alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 708/2014Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 708/2014 of 25 June 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 708/2014                     

# of 25 June 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 Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural                           markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation)(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, 25 June 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 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.                           

2

OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.
In re S.F.P. appealed by Mother.

No. 395P08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 5, 2009.

Charlotte Gail Blake, Boone, for Mother.

Steven D. Michael, Kitty Hawk, for Pasquotank DSS.

William Kuzenko, Pro Se.

Pamela N. Williams, Appellate Counsel, for Guardian ad Litem.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 2nd day of September 2008 by Respondent (Mother) 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:

*363"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th day of February 2009."
IN RE A.W.

No. COA07-819.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed April 15, 2008.

Certification Date May 5, 2008.

Appeal from Robeson (07JB55, 07JB56).

Cases reported without published opinion. Vacated.
Order entered January 18, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-18-01472-CR

CLAUDIO CASTRO, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 1

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F17-75758-H

ORDER

Before the Court is court reporter LaToya Young-Martinez’s January 16, 2019 first 

request for an extension of time to file the reporter’s record. We GRANT the request and 

ORDER the reporter’s record filed within THIRTY DAYS of the date of this order.

/s/ LANA MYERS 

JUSTICE
STATE v. MORROW.

No. COA07-1428.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed July 1, 2008.

Certification Date July 21, 2008.

Appeal from Transylvania (05CRS52842).

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
# Commission Regulation (EU) No 839/2013Show full title

Commission Regulation (EU) No 839/2013 of 30 August 2013 establishing a prohibition of fishing for haddock in Norwegian waters            of I and II by vessels flying the flag of Portugal         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Regulation (EU) No 839/2013                     

# of 30 August 2013

# establishing a prohibition of fishing for haddock in Norwegian waters of I and II by vessels flying the flag of Portugal

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring                           compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy(1), and in particular Article 36(2) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Council Regulation (EU) No 40/2013 of 21 January 2013 fixing for 2013 the fishing opportunities available in EU waters and,                              to EU vessels, in certain non-EU waters for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks which are subject to international                              negotiations or agreements(2), lays down quotas for 2013.

(2)According to the information received by the Commission, catches of the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation                              by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein have exhausted the quota allocated for                              2013.

(3)It is therefore necessary to prohibit fishing activities for that stock,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

## Article 1U.K.Quota exhaustion

The fishing quota allocated to the Member State referred to in the Annex to this Regulation for the stock referred to therein                     for 2013 shall be deemed to be exhausted from the date set out in that Annex.                  

## Article 2U.K.Prohibitions

Fishing activities for the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in                     the Member State referred to therein shall be prohibited from the date set out in that Annex. In particular it shall be prohibited                     to retain on board, relocate, tranship or land fish from that stock caught by those vessels after that date.                  

## Article 3U.K.Entry into force

This Regulation shall enter into force on the 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, 30 August 2013.

*For the Commission, On behalf of the President*,                           

Lowri Evans                            

*Director-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries*                            

## ANNEXU.K.

1

OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.                           

2

OJ L 23, 25.1.2013, p. 54.
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A25A0261. SHEENA CALVIN v. HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF

JESUP.

This case began as a dispossessory proceeding in magistrate court. Following

an adverse ruling, pro se defendant Sheena Calvin filed a petition for review with the

superior court, which dismissed the petition on August 9, 2024. Calvin filed a notice

of appeal on August 13, 2024. We, however, lack jurisdiction.

Appeals from superior court decisions reviewing lower court decisions by

petitions for review must be initiated by filing an application for discretionary review.

OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (1), (b); Bullock v. Sand, 260 Ga. App. 874, 875 (581 SE2d 333)

(2003). “Compliance with the discretionary appeals procedure is jurisdictional.”

Smoak v. Dept. of Human Resources, 221 Ga. App. 257, 257 (471 SE2d 60) (1996).

Because this case involves an appeal from magistrate court to superior court, Calvin

has no right to a direct appeal here. See Bullock, 260 Ga.App. at 875.Accordingly, this

appeal is hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office,Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

September 05, 2024

09/05/2024
IN RE J.J.B.

No. COA08-460.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed October 7, 2008.

Certification Date October 27, 2008.

