alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# The Air Navigation (Amendment) (No. 4) Order 2014 (revoked)

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

Statutory Instruments

# 2014 No. 3302

Civil Aviation

# The Air Navigation (Amendment) (No. 4) Order 2014 (revoked)F1

Made

10th December 2014

Laid before Parliament

17th December 2014

Coming into force

10th January 2015

At the Court at Buckingham Palace, the 10th day of December 2014

Present,

The Queen's Most Excellent Majesty in Council

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

F1Order revoked (25.8.2016) by The Air Navigation Order 2016 (S.I. 2016/765), art. 1, **Sch. 14 Pt. 1** (with arts. 17-23, 274(2)-(4))
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1309/2014Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1309/2014 of 9 December 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 1309/2014                     

# of 9 December 2014

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

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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

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

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

Whereas:

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

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

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

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

# Article 2U.K.

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

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

Done at Brussels, 9 December 2014.

*For the Commission,*                            

*On behalf of the President,*                            

Jerzy Plewa                            

*Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development*                            

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

1

OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671.                           

2

OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001045549
<NAME> HOLT'S CIGAR HOLDINGS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                       2,882,393
<SECURITIES>                                12,080,662
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,244,445
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (74,000)
<INVENTORY>                                  7,559,416
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            17,895,054
<PP&E>                                       2,797,571
<DEPRECIATION>                               (749,050)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              29,321,917
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,367,181
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         6,246
<OTHER-SE>                                  26,948,490
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                29,321,917
<SALES>                                     32,922,139
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            32,922,139
<CGS>                                       18,088,428
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               10,282,172
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (651,808)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              5,203,347
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,967,404
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          3,235,943
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 3,235,943
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.54
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.54


</TABLE>
----

(2004/C 65 E/245)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2838/03

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(25 September 2003)

Subject:   Destruction of the road linking Paradisia and Tsakona in Messinia

The 13-kilometre road linking Paradisia and Tsakona in Messinia was funded under the 1st and 2nd Community Support Frameworks and was opened in April 2000. In 1995, the road was already found to have geological problems and the regional authorities asked the Ministry for the Environment, Planning and Public Works in July 1995 to carry out a geological study with a view to repairing the road as there was a landslide problem. Those authorities were ignored.

On 20 March 2000 a report by an advisor to the Ministry stressed the seriousness of the problem. A study was commissioned and delivered on 29 April 2002, which confirmed that a landslide of 3 000 000 cubic metres had taken place. No action had been taken to repair the road by 15 January 2003 when the mountainside collapsed rendering the road unusable.

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(12 November 2003)

The information provided by the Greek authorities responsible for the day-to-day management of projects supported by the Structural Funds confirms that a report was submitted on 29 April 2002 indicating the existence of a landslip affecting the route in question. On the basis of this report a further examination was carried out in order to evaluate, among other things, the most efficient and effective way of dealing with the problem. While this examination was being carried out, on 12 January 2003, 15 days before the landslip, it was decided to close the road due to safety concerns.

The organisation for control, ESPEL, performed two visits to the project in question, documented in two reports. The phenomenon was not detected during these two visits and the project was classified as clear from any technical problems or insufficiencies. Following the landslip, the Body of Inspectors of Public Works inspected the project and the circumstances surrounding the landship, and provided a report which cleared the managers of the project from responsibility for the damage.

The reconstruction of the road is to be financed entirely from national resources.

----
STATE v. Avenger RIDGEWAY.

No. 375P09-4.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Sept. 24, 2015.

Avenger Ridgeway, Polkton, for Ridgeway, Avenger.

Anne M. Middleton, Assistant Attorney General, for State of North Carolina.

Jon David, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

**Opinion**

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 19th of August 2015 by Defendant for Petition to Toss Out Violent Habitual Law:

> "Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 24th of September 2015."
2008 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

8-22-2008

Budget Blinds Inc v. White

Precedential or Non-Precedential: Precedential

Docket No. 06-2733

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2008

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2008 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"Budget Blinds Inc v. White" (2008). 2008 Decisions. Paper 575.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2008/575
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

Case No: 06-2610

BUDGET BLINDS, INC.,

 Appellant

 v.

VALERIE WHITE;

BUDGET BLINDS OF NJ, INC;

VAL U BLINDS, INC.

Case No: 06-2733

BUDGET BLINDS, INC.

 v.

