alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
`[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3605 Referred in House (RFH)]







110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3605


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 26, 2008

               Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT


 
  To extend the pilot program for volunteer groups to obtain criminal 
                       history background checks.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Criminal History Background Checks 
Pilot Extension Act of 2008''.

SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF PILOT PROGRAM.

    Section 108(a)(3)(A) of the PROTECT Act (42 U.S.C. 5119a note) is 
amended by striking ``a 66-month'' and inserting ``a 78-month''.

            Passed the Senate September 26 (legislative day, September 
      17), 2008.

            Attest:

                                                NANCY ERICKSON,

                                                             Secretary.`
### IN THE UNI TED STATES COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCU IT

No. 11-40072 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. JOSE RAMIRO TORREZ-BALANZAR, Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:10-CR-1952-1
Before BENAVIDES, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * 

### The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jose Ramiro TorrezBalanzar has moved for leave to withdraw and has f iled a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Torrez-Balanzar has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See5 T H 

### C I R


### . R. 42.2. U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s F i ft h C i rc u i t 

## F I L E D Octob er 21 , 20 11 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Pur sua nt to 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5 , the cour t has det erm ined thatthisop inion sho uld not * be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t for th in 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 11-40072 Document: 00511640973 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/21/2011
# Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 110/2014 (repealed)Show full title

Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 110/2014 of 30 September 2013 on the model financial regulation for public-private            partnership bodies referred to in Article 209 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the            Council (repealed)         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 110/2014                     

# of 30 September 2013

# on the model financial regulation for public-private partnership bodies referred to in Article 209 of Regulation (EU, Euratom)                        No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council (repealed)                     

F1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                        

Textual Amendments

F1Repealed by Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/887 of 13 March 2019 on the model financial regulation for public-private partnership                                 bodies referred to in Article 71 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Exhibit 8.1


                        Industrias Bachoco, S.A. de C.V.

                      Subsidiaries as of December 31, 2003



1.    Bachoco, S.A. de C.V.

2.    Operadora de Servicios de Personal, S.A. de C.V.

3.    Servicios de Personal Administrativo, S.A. de C.V.

4.    SEPETEC, S.A. de C.V.

5.    Acuicola Bachoco, S.A. de C.V.

6.    Huevo y Derivados, S.A. de C.V.

7.    Pecuarius Laboratorios, S.A. de C.V.

8.    Aviser, S.A. de C.V.

9.    Campi Alimentos, S.A. de C.V.

Each of the subsidiaries listed above is incorporated under the laws of Mexico.
----

(2004/C 33 E/169)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1782/03

by Claude Moraes (PSE) to the Commission

(28 May 2003)

Subject:   The EQUAL funding programme progress report

What plans does the Commission have for a progress report on the EQUAL funding programme before the end of the current mandate in 2004?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(1 July 2003)

The first phase of EQUAL will run until 2005, and already the Development Partnerships (of which there are more than 1 500) have identified innovations in tackling discrimination and inequality experienced by those at work and those seeking work.

The Commission plans to prepare a Communication at the end of 2003 which will highlight these innovations whilst noting general progress in EQUAL, and which will serve as a preparation for the launch of the second phase of EQUAL both for the Member States and Candidate Countries who will participate fully in this second phase.

----
Loan
Agreement

    


    Party A
(hereinafter referred to as the “Lender”): Tianjin Tianshi Biological
Engineering Co., Ltd.

    


    Party B
(hereinafter referred to as the “Borrower”): Tianjin Tiens Life Resources Co.,
Ltd.

    


    The
Lender and the Borrower have reached and signed a loan agreement which should be
observed by both parties.

    


    In order
to support the business development of the Borrower, the Lender agrees to make
the outstanding of Advances from Customers by the end of June 30, 2010 as a loan
to the Borrower on the following terms:

    


    
      	
              1.

            	
              The
      amount of the Loan: RMB Sixty million (RMB
  60,000,000.00);

            


    

    
      	
              2.

            	
              The
      term of the loan agreement: From July 1, 2010 to December 31,
      2010;

            


    

    
      	
              3.

            	
              The
      type of the Loan: short-term loan;

            


    

    
      	
              4.

            	
              The
      interest rate is the same as benchmark interest rate of the people's bank
      of china in July 1 (5.31%APR);

            


    

    
      	
              5.

            	
              The
      Lender approves that the Borrower can pay off the loan before December 31,
      2010 without any default interest. The Borrower only needs to pay the
      interest during the period of July 1, 2010 to the day paying off the
      load.

            


    

    


    This
agreement is made in English and Chinese respectively with four copies with the
same legal effects, and Chinese version will prevail if any conflicts existing
between two language contents. This Agreement shall become effective on the date
of execution.

