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

(2004/C 33 E/223)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2110/03

by Margrietus van den Berg (PSE) to the Commission

(19 June 2003)

Subject:   Closure of the Europa Centrum in the Netherlands

Is the Commission aware that the Europa Centrum in the Hague, a foundation providing information on the EU, will close on 1 July 2003?

How does the Commission explain that the foundation has not been granted a subsidy for 2003?

Does the Commission agree with me that information on the European Union and its institutions is of crucial importance?

How does the Commission plan to ensure that in the year ahead, in which events of major importance for the EU are on the agenda (enlargement to include ten new countries, European Parliament elections, drafting of a Constitution), reliable and detailed information can be provided in the Netherlands if the Europa Centrum foundation — which is a key source of information for young people and schools — is no longer able to take on this task?

Is the Commission prepared to reconsider the foundation's application for a subsidy? If so, when will it be able to give its final answer? If not, why not?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(16 July 2003)

The Commission is aware of and deeply regrets the fact that Europa Centrum will close on 1 July 2003. Information and communication about the Union and its Institutions is extremely important, as the Honourable Member recalls, particularly in the Netherlands, which will assume the Union-presidency in the second half of 2004. The loss of Europa Centrum is therefore clearly felt by the Commission and the national authorities in the Netherlands.

As the Honourable Member knows, the new Financial Regulation (1) prevents operating grants to organisations such as Europa Centrum which cannot exist solely on the basis of project-based subventions, via calls for proposals.

As far as this kind of project-based grants is concerned, the Europa Centrum has been awarded in 2003 two grants by the Directorate General (DG) for Education and Culture, in the framework of the Calls for Proposals addressed to Non-Governmental Organisations and Associations of European Interest. Unfortunately, after the sad decision to terminate its activities, the Europa Centrum will not be able to use these grants.

It goes without saying that, if Europa Centrum changes this decision in the future and starts over its activities, nothing would prevent it to present one or more projects in the framework of new calls for proposals and the Commission would of course seriously consider them, as it does with any other project.

A call was published by the Commission's Representation in the Netherlands in May 2003, following the adoption of the work programme for DG Press and Communication on 28 March 2003. The first deadline for this call was set at the 30 June 2003.

----

(1)  Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities, OJ L 248, 16.9.2002.

----
STATE v. Mark Leonard MORGAN.

No. 203P08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 30, 2008.

Allen Brotherton, Charlotte, for Morgan.

Peter S. Gilchrist, III, District Attorney.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 30th day of April 2008 by State of NC for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference this the 30th day of April 2008."
Matthew Cate, Secretary of the California Department of Corrections, is *

substituted for his predecessor, J.S. Woodford, Warden. Fed. R. App. P. 43(c)(2).

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent **

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

GREGORY ROSS WHITE,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

MATTHEW CATE, Secretary of the *

California Department of Corrections;

MARGARITA E. PEREZ, Chairperson,

California Board of Prison Terms,

Respondents - Appellees.

No. 06-56174

D.C. No. CV-04-05968-SJO

MEMORANDUM**

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

S. James Otero, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted May 7, 2008

Pasadena, California

Submission withdrawn May 23, 2008

Resubmitted September 9, 2010

FILED

SEP 17 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
The Honorable James L. Robart, United States District Judge for the ***

Western District of Washington, sitting by designation.

2

Before: FISHER and BERZON, Circuit Judges, and ROBART, District Judge.*** 

Gregory Ross White appeals from the judgment of the district court

dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition challenging the 1996

rescission of parole. We dismiss the appeal as moot.

White filed his habeas petition on July 22, 2004, while he was incarcerated

by the State of California at the Oregon State Penitentiary in Salem, Oregon. In his

petition, White sought an order vacating his 1996 parole rescission order,

reinstating his parole date and requiring the Department of Corrections to release

him from prison “in accordance with the terms of his parole.” Supplement Pet.

Habeas Corpus 13. On January 22, 2010, while this appeal was pending, White

was released on parole. White has, accordingly, been granted the relief he sought

in his habeas petition. This renders his appeal moot. See Munoz v. Rowland, 104

F.3d 1096, 1097-98 (9th Cir. 1997) (“We are precluded by Article III of the

Constitution . . . from entertaining an appeal if there is no longer a live case or

controversy.”). 