Appeal from Stokes (05J61A, 06J40A).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
<PAGE>


                      RECKSON OPERATING PARTNERSHIP, L. P.
                                  EXHIBIT 32.1
    CERTIFICATION OF SCOTT H. RECHLER, CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD, CHIEF EXECUTIVE
  OFFICER, PRESIDENT AND DIRECTOR OF RECKSON ASSOCIATES REALTY CORP., THE SOLE
  GENERAL PARTNER OF THE REGISTRANT, PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350 OF CHAPTER 63 OF
                       TITLE 18 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE


I, Scott H. Rechler, Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer, President
and Director of Reckson Associates Realty Corp., the sole general partner of
Reckson Operating Partnership, L. P. (the "Company"), certify pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

         1)  The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly
             period ended June 30, 2005 (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 or 78o(d)); and

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


Dated: August 8, 2005
                                 By /s/ Scott H. Rechler
                                    ------------------------------------------
                                 Scott H. Rechler,
                                 Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer,
                                 President and Director of Reckson Associates
                                 Realty Corp., the sole general partner of the
                                 Registrant


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Reckson Operating Partnership, L.P. and will be furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
BROWN v. VIA ELEC. CO.

No. COA07-1027.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed March 4, 2008.

Certification Date March 24, 2008.

Appeal from NC Industrial Commission (I.C. NO. 503132).

Case reported without published opinion. Dismissed.
HOUSING AUTHORITY v. CREECH.

No. 114P07-4.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 11, 2008.

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

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 7th day of April 2008 by Defendant to reconsider, rehear and review N.C. Supreme Court Writ requests:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference this the 11th day of June 2008."
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 392 

To ensure payment of United States assessments for United Nations 

peacekeeping operations for the 2005 through 2008 time period. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 25, 2007 

Mr. BIDEN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Foreign Relations 

A BILL 

To ensure payment of United States assessments for United 

Nations peacekeeping operations for the 2005 through 

2008 time period. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON THE UNITED STATES SHARE OF 

4 ASSESSMENTS FOR UNITED NATIONS PEACE5 KEEPING OPERATIONS. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 404(b)(2)(B) of the For7 eign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1994 and 

8 1995 (Public Law 103–236; 22 U.S.C. 287e note) is 

9 amended by adding at the end the following new clause: 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
2 

•S 392 IS

1 ‘‘(v) For assessments made during 

2 calendar years 2005, 2006, 2007, and 

3 2008, 27.1 percent.’’. 

4 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 411 of the 

5 Department of State and Related Agency Appropriations 

6 Act, 2005 (title IV of division B of Public Law 108–447; 

7 22 U.S.C. 287e note) is repealed. 

Æ 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
STATE v. WATSON.

No. COA08-315.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed December 2, 2008.

Certification Date December 22, 2008.

Appeal from Johnston (06CRS53635, 06CRS53636, 06CRS54139).

Case reported without published opinion. New trial in case number 06CRS54139. No error as to all other cases..
STATE v. WILDS.

No. COA08-375.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed December 16, 2008.

Certification Date January 5, 2009.

Appeal from Columbus (06CRS51616, 06CRS51617).

Case reported without published opinion. No Error.
# The South West Water Authority (Dissolution) Order 2014

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

Statutory Instruments

# 2014 No. 2679

Water Industry, England And Wales

# The South West Water Authority (Dissolution) Order 2014

Made

30th September 2014

Coming into force

1st November 2014

The Secretary of State makes this Order, in exercise of the powers conferred by section 4(3) of the Water Act 1989(1) (“the Act”).                        

In accordance with section 4(5) of the Act, the Secretary of State has consulted the South West Water Authority, the Environment                           Agency(2) and South West Water Limited and is satisfied that nothing further remains to be done by the South West Water Authority under                           any scheme under Schedule 2 to the Act.                        

## Citation and commencementU.K.

1.  This Order—                  

(a)may be cited as the South West Water Authority (Dissolution) Order 2014; and                  

(b)comes into force on 1st November 2014.                  

## Dissolution of the South West Water AuthorityU.K.

2.  The South West Water Authority is dissolved.                  

John Bourne

Deputy Director in the Water Availability and Quality Programme

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

30th September 2014

## EXPLANATORY NOTE

(This note is not part of the Order)

This Order provides for the dissolution of the South West Water Authority.

An impact assessment has not been produced for this Order as no cost to the business or voluntary sectors is foreseen.

1

1989 c.15.                           

