alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Presidential Documents

4985

Federal Register 

Vol. 70, No. 19

Monday, January 31, 2005

Title 3— 

The President 

Proclamation 7865 of January 25, 2005

60th Anniversary of the Liberation of the Auschwitz 

Concentration Camp, 2005

By the President of the United States of America 

A Proclamation

At the Auschwitz concentration camp, evil found willing servants and innocent victims. For almost 5 years, Auschwitz was a factory for murder where 

more than a million lives were taken. It is a sobering reminder of the 

power of evil and the need for people to oppose evil wherever it exists. 

It is a reminder that when we find anti-Semitism, we must come together 

to fight it. 

In places like Auschwitz, evidence of the horror of the Holocaust has been 

preserved to help the world remember the past. We must never forget 

the cruelty of the guilty and the courage of the victims at Auschwitz and 

other Nazi concentration camps. 

During the Holocaust, evil was systematic in its implementation and deliberate in its destruction. The 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz 

is an opportunity to pass on the stories and lessons of the Holocaust to 

future generations. The history of the Holocaust demonstrates that evil is 

real, but hope endures. 

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States 

of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution 

and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim January 27, 2005, as 

the 60th anniversary of the Liberation of the Auschwitz Concentration Camp. 

I call upon all Americans to observe this occasion with appropriate ceremonies and programs to honor the victims of Auschwitz and the Holocaust. 

May God bless their memory and their families, and may we always remember. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-fifth 

day of January, in the year of our Lord two thousand five, and of the 

Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and twentyVerDate jul<14>2003 17:21 Jan 28, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4705 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\31JAD0.SGM 31JAD0

[FR Doc. 05–1776

Filed 1–27–05; 9:58 am] 

Billing code 3195–01–P 

ninth.

W
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Anthony Watkins, Appellant.

[799 NYS2d 427]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (DeRosa, J.), rendered August 24, 2004, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see Anders v California,*386 US 738 [1967]; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631 [1976]; *cf. People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606 [1979]). Adams, J.P., Cozier, Ritter and Skelos, JJ., concur.
# **Exhibit 32.2**

# ** **

# **OFFICER’SCERTIFICATION**

# ** **

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the Chief Financial Officer ofWestern Sizzlin Corporation (the “Company”), hereby certifies that the Form10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2005 and the financial statements containedtherein, fully comply with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the Form 10-Qand the financial statements thereto fairly present, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of March31, 2005, and the period then ended.

 

 
| /s/ Robyn B. Mabe |   | May 12, 2006 |
|-------------------|--------|--------------|

 

1

----
Exhibit 3.4  STATE OF DELAWARE CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT OF CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION  The corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware does hereby certify: FIRST:  That at a meeting of the Board of Directors of Chemical Consortium Holdings Inc. resolutions were duly adopted setting forth a proposed amendment of the Certificate of Incorporation of said corporation, declaring said amendment to be advisable.  The resolution setting forth the proposed amendment is as follows: RESOLVED, that the Certificate of Incorporation of this corporation be amended and read as follows: 1) That the stockholders of the Corporation duly adopted the foregoing amendment to the Certificate of Incorporation of the Corporation by written consent in accordance with the provisions of Section 228 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware. 2) That the Corporation will affect a reverse stock affecting 97,795,668 outstanding corporate shares of stock to be rolled back to 9,779,566.8. SECOND:  That thereafter, pursuant to resolution of its Board of Directors, a special meeting of the stockholders of said corporation was duly called and held upon notice in accordance with Section 222 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware at which meeting the necessary number of shares as required by statute were voted in favor of the amendment. THIRD:  That said amendment was duly adopted in accordance with the provisions of Section 242 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware. FOURTH:  That the capital of said corporation shall not be reduced under or by reason of said amendment. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said corporation has caused this certificate to be signed this 30th day of June, 2005.  By:/s/ J. Greig Authorized Officer  Title: President  Name: J. Greig, Ph.D.  {A0041336.DOC}
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION

            Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
                    (Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350,
                   Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)

     Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections (a)
and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the
undersigned officer of Western Wireless Corporation, a Washington corporation
(the "Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:

     The Amendment No. 1 to Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter
     ended March 31, 2003 (the "Form 10-Q/A") of the Company fully complies with
     the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
     of 1934 and information contained in the Form 10-Q/A fairly presents, in
     all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
     the Company.