In his supplemental brief, White argues that his case is not moot because this

court could order his discharge from parole. Cf. McQuillion v. Duncan, 342 F.3d

1012, 1015 (9th Cir. 2003). White, however, raises this claim for relief for the first
3

time in his supplemental brief on appeal. We therefore treat this argument as

waived. See Allen v. Ornoski, 435 F.3d 946, 960 (9th Cir. 2006).

APPEAL DISMISSED.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 523 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 523

To amend the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the 
  Global War on Terror, and Hurricane Recovery, 2006 to authorize the 
Federal Emergency Management Agency to provide additional assistance to 
   State and local governments for utility costs resulting from the 
provision of temporary housing units to evacuees from Hurricane Katrina 
                         and other hurricanes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            February 7, 2007

  Mr. Vitter introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the 
  Global War on Terror, and Hurricane Recovery, 2006 to authorize the 
Federal Emergency Management Agency to provide additional assistance to 
   State and local governments for utility costs resulting from the 
provision of temporary housing units to evacuees from Hurricane Katrina 
                         and other hurricanes.

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

SECTION 1. FEDERAL ASSISTANCE FOR UTILITY COSTS RESULTING FROM THE 
              PROVISION OF TEMPORARY HOUSING UNITS TO EVACUEES FROM 
              HURRICANE KATRINA AND OTHER HURRICANES.