2

Section 4(5) of the Water Act 1989 requires consultation with the National Rivers Authority, but the Authority was abolished                              by the Environment Act 1995 and its functions transferred to the Environment Agency.
# CE2004088EN.01034901.xml

| 8.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 88/349 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 88/349

---

(2004/C 88 E/0355)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1310/03

by Bill Newton Dunn (ELDR) to the Commission

(7 April 2003)

Subject:   The situation of the Nigerian national, Mr Abubakir, a practising Christian

Subject:

The Commission may be aware of the situation of Mr Abubakir and his two daughters Rakiya and Dije from the village of Bilkawa in Kano state, Nigeria. There is evidence that the Muslim authorities in Nigeria have put pressure on the two girls to convert to Islam and to marry Muslim men. This is particularly important considering that the Nigerian authorities have signed up to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Has the Commission:

| 1. | made representations to the Nigerian Government about the situation of Mr Abubakir? |
| --- | --- |

1.

made representations to the Nigerian Government about the situation of Mr Abubakir?

| 2. | other plans, to try to ensure that the Nigerian authorities respect the human rights of the Christian minority in their country? |
| --- | --- |

2.

other plans, to try to ensure that the Nigerian authorities respect the human rights of the Christian minority in their country?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(6 May 2003)

(6 May 2003)

The Commission has not been alerted as to the situation of Mr Abubakir and his family and has not made any representation to the Nigerian Authorities on this matter. The Commission has asked its Delegation in Abuja to make enquiries on this matter to Federal and State officials.

---
HEATHERLY, et al. v. STATE of NC, et al.

No. 317A06-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 27, 2008.

Jeanette Doran Brooks, for Heatherly, et *669Jack Holtzman, Raleigh, for Williams, et al.

Norma S. Harrell, Ronald M. Marquette, Special Deputy Attorney Generals, for State of NC, et al.

Kevin W. Benedict, Raleigh, Joseph D. Henchman, for Tax Foundation.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 19th day of May 2008 by Tax Foundation for leave to file Amicus Curiae Brief:

"Motion Allowed. Unless already submitted, the Amicus Brief shall be submitted to the court within the times allowed and in the manner provided by Appellate Rule 28(i). By order of the Court in conference this the 27th day of May 2008."
STATE of North Carolina v. Arthur O. ARMSTRONG.

No. 544P06-4.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 11, 2008.

Arthur O. Armstrong, Pro Se.

Patricia Duffy, Assistant Attorney General, Howard S. Boney, Jr., District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 29th day of April 2008 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, Nash County, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court of that County:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 11th day of December 2008."
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET OF GAMETECH INTERNATIONAL, INC. ("THE COMPANY") AS OF OCTOBER 31, 1999 AND
THE STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS OF THE COMPANY FOR THE YEAR ENDED OCTOBER 31, 1999.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             NOV-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1999
<CASH>                                           4,554
<SECURITIES>                                     6,835
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,155
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (503)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                16,963
<PP&E>                                          32,130
<DEPRECIATION>                                (10,624)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  58,803
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            12
<OTHER-SE>                                      51,412
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    58,803
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                41,663
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   11,590
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,152
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   725
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 549
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  8,758
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,900
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,858
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,858
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .45
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .42


</TABLE>
# CE2004084EN.01047801.xml

| 3.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 84/478 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 84/478

---

(2004/C 84 E/0553)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1830/03

by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(2 June 2003)

Subject:   Letters to the Greek authorities regarding the proper use of Community funds and compliance with Community (regional policy) legislation

Subject:

Can the Commission say how many letters it has sent to the Greek authorities since 1994 and from whom (Commissioners, directors-general or heads of division) concerning the proper use of Community funds and the transposition and proper implementation of Community regional policy legislation?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(7 July 2003)

(7 July 2003)

Under the partnership principle a flow of inquiries and information between the Commission and national authorities in connection with implementation of Community programmes is standard management practice.

For both Greece and the other Member States the exchanges, which occur on an almost daily basis, can be made by various means, including letters signed by a Commissioner or Director-General.

Dispatch of such letters is a routine matter given the Member States' accountability for utilisation of Community funds in line with the rules drawn up at Community level.

---
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 450 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to repeal the medicare 

outpatient rehabilitation therapy caps. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 31, 2007 

Mr. ENSIGN (for himself, Mrs. LINCOLN, Mr. CARDIN, Ms. COLLINS, Mr. 

REED, Mr. WARNER, Mr. GRAHAM, Mr. AKAKA, Mr. HAGEL, Mr. 

HATCH, and Mr. DODD) introduced the following bill; which was read 

twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to repeal 

the medicare outpatient rehabilitation therapy caps. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Medicare Access to 

5 Rehabilitation Services Act of 2007’’. 

6 SEC. 2. OUTPATIENT THERAPY CAP REPEAL. 

7 Section 1833 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

8 1395(l)) is amended by striking subsection (g). 

Æ 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
Kevin L. HINES v. WAL-MART STORES EAST, L.P.

No. 378P08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 5, 2009.

W. Earl Taylor, Jr., Wilson, for Hines.

Michael W. Washburn, Raleigh, for Wal-Mart.

Prior report: ___ N.C.App. ___, 663 S.E.2d 337.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 15th day of August 2008 by Plaintiff 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:

*132"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th day of February 2009."