNETTE TOWNSEND, Sergeant, Disciplinary Chiarperson; WALTER BOOKER, Superintendent at Parchman; JAMES ANDERSON, Commissioner; CHARLES THOMAS; DORA ROSS; DAVID REED; OFFICER BOOKER, Defendants-Appellees.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 4:99-CV-89-S-B

-------------------- June 15, 2000 Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * David C. Brooker, Mississippi inmate #78460, appeals the denial of his civil rights complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for failure to state a claim. Brooker’s argument that the disciplinary hearing was unfair because the hearing officers relied only on what the charging officer stated and not on Brooker’s evidence does not state a claim for which relief can be granted. See Reeves v. Pettcox , 19 F.3d 1060, 1062No. 99-60384 -2- (5th Cir. 1994). Brooker’s claim that he was not given the opportunity to be heard lacks a factual predicate. Because Brooker does not make his district court argument that he was retaliated against for filing the instant suit, that issue is deemed waived. See Yohey v. Collins , 985 F.2d 222, 224 (5th Cir. 1993). AFFIRMED.