VALERIE WHITE;

BUDGET BLINDS OF NJ, INC.;

VAL U BLINDS, INC.,

 Appellants

 

ORDER AMENDING OPINION

 

The precedential opinion filed on July 28, 2008 is AMENDED as follows: (1) the

Roman numeral sections I, III, IV, V, VI are amended to I, II, III, IV, and V; and (2) the citation

on page 42 to Sebastian Int’l, Inc. v. Russolillo, No. 00-03476 CM, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS

21510 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 25, 2005) is amended to read Sebastian Int’l, Inc. v. Russolillo, No. 00-

03476 CM, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21510 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 25, 2000).

By the Court:

 /s/ D. Brooks Smith 

United States Circuit Judge 

Date: August 22, 2008
Order entered July 30 , 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 18
- 01309
- CV REWA C. HALTON, RODN EY G. HALTON & ALL O THER OCCUPANTS, Appellant s V. DEUTSCHE BANK NATION AL TRUST COMPANY, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC
- 18
- 03485
- A



### O RDER Before the Court is appellee’s July 26, 2019 unopposed second motion for extension of time to file its response brief

. Appellee seeks a forty

- five day extension so that the parties may have an opportunity to settle the dispute.
We note appellants filed a corrected brief , as directed to do so , on July 22, 2019 . We GRANT the motion and ORDER appellee to file either its brief or a status report no later than September 13, 2019.

/s/ ERIN A. NOWELL JUSTICE
EXHIBIT 14.(a).2

            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

     We hereby consent to the inclusion of our report relating to our
examination of the financial statements of AlbaHealth LLC covering the balance
sheets as of December 31, 2005 and 2004 and the related statements of income,
members' equity and cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004,
appearing in the annual report of TEFRON LTD. (parent company) on Form 20-F,
which is to be filed with U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and to the
incorporation by reference of such report into the Registration Statement on
Form F-3 (Registration No. 333-128847) and the Registration Statements on Form
S-8 (Nos. 333-111932 and 333-139021) of TEFRON LTD.


                                                  /s/ McGladrey & Pullen, LLP
                                                  ---------------------------
                                                  Charlotte, North Carolina
                                                  March  27, 2007
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-40547 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. GERARDO ROJO-MARTINEZ Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:06-PO-1806-ALL Before PRADO, OWEN, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Gerardo Rojo-Martinez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Rojo-Martinez has not filed a response. Our independent reviewofthe record and counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR. R. 42.2. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D April 16, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk
#### In the Matter of Nazareth Home of the Franciscan Sisters et al., Appellants, v Antonia C. Noveleo, M.D., as Commissioner of Health of State of New York, et al., Respondents.

[801 NYS2d 679]

Appeal from a judgment (denominated order and judgment) of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Kevin M. Dillon, J.), entered December 22, 2004 in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78. The judgment dismissed the petition.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Petitioners, 62 nursing homes in western New York, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding alleging, inter alia, that the methodology by which Medicaid reimbursement rates are set is arbitrary and capricious. We affirm the judgment for reasons stated in the decision at Supreme Court. We add only that petitioners lack standing with respect to their “second claim for relief,” i.e., that respondents are failing to provide adequate care to “the elderly, needy and disabled New Yorkers who reside in the nursing facilities operated by [petitioners],” in violation of NY Constitution article XVII. “The standing of an organization ... to maintain an action on behalf of its members requires that some or all of the members themselves have standing to sue, for standing which does not otherwise exist cannot be supplied by the mere multiplication of potential [petitioners]” *(Matter of Dental Socy. of State of N.Y. v Carey,*61 NY2d 330, 333 [1984]), and here it cannot be said that the Medicaid recipients are members of petitioners’ nursing homes. Thus, petitioners do not fall within the requisite “ ‘zone of interests’ ” sought to be protected by article XVII of the NY Constitution and thus lack standing to assert the violation of that article *(Society of Plastics Indus. v County of Suf*
      *1389
      *folk,*77 NY2d 761, 773 [1991]). Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Green, Gorski, Smith and Lawton, JJ.
RIBELIN v. CREEL.

No. 112A15-1.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Sept. 14, 2015.

Robert L. Inge, Salisbury, Attorney at Law, for Creel, Phillip Ray.

Phillip Creel, for Creel, Phillip Ray.

Arlaine Rockey, Marshall, Attorney at Law, for Ribelin, Dana Marie (fka Creel).

Mr. Kip David Nelson, Greensboro, Attorney at Law, for Creel, Phillip Ray.