     

    
      	
              The
      Lender:

            	
              The
      Borrower:

            
	
              Tianjin
      Tianshi Biological Engineering

            	
              Tianjin
      Tiens Life Resources

            
	
              Co.,
      Ltd.

            	
              Co.,
      Ltd.

            


    

    


    
      	
              By
      /s/ Jinyuan Li

            	
              By
      /s/ Baolan Li

            
	 
      	 
      
	
              Title:
      Legal Representative

            	
              Title:
      Legal Representative

            
	
              Aug
      24, 2010

            	
              Aug
      24, 2010
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          19,167
<SECURITIES>                                24,044,170
<RECEIVABLES>                                  630,184
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              24,693,521
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          626,851
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  24,066,670
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                24,693,521
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               370,937
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   26,279
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                344,658
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            344,658
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   344,658
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.23
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
# CE2004070EN.01003901.xml

| 20.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 70/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 70/39

---

(2004/C 70 E/043)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1380/03

by Anne Jensen (ELDR) to the Commission

(15 April 2003)

Subject:   Wage subsidies in Germany

Subject:

According to Danish media reports, German tradesmen are entitled to receive wage subsidies from the German state, thereby substantially reducing the cost of their labour. Apparently, certain German building firms have endeavoured with the backing of such wage subsidies to enter the construction market in Denmark. This means that, thanks to the subsidy from the German state, they can practice price dumping and out-bid Danish building firms that are not in receipt of wage subsidies.

Will the Commission advise whether this kind of wage subsidy does in actual fact distort competition and run counter to the EU's competition rules?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(4 June 2003)

(4 June 2003)

The information available to the Commission does not allow to identify the German public support measure, as described in Danish media reports and as referred to by the Honourable Member. Therefore, the Commission requested Germany to provide all necessary information. Should the German measure exist and contain state aid in the meaning of Article 87 paragraph 1 of the EC Treaty, and should this aid not be exempted from notification pursuant to the Commission Block Exemption Regulation (EC) No 2204/2002 of 12 December 2002 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid for employment (1), its compatibility will be assessed under the relevant State aid rules.

1

---

(1)  OJ L 337, 13.12.2002, and Corrigendum OJ L 349, 24.12.2002.

1

---
```

                        [Unofficial English Translation]

                                                                    EXHIBIT 4.13

(LOGO) D I S C O U N T
THE BUSINESS DIVISION

JULY 11, 2010

For the attention of:
TEFRON LTD. (hereinafter: "the Company")

Dear Sir/ Madam,

              RE: YOUR COVENANT DOCUMENT TO US, DATED MARCH 2, 2010

Whereas   In the framework of the Covenant document which you signed in our favor
          on March 2, 2010 (hereinafter: "THE COVENANT DOCUMENT"), you committed to
          us, that your EBITDA, based on your consolidated financial statements as of
          December 31, 2010 will be positive (hereinafter: "THE SAID COVENANT"); and

Whereas   You have informed us that you will not meet the Said Covenant in your
          reports pursuant to your consolidated financial statements as of December
          31, 2010, and you have asked us, notwithstanding the foregoing, not to
          exercise our rights pursuant to the said Covenant Document;

Therefore We wish to inform you that we consent, on a one-time basis, not to
          take any measures against you following the breach of the Said Covenant,
          subject to the following: that your EBITDA, according to your consolidated
          financial statements as of December 31, 2010 shall not be less than U.S.$ -
          2.1 million (negative two million and one hundred thousand U.S. dollars),
          and that no other cause shall be established for us to declare your debts
          and obligations to us to be immediately due and payable;

Except as aforesaid, there shall be no change in the Covenant Document and in
the Said Covenant.

Sincerely yours,
          /s/
-------------------------
Israel Discount Bank Ltd.                       WE CONSENT TO THE FOREGOING

                                                /s/ Amit Meridor, Eran Rotem
                                                ----------------------------
                                                Tefron Ltd.
```
#  

# **Exhibit 32.2**

#  

# **OFFICER’SCERTIFICATION**

#  

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,the Chief Financial Officer of Western Sizzlin Corporation (the “Company”),hereby certifies that the Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31,2008 and the financial statements contained therein, fully comply with therequirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities ExchangeAct 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 March 31,2008, and the period then ended.

 
| /s/ Robyn B. Mabe |   | Date: May 15, 2008 |
|-------------------|--------|-------------------------|

 

 

----
STATE of North Carolina v. Mark Daniel STEPHENS.

No. 67P08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 10, 2008.

Jarvis John Edgerton, IV, for Stephens.

Amy C. Kunstling, Assistant Attorney General, C. Colon Willoughby, Jr., District Attorney, for State of NC.