Dated: September 11, 2003

                                                By: /s/ M. WAYNE WISEHART
                                                    ----------------------------
                                                    M. Wayne Wisehart
                                                    Executive Vice President and
                                                    Chief Financial Officer

     The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350,
Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code).
# C_2023296EN.01003501.xml

| 21.8.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 296/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.8.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 296/35

---

Action brought on 24 May 2023 — Timchenko v Council

(Case T-298/23)

(2023/C 296/39)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Elena Petrovna Timchenko (Moscow, Russia) (represented by: T. Bontinck, L. Burguin, S. Bonifassi, E. Fedorova and J. Goffin, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims the Court should:

| — | annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2023/572 of 13 March 2023 in so far as it extends the application of the restrictive measures adopted against the applicant by Council Decision (CFSP) 2022/582 of 8 April 2022 and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/581 of 8 April 2022; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2023/572 of 13 March 2023 in so far as it extends the application of the restrictive measures adopted against the applicant by Council Decision (CFSP) 2022/582 of 8 April 2022 and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/581 of 8 April 2022;

| — | annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/571 of 13 March 2023 in so far as it extends the application of the restrictive measures adopted against the applicant by Council Decision (CFSP) 2022/582 of 8 April 2022 and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/581 of 8 April 2022; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/571 of 13 March 2023 in so far as it extends the application of the restrictive measures adopted against the applicant by Council Decision (CFSP) 2022/582 of 8 April 2022 and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/581 of 8 April 2022;

| — | order the Council to pay the sum of EUR 1 000 000, on a provisional basis, in respect of the non-material damage suffered by the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Council to pay the sum of EUR 1 000 000, on a provisional basis, in respect of the non-material damage suffered by the applicant;

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

—

order the Council to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on six pleas in law that are identical or similar to those relied on in Case T-297/23, Timchenko v Council.

---
Thomas W. HILL v. Garford Tony HILL, Jewel Anne Hill, and the Estate of Sadie C. Hill.

No. 138P06-3.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 10, 2008.

Thomas W. Hill, Pro Se.

*740Garford T. Hill, Pro Se, Cindy Hill Ford, Edward C. Hay, Jr., Asheville, for Garford T. & Jewell A. Hill.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Plaintiff on the 18th day of July 2007 for rehearing of the decision of this Court pursuant to Rule 31, N.C. Rules of Appellate Procedure, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 10th day of April 2008."

MARTIN and TIMMONS-GOODSON, JJ., recused.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-07-00406-CV

In re Kelly Stinson

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Kelly Stinson petitioned the Court for a writ of mandamus to compel the district court

to act on his motion to protect documents in State custody that are the subject of pending litigation.

Counsel for the Board of Pardons and Paroles, the real party in interest, has assured the Court that

the documents are either not subject to or are exempt from the two-year destruction provision of the

records retention schedule. Counsel assures the Court that all documents in question will be

maintained. With this assurance, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied. See Tex. R. App. P.

52.8(a).

__________________________________________

Diane Henson, Justice

Before Chief Justice Law, Justices Waldrop and Henson

Filed: August 14, 2007
# Council Decision of 24 March 2014 appointing a Danish member of the European Economic and Social Committee (2014/171/EU)

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Council Decision

# of 24 March 2014

# appointing a Danish member of the European Economic and Social Committee

# (2014/171/EU)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 302 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal of the Danish Government,

Having regard to the opinion of the European Commission,

Whereas:

(1)On 13 September 2010 the Council adopted Decision 2010/570/EU, Euratom appointing the members of the European Economic and                              Social Committee for the period from 21 September 2010 to 20 September 2015(1).

(2)A member’s seat on the European Economic and Social Committee has become vacant following the end of the term of office of                              Ms Rikke EDSJÖ,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

# Article 1U.K.

Mr Niels LINDBERG MADSEN is hereby appointed as a member of the European Economic and Social Committee for the remainder of                     the current term of office, which runs until 20 September 2015.                  

# Article 2U.K.

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

Done at Brussels, 24 March 2014.

*For the Council*                            

*The President*                            

A. Tsaftaris                            

1

OJ L 251, 25.9.2010, p. 8.
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 434/2014Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 434/2014 of 11 April 2014 entering a name in the register of protected designations            of origin and protected geographical indications (Noisette de Cervione — Nuciola di Cervioni (PGI))         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 434/2014                     

# of 11 April 2014

# entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Noisette de Cervione                        — Nuciola di Cervioni (PGI))                     

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality                           schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs(1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, France's application to register the name ‘Noisette de Cervione                              — Nuciola di Cervioni’ was published in the *Official Journal of the European Union* (2).

