alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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.
 Small Business Administration [Disaster Declaration #10169 and #10170]
 AGENCY: Small Business Administration.
 ACTION: Notice.
 SUMMARY: This is a notice of an Administrative declaration of a disaster for the State of Texas dated 08/29/2005. *Incident:*
                         Severe Storms and Flooding. *Incident Period:*
                         08/09/2005 through 08/15/2005.
 DATES: *Effective Date:*
                         08/29/2005. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         10/28/2005. *EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         05/29/2006.
 ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Disaster Area Office 3, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of the Administrator's disaster declaration applications for disaster loans may be 
                    ( print page 53266)
                    filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations. The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster: *Primary Counties:* Haskell. *Contiguous Counties:* *Texas:*
                     Baylor, Jones, King, Knox, Shackelford, Stonewall, Throckmorton. The Interest Rates are: Percent*Homeowners With Credit Available Elsewhere*
5.375*Homeowners Without Credit Available Elsewhere*
2.687*Businesses With Credit Available Elsewhere*
6.557*Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives Without Credit Available Elsewhere*
4.000*Other (Including Non-Profit Organizations) With Credit Available Elsewhere*
4.750*Businesses And Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere*
4.000
 The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 10169 B and for economic injury is 10170 0. The State which received an EIDL Declaration # is Texas. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008) Dated: August 29, 2005. Hector V. Barreto, Administrator.


[FR Doc. 05-17687 Filed 9-6-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
STATE v. Marcus J. WALTERS.

No. 305P08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 26, 2008.

LaToya B. Powell, Assistant Attorney General, Philip E. Berger, Jr., District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 30th day of June 2008 by Defendant for "Notice of Appeals":

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference this the 26th day of August 2008."
STATE of North Carolina v. Karshia Bliamy LY and Jeffrey Xiong.

No. 200P08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 9, 2008.

Daniel Pollitt, Assistant Appellate Defender, for Ly & Xiong.

*568Creecy Chandler Johnson, Harriet F. Worley, Assistant Attorney Generals, John Snyder, District Attorney, for State of NC.

Prior report: ___ N.C.App. ___, 658 S.E.2d 300.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 28th day of April 2008 by Defendants 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 9th day of October 2008."
Christopher RANDELL, a minor, by and through his Guardian ad Litem Gloria FORREST and Gloria Forrest, Individually and Gloria Forrest as Administratrix of the Estates of Victoria Stephenson and Vicki Lynn Stephenson v. Crystal Gale BEACHAM and Katrina Lynne Burbage. appealed by unnamed defendant GEICO.

No. 108P08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 26, 2008.

Rudolph A. Ashton, III, New Bern, Terri W. Sharp, for GEICO.

Charles R. Hardee, Greenville, for Randell, et al.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 11th day of March 2008 by Unnamed Defendant (GEICO) 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 26th day of August 2008."
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   1-MO
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                         1462115
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                   66576826
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                       11113294
<ALLOWANCE>                                    (10000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                80394411
<DEPOSITS>                                    62522025
<SHORT-TERM>                                   2500000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             284254
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             9
<OTHER-SE>                                       15079
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                80394411
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                2256102
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              1579560
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                 78161
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               3913823
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             2286789
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             2308335
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          1605488
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                6875
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 920077
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 734739
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      463740
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 463740
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    463740
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .59
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .59
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    2.73
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                     0
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                10000
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             10000
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          10000
        

</TABLE>
```

                                                                EXHIBIT 13.(A).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 Tefron Ltd. (the "Company") on Form 20-F
for the period ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned hereby
certify that to the best of our 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 the Company.

Date: July 13, 2010

                                                   By: /s/ Amit Meridor
                                                   ----------------------------
                                                   Amit Meridor
                                                   Chief Executive Officer

Date: July 13, 2010

                                                   By: /s/ Eran Rotem
                                                   ---------------------------
                                                   Eran Rotem
                                                   Chief Financial Officer
```
Exhibit 31.1
                                 CERTIFICATION

I, Charles M. Weaver, certify that:

         1.       I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K in respect
                  of the S&P-Linked Investment Trust Certificates, Series
                  1997-SP-1 Trust (the "Trust");

         2.       Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports does
                  not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit
                  to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
                  made, in light of the circumstances under which such
                  statements were made, not misleading as of the last day of
                  the period covered by this annual report;

         3.       Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing
                  information required to be provided to the Depositor by the
                  Trustee under the pooling and servicing or similar
                  agreement, for inclusion in these reports is included in
                  these reports; and

         4.       I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by
                  the Depositor and the Trustee under the pooling and
                  servicing or similar agreement and based upon my knowledge
                  and the annual compliance review required under that
                  agreement, and except as disclosed in the reports, the
                  Depositor and Trustee have each fulfilled its obligations
                  under that agreement.

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information
provided to me by the following unaffiliated party: The Bank of New York, as
Trustee.