**Opinion**

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 14th of September 2015 by Plaintiff:

> "Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 14th of September 2015."
NUMBER 13-07-00560-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

______________________________________________________________

WILLIAM LONG, Appellant,

v.

JOHN BOUDREAUX, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 130th District Court

of Matagorda County, Texas.

______________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justices Garza, Benavides, and Vela

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

The appellant's brief in the above cause was due on May 19, 2008. On June 3,

2008, the Clerk of the Court notified appellant that the brief had not been timely filed and

that the appeal was subject to dismissal for want of prosecution under Texas Rule of

Appellate Procedure 38.8(a)(1), unless within ten days from the date of receipt of this
2

letter, appellant reasonably explained the failure and the appellee was not significantly

injured by the appellant's failure to timely file a brief. To date, appellant has neither filed

his brief in this matter nor otherwise responded to the Court’s notices.

Appellant has failed to either reasonably explain his failure to file a brief, file a

motion for extension of time to file his brief, or file his brief. Accordingly, the appeal is

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a), 42.3(b). 

PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered 

and filed this the 21st day of August, 2008.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                          14,984
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   47,958
<ALLOWANCES>                                       500
<INVENTORY>                                     26,415
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                96,342
<PP&E>                                          63,465
<DEPRECIATION>                                  18,648
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 656,300
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           39,624
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       222,069
<OTHER-SE>                                       2,553
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   656,300
<SALES>                                        242,818
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               242,818
<CGS>                                          195,924
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  209,627
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   340
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              18,784
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 14,067
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             14,067
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    14,067
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.51
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                  ORALABS, INC.
                             2901 South Tejon Street
                            Englewood, Colorado 80110

Telephone:                                                            Facsimile:
(303)783-9499                                                      (303)783-5759


                                 April 28, 1999



Mr. Gary H. Schlatter
4835 South Gaylord Street
Englewood, CO 80110

Dear Mr. Schlatter:

     This letter confirms the agreement between the parties that the contract
between OraLabs, Inc. and Top Form Brands, Inc. effective April 1, 1998 shall
terminate as of June 30, 1999.

                                                     Very truly yours,

                                                     /s/ Allen R. Goldstone

                                                     Allen R. Goldstone,
                                                     Authorized Director





APPROVED:

TOP FORM BRANDS, INC.


By: /s/ Gary H. Schlatter
   ----------------------------
        Gary H. Schlatter, Authorized Officer
EARTHMOVERS EQUIPMENT CO. v. NORTH CAROLINA DEPT. OF CRIME CONTROL AND PUBLIC SAFETY, DIV. OF STATE HIGHWAY PATROL.

No. COA08-693.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed February 3, 2009.

Certification Date February 23, 2009.

Appeal from Wake (07CVS5022).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
STATE v. Brian Craig SEXTON.

No. 483P08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 27, 2008.

Staples Hughes, Appellate Defender, for Sexton.

Ronald L. Moore, District Attorney, for State.

Prior report: ___ N.C.App. ___, 666 S.E.2d 889.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 24th day of October 2008 by State of NC for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference this the 27th day of October 2008."
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 177 (Wednesday, September 14, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 54370]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-18335]


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

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: 11 a.m., Friday, October 14, 2005.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission 
Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Surveillance Matters.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jean A. Webb, (202) 418-5100.

Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 05-18335 Filed 9-12-05; 11:52 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 876/2014 (repealed)Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 876/2014 of 8 August 2014 concerning the classification of certain goods in the            Combined Nomenclature (repealed)         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 876/2014                     

# of 8 August 2014

# concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature (repealed)

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

Textual Amendments

F1Repealed by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1977 of 26 October 2017 repealing Implementing Regulation (EU) No 876/2014 concerning                                 the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature.
STATE of North Carolina v. Jeffrey Tremaine WILLIAMS.

No. 474P07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 11, 2008.

Vincent F. Rabil, for Williams.

Jonathan Babb, Special Deputy Attorney General, Susan Doyle, District Attorney, for State of NC.

Prior report: ___ N.C.App. ___, 648 S.E.2d 896.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the notice of appeal from the North Carolina Court of Appeals, filed by the Defendant on the 25th day of September 2007 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-30, and the motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question filed by the State of NC, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the motion to dismiss the appeal is

> "Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 11th day of June 2008."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 25th day of September 2007 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 11th day of June 2008."