Prior report: ___ N.C.App. ___, 655 S.E.2d 435.

*390*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 18th day of February 2008 by Defendant 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 10th day of April 2008."
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 550 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.550

                       One Hundred Tenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday,
            the third day of January, two thousand and eight

                                 An Act

 
To preserve existing judgeships on the Superior Court of the District of 
                                Columbia.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. COMPOSITION OF SUPERIOR COURT.
    Section 903 of title 11 of the District of Columbia Code is amended 
by striking ``fifty-eight'' and inserting ``61''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
STATE v. VAUGHAN.

No. COA08-158.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed November 4, 2008.

Certification Date November 24, 2008.

Appeal from Northampton (06CRS58, 06CRS59, 06CRS60, 05CRS51613).

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
**Exhibit32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of ERP Operating Limited Partnership (“ERPOP”) on Form 10-Qfor the period ending March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, David J. Neithercut,Chief Financial Officer of Equity Residential, general partner of ERPOP,certify, pursuant to 18.U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

 

(1)                                  TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                                  Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of ERPOP.

 

 
| /s/                                            | David J. Neithercut |   |
|------------------------------------------------|---------------------|--------|
| David J. Neithercut                            |
| Chief Financial Officer  of Equity Residential |
| May 7, 2004                               |

 

----
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA

Present: Judges Humphreys, Beales and Retired Judge Fitzpatrick*

BERNARD L. DINICOLA, JR. MEMORANDUM OPINION * * v. Record No. 2726-07-4 PER CURIAM JULY 22, 2008 TARGET CORPORATION

FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION (Bernard L. DiNicola, Jr., pro se , on briefs). (Joseph F. Giordano; Anne-M arie K. Zell; Semmes, Bowen & Semmes, on brief), for appellee.

Bernard L. DiNicola, Jr. (claimant) app eals a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Commission finding that (1) he fail ed to prove he was disabled from work as a result of his compensable October 15, 2004 injury by accident; (2) he failed to prove he sustained an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment on December 9, 2005; and (3) the deputy commissioner did not err in fail ing to strike Target’s defenses. 1 We have reviewed the record and the commission’s opinion and find that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by th e commission in its final opinion. See DiNicola v. Target , VWC File Nos. 226-72-33 & 226-81-77 (Oct. 11, 2007) . We dispense with oral argument and

* Judge Fitzpatrick took part in the consideration of this case pr ior to the effective date of her retirement as senior judge on July 1, 2008 a nd thereafter by designation pursuant to Code § 17.1-400(D).

** Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opin ion is not designa ted for publication.

1 Claimant’s opening brief does not contain a ny questions presented. Claimant filed a document entitled “Questions to be answered in support of opening brief,” which includes forty-three questions. In re ndering our decision, we have co nsidered only those issues considered by the commission and preserved for appeal.- 2 - summarily affirm because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument w ould not aid the decisional process. See Code § 17.1-403; Rule 5A:27.

Affirmed.
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3733 

To require the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to hold at least 1 

public hearing before issuance of a permit affecting public or private 

land use in a locality. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 11 (legislative day, DECEMBER 10), 2008 

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

to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To require the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to 

hold at least 1 public hearing before issuance of a permit 

affecting public or private land use in a locality. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE ISSUANCE OF PER4 MITS AFFECTING PUBLIC OR PRIVATE LAND 

5 USE IN LOCALITIES. 

6 (a) ELECTRICITY.—Section 216(c) of the Federal 

7 Power Act (16 U.S.C. 824p(c)) is amended by adding at 

8 the end the following: 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
2 

•S 3733 IS

1 ‘‘(3) PUBLIC HEARING.—Before issuing a per2 mit or other authorization for any action that may 

3 affect public or private land use (other than Federal 

4 land) in a locality, the Commission shall hold at 

5 least 1 public hearing in each county and locality af6 fected.’’. 

7 (b) NATURAL GAS.—Section 7(e) of the Natural Gas 

8 Act (15 U.S.C. 717f(e)) is amended— 

9 (1) by inserting ‘‘(1)’’ after ‘‘(e)’’; and 

10 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

11 ‘‘(2) PUBLIC HEARING.—Before issuing a per12 mit or other authorization for any action that may 

13 affect public or private land use (other than Federal 

14 land) in a locality, the Commission shall hold at 

15 least 1 public hearing in each county and locality af16 fected.’’. 

Æ 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
STATE v. Donald A. MILLER.

No. 430P08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 9, 2008.

Anne M. Middleton, Assistant Attorney General, G. Dewey Hudson, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 10th day of September *5692008 by Defendant for "Petition for Discretionary Review":

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference this the 9th day of October 2008."