Date: March 27, 2006


         /s/ Charles M. Weaver
----------------------------------------
Charles M. Weaver, Senior Vice President
# CE2004088EN.01035901.xml

| 8.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 88/359 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 88/359

---

(2004/C 88 E/0365)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1631/03

by Carlos Coelho (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(12 May 2003)

Subject:   Discrimination on grounds of nationality

Subject:

The European Community's development is no longer confined to the economic sphere. The Community is now made up of 375 million people, who are not merely consumers in a large single market, but also citizens of the European Union who have the right to move freely within the EU and to settle in any part of that Union for personal or professional reasons and who hope they can live without fear of being discriminated against in any way.

I have been contacted by a Portuguese national who has opted for an international career with Shell Accounting Service in Glasgow, and has been living and working in the United Kingdom (Scotland) for some two years. He maintains that he has been discriminated against on account of his nationality by the Halifax Bank (a member of the Bank of Scotland group), which has rejected his request for his bank account to be ‘upgraded’ on the grounds that this is only possible once a person has been resident in the country for three years. As an EU citizen, does he not have the same rights and duties as a UK national?

Article 12 of the EC Treaty stipulates that ‘within the scope of this Treaty, and without prejudice to any special provisions contained therein, any discrimination on grounds of nationality shall be prohibited’. Does the Commission agree that the Halifax Bank's policy may be considered discriminatory in that it is contrary to the very essence of the European Union and constitutes a clear violation of the principle of non-discrimination enshrined in the Treaty?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(13 June 2003)

(13 June 2003)

In principle, a bank has the contractual freedom to enter into contractual agreements with a potential customer. This applies both to any intended contractual relationship (e.g. opening an account) and to the conditions under which a corresponding contract is concluded (particularly account maintenance fees, interest rates, overdraft facilities, etc.).

There is therefore, in principle, no reason to challenge the Halifax Bank's decision not to grant a customer better conditions on the grounds that the customer has to have lived in the country for at least three years in order for his/her bank account to be upgraded. This is not necessarily discrimination on grounds of nationality. The reasons for rejecting the application could rather be based on specific economic considerations (risk assessment, account history, volume of deposits and withdrawals, payment record or other reasons relating to the individual customer). The information provided is not sufficient to allow a clear legal assessment to be delivered.

---
# C_2023321EN.01005901.xml

| 11.9.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 321/59 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.9.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 321/59

---

Action brought on 14 July 2023 — Nordea Kiinnitysluottopankki v SRB

(Case T-413/23)

(2023/C 321/65)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Nordea Kiinnitysluottopankki Oyj (Helsinki, Finland) (represented by: H. Berger, M. Weber and D. Schoo, lawyers)

Defendant: Single Resolution Board (SRB)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the Decision of the SRB of 2 May 2023, document no. SRB/ES/2023/23, including Annexes I, II and III, as far as it concerns the ex-ante contribution of the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the Decision of the SRB of 2 May 2023, document no. SRB/ES/2023/23, including Annexes I, II and III, as far as it concerns the ex-ante contribution of the applicant;

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

—

order the SRB to pay the costs.

Plea in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on one plea in law, alleging that the SRB has infringed Article 70(2) of Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 (1) by not applying the binding 12,5 % cap to the target level when determining the 2023 annual target level.

---

(1)  Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2014 establishing uniform rules and a uniform procedure for the resolution of credit institutions and certain investment firms in the framework of a Single Resolution Mechanism and a Single Resolution Fund and amending Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 (OJ 2014 L 225, p. 1).

---
MILES v. KOON.

No. COA07-1181.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed May 6, 2008.

Certification Date May 27, 2008.

Appeal from Mecklenburg (05CVS9754).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
**EXHIBIT** **32**





**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 Clickable Enterprises, Inc. (the “Company”)
      on Form 10-KSB for the period ended March 31, 2007 as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), each of
      the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates 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 to his 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 operation of the Company.




Date:September
              14, 2007
            
            By:
            /s/
              Nicholas
              Cirillo, Jr.Name:
            Nicholas
              Cirillo, Jr.,Title:
            President
              and
              Chief Executive Officer
              (Principal
                Executive Officer)
# Council Implementing Decision 2014/439/CFSPShow full title

Council Implementing Decision 2014/439/CFSP of 8 July 2014 implementing Decision 2012/642/CFSP concerning restrictive measures            against Belarus         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Council Implementing Decision 2014/439/CFSP                     

# of 8 July 2014

# implementing Decision 2012/642/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Belarus

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 31(2) thereof,

Having regard to Council Decision 2012/642/CFSP of 15 October 2012 concerning restrictive measures against Belarus(1), and in particular Article 6(1) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)On 15 October 2012, the Council adopted Decision 2012/642/CFSP which imposes restrictive measures against Belarus.

(2)The Council considers that one person should be added to the list of persons and entities subject to restrictive measures                              as set out in the Annex to Decision 2012/642/CFSP.