(2)As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name                              ‘Noisette de Cervione — Nuciola di Cervioni’ should therefore be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

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

# Article 2U.K.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*.                  

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 11 April 2014.

*For the Commission,*                            

*On behalf of the President,*                            

Dacian Cioloș                            

*Member of the Commission*                            

## ANNEXU.K.

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

### **Class 1.6 — Fruit, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed**U.K.

#### FRANCEU.K.

Noisette de Cervione — Nuciola di Cervioni (PGI)

1

OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.                           

2

OJ C 363, 13.12.2013, p. 10.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-7217
LESLIE DEVON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RONALD MOATS; SERGEANT GROVE; OFFICER BREWER,All of Roxbury Correctional Institution; HEARING OFFICER DUSING, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District ofMaryland, at Baltimore. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CA95-3568-PJM) Submitted: February 13, 1997 Decided: February 26, 1997 Before WIDENER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Leslie Devon, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., AttorneyGeneral, Glenn T. Marrow, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's orders denying reliefon his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint and his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and orders and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Devon v. Moats , No. CA-95-3568-PJM (D. Md. June 25 & Aug. 12, 1996). We dispense withoral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
# C_2023296EN.01004503.xml

| 21.8.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 296/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.8.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 296/45

---

Order of the General Court of 7 July 2023 — UH v ECB

(Case T-67/23) (1)

(2023/C 296/53)

Language of the case: German

The President of the Sixth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 164, 8.5.2023.

---
IN RE T.S.

No. COA08-436.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed August 19, 2008.

Certification Date September 8, 2008.

Appeal from Harnett (07J13, 07J14, 07J15, 07J16, 07J17, 07J18, 07J19, 07J139).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
# Regulation (EU) No 259/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council (repealed)Show full title

Regulation (EU) No 259/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014 amending Council Regulation (EC)            No 539/2001 listing the third countries whose nationals must be in possession of visas when crossing the external borders            and those whose nationals are exempt from that requirement (repealed)         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Regulation (EU) No 259/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council

# of 3 April 2014

# amending Council Regulation (EC) No 539/2001 listing the third countries whose nationals must be in possession of visas when                        crossing the external borders and those whose nationals are exempt from that requirement (repealed)                     

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

Textual Amendments

F1Repealed by Regulation (EU) 2018/1806 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 November 2018 listing the third countries whose                                 nationals must be in possession of visas when crossing the external borders and those whose nationals are exempt from that                                 requirement.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           3,788
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   85,171
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (3,054)
<INVENTORY>                                     25,111
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               142,592
<PP&E>                                         264,087
<DEPRECIATION>                                (66,452)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 369,484
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           94,215
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      72,494
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 (369,484)
<SALES>                                        426,094
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               426,094
<CGS>                                          367,037
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  398,779
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  (56)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              28,036
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (665)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (238)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (427)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  9,788
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (10,215)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
STATE of North Carolina v. Willie Alexander BAILEY.

No. 294P08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 9, 2008.

Duncan McCormick, Lillington, for Willie Alexander Bailey.

Lisa Glover, Assistant Attorney General, Peter S. Gilchrist, III, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 24th day of June 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 9th day of October 2008."
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

CLIFFORD TAYLOR GREEN,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 397 WAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 15th day of February, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Edward Cooper, Appellant.

[803 NYS2d 3]

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (John N. Byrne, J.), rendered January 14, 2002, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4V2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s claim that he was improperly sentenced under his plea of guilty to a felony, which had been accompanied by a promise that he could obtain a misdemeanor disposition upon successful completion of a drug program, is unpreserved since defendant neither requested a hearing nor moved to withdraw his plea *(see People v Battle,*287 AD2d 361 [2001], *lv denied*97 NY2d 751 [2002]), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that the court properly sentenced defendant to a term of incarceration since he failed to comply with the terms of the plea agreement. The court’s decision was not based solely on a disputed allegation *(compare Torres v Berbary,*340 F3d 63 [2d Cir 2003]), but on defendant’s entire, well-documented pattern of unsatisfactory performance in connection with three different drug programs. Concur—Buckley, P.J., Andrias, Saxe and Williams, JJ.
FREEMAN v. ROTHROCK, et al.

No. 163A08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

July 10, 2008.

Joy H. Brewer, Ginny P. Lanier, Cary, for Rothrock, et al.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 9th day of July 2008 by Plaintiff for Extension of Time to File Brief:

"Motion Allowed. Plaintiff (Freeman) shall have up to and including the 11th day of August 2008 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court. By order of the Court in conference this the 10th day of July 2008."