(3)The Council also considers that eight persons should be removed from the list of persons and entities subject to restrictive                              measures as set out in the Annex to Decision 2012/642/CFSP.

(4)The Annex to Decision 2012/642/CFSP should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

# Article 1U.K.

The Annex to Decision 2012/642/CFSP is hereby amended in accordance with the Annex to this Decision.

# Article 2U.K.

This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union.*                   

Done at Brussels, 8 July 2014.

*For the Council*                            

*The President*                            

P. C. Padoan                            

## ANNEXU.K.

### I.The following persons are deleted from the list set out in part A of the Annex to Decision 2012/642/CFSP:U.K.

### II.The following person is added to the list set out in part A of the Annex to Decision 2012/642/CFSP:U.K.

1

OJ L 285, 17.10.2012, p. 1.
#### 159 West 80th Street Corp. et al., Appellants, v Interstate Insurance Group, Defendant, and RSI Services, Inc., Respondent.

[801 NYS2d 309]

*835Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Diane A. Lebedeff, J.), entered on or about February 8, 2005, which granted defendant-respondent’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiffs theory appears to be that it was denied a defense in an underlying action for premises liability because of defendant’s negligence in issuing a policy that did not name plaintiff as the owner of the premises. In response to defendant’s demand for a bill of particulars specifying, inter alia, the issuance date, number and period of the subject policy, plaintiff stated that the information sought was in defendant’s “custody,” and further indicated that defendant had issued several policies all of which misnamed the insured, and refused to correct the policies when advised of the error on at least four occasions. Directed to supplement this response, plaintiff responded that the original policy is in defendant’s possession, and indicated that the error appeared on policies issued between 1998 and 2002, and perhaps others as well. The motion court aptly described this response as “patently insufficient,” and went on to note that plaintiffs opposition to the motion also failed to identify the “relevant insurance policy,” or provide any additionally demanded particulars of the alleged negligence, such as the identity of defendant’s representative who was advised of the error and the dates of the alleged communications. Under the circumstances, the action was properly dismissed (CPLR 3042 [d]; *see Shaw v Bronfman,*284 AD2d 267 [2001], *Iv dismissed*97 NY2d 725 [2002]). Concur—Buckley, P.J., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Saxe and Williams, JJ.
# C_2023024EN.01005702.xml

| 23.1.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/57 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.1.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/57

---

Action brought on 12 November 2022 — Poppysle v Commission

(Case T-704/22)

(2023/C 24/80)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Applicant: Poppysle — Comércio Internacional e Serviços, Sociedade Unipessoal, Lda (Zona Franca da Madeira) (Funchal, Portugal) (represented by: A. Ferreira Correia and R. da Palma Borges, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision in respect of Articles 1 and 4; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision in respect of Articles 1 and 4;

| — | order the defendant institution to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant institution to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action brought against Commission Decision (EU) 2022/1414 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 (notified under document C(2020) 8550) (OJ 2022 L 217, p. 49), the applicant relies on six pleas in law that are, essentially, identical or similar to those relied on in Case T-702/22, TA v Commission.

---
INTERMEC,
INC.


SUBSIDIARIES
OF THE REGISTRANT





Intermec
Technologies Corporation (WASHINGTON)





Infolink
Group Limited  (AUSTRALIA)





Intermec Technologies Australia Pty.
Limited  (AUSTRALIA)





Intermec
International Inc.  (WASHINGTON)





Intermec International
B.V.  (NETHERLANDS)





Intermec Scanner Technology Center
S.A.S.  (FRANCE)





Intermec Technologies (S) Pte
Ltd  (SINGAPORE)





Intermec Technologies
AB  (SWEDEN)





Intermec Technologies
A/S  (DENMARK)





ITC Intermec
Technologies Corporation AS  (NORWAY)





Intermec Technologies Holdings
B.V.  (NETHERLANDS)





Intermec
IP Corp.  (DELAWARE)





Intermec
Label Products B.V.  (NETHERLANDS)





Intermec
(South America) Ltda.  (BRAZIL)





Intermec
Technologies Benelux B.V.  (NETHERLANDS)





Intermec
Technologies Canada Ltd.  (CANADA)





Intermec
Technologies de Mexico, S.A. de C.V.  (MEXICO)





Intermec Services, S.A. de
C.V.  (MEXICO)





Intermec
Technologies GmbH  (GERMANY)





Intermec
Technologies, S.A.  (SPAIN)





Intermec
Technologies S.A.S.  (FRANCE)





Intermec
Technologies S.r.l.  (ITALY)





Intermec
Technologies U.K. Limited  (UNITED KINGDOM)





Intermec
Europe Limited (UNITED KINGDOM)





The
Registrant has additional operating subsidiaries which, considered in the
aggregate as a single subsidiary, do not constitute a significant
subsidiary.





All
above-listed subsidiaries have been consolidated in the Registrant’s financial
statements.