    Section 2401 of the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for 
Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Hurricane Recovery, 2006 (Public 
Law 109-234; 120 Stat. 460), is amended by striking ``12 months'' and 
inserting ``24 months''.
                                 <all>
```
#### In the Matter of Benjamin Perez, Respondent, v Grissel M. Sepulveda, Appellant.

[799 NYS2d 903]

*559In a child custody proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Queens County (Richroath, J.), dated April 30, 2004, which, after a hearing, inter alia, awarded permanent legal and physical custody of the subject child to the father and established a visitation schedule for her.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Where, as here, the parents seem equally able to provide for the intellectual and material needs of the child, “the effect that an award of custody to one parent might have on the child’s relationship with the other parent” is a crucial factor *(Bliss v Ach,*56 NY2d 995, 998 [1982]; *see Young v Young,*212 AD2d 114 [1995]; *Janecka v Franklin,*150 AD2d 755, 757 [1989]). The mother’s denigration of the child’s father, deliberate interference with the father’s visitation rights, and uncorroborated and unfounded allegations of abuse against the father is conduct so inconsistent with the best interests of the child as to per se raise a strong probability that she is unfit to act as a custodial parent *(see Young v Young,*supra;*Matter of Wolfer v Wolfer,*183 AD2d 903 [1992]; *Janecka v Franklin, supra).*Accordingly, the Family Court’s determination awarding the father custody was a provident exercise of discretion.

The mother’s remaining contentions are without merit. Schmidt, J.P., S. Miller, Mastro and Rivera, JJ., concur. *[See 4*Misc 3d 1005(A), 2004 NY Slip Op 50664(U) (2004).]
TAYLOR v. MILLER.

No. COA07-913.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed November 18, 2008.

Certification Date December 8, 2008.

Appeal from Carteret (06CVS25).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed in part; remanded in part for further proceedings.
IN RE J.C.D.

No. COA08-116.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed June 17, 2008.

Certification Date July 7, 2008.

Appeal from Forsyth (05JT203).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
<PAGE>
 
                                                                EXHIBIT 3.4

                                 AMENDMENT TO
                        AMENDED AND RESTATED BYLAWS OF 
                               DOCUMENTUM, INC.

        The Board of Directors of Documentum, Inc., at a meeting held March 12, 
1998, approved amended Section 15 of the Company's Amended and Restated Bylaws 
to read as follows:

        "SECTION 15. NUMBER AND TERM OF OFFICE. The Board of Directors shall
        consist of one or more members, the number thereof to be determined from
        time to time by resolution of the Board of Directors. The number of
        authorized Directors also may be modified from time to time by amendment
        of this Section 15 in accordance with the provisions of Section 44
        hereof. Except as provided in Section 17, the Directors shall be elected
        by the stockholders at their annual meeting in each year and shall hold
        office until the next annual meeting and until their successors shall be
        duly elected and qualified. Directors need not be stockholders unless so
        required by the Certificate of Incorporation. If for any cause, the
        Directors shall not have been elected at an annual meeting, they may be
        elected as soon thereafter as convenient at a special meeting of the
        stockholders called for that purpose in the manner provided in these
        Bylaws. No reduction of the authorized number of Directors shall have
        the effect of removing any Director before the Director's term of office
        expires, unless such removal is made pursuant to the provisions of
        Section 19 hereof."
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>        9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM UNAUDITED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS DATED MARCH 31, 1997, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         1769513
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         7960101
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    7340704
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          409481
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            411000
<LOANS>                                       28195201
<ALLOWANCE>                                      78600
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                46803994
<DEPOSITS>                                    37110290
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             344521
<LONG-TERM>                                    3699985
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                          3317
<OTHER-SE>                                     5645881
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                46803994
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                1195691
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                74425
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                379840
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               1649956
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              813362
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              922001
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           727955
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                2896
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 529650
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 260673
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      163190
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    163190
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .58
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .57
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                     .04
<LOANS-NON>                                     243000
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 77000
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                      1600
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                78600
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             68500
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          10100
STATE of North Carolina v. Antwan Montrece BANKS.

No. 426P08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 11, 2008.

Christy E. Wilhelm, Concord, for Banks.

Elizabeth N. Strickland, Special Deputy Attorney General, Rick Shaffer, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 11th day of September 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:

*566"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 11th day of December 2008."
STATE of North Carolina v. Roger Earl COLEY.

No. 544A08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 5, 2009.

M. Gordon Widenhouse, Jr., Chapel Hill, for Coley.

Joan Cunningham, Special Deputy Attorney General, Howard S. Boney, Jr., District Attorney, for State of NC.

Prior report: ___ N.C.App. ___, 668 S.E.2d 46.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition for discretionary review, filed by Defendant on the 9th day of December 2008 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 and the Appellate Rule 16(b) as to issues in addition to those presented as the basis for the dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the petition for discretionary review as to additional issues is

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

Accordingly, only those issues which are the basis of the dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals shall be presented to this Court in briefs. The Defendant's new brief so limited in scope shall be filed with this Court not more that 30 days from the date of certification of this order.
SUBJECT: State briefly the problem on which you desire assistance.

# V5)L\~q1i '•

### L._~**~16-rV_M** /l) 

### /111'-1 1(_{-.QUt:.dr' 

# A"-'·'

. '**------~-~-.-------.** 

## If-

_ ____/)_() ('**k'.L~-** _ L 

## f 1¥6G r

### ~ /'-·· 

### /VI V

### ~ r- _j 

### I. 

## d 7- 

# tlwt> 

# -TI-t r2**7~-** 

# :r>,**~ ~** **~r** L 1

### ;b~**eo~** 

# '7. -----, 

# R4 ,f. f 

## A&.Jr-1{.,(< /L 

## '1-2JJ I d/01 

## 7<'Vl :JbJ rJ?Jd- · jJ

## ~ vJ lr- 

## i>IJ.fuL "N 

### '?-t 

## -1 ' l-

## -£ft.~· ,

Name:

------------------------------------------- No: Unit:

____________ _ Living Quarters: Work Assignment: 

### RECEIVFfiJ IM DISPOSITION: (Inmate will not write in this space)

i'rl-60 (Rev. 11-90) COURT OF CRIIIJIII\!AL APPEALS 

## MAY 112015**Arc»®~ Aco~~SJ,** **C~ewk**
STATE of North Carolina v. Alex Levone McGIRT, Jr.

No. 552P07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 6, 2008.

Alex L. McGirt, Jr., Pro Se.

Robert Montgomery, Special Deputy Attorney General, R. Stuart Albright, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 9th day of November 2007 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, Guilford 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 6th day of March 2008."
# The Salaries (Assembly Ombudsman and Commissioner for Complaints) Order (Northern Ireland) 2014 (revoked)

        - Previous
        - Next

N.I.

Statutory Rules of Northern Ireland

# 2014 No. 55

Salaries

# The Salaries (Assembly Ombudsman and Commissioner for Complaints) Order (Northern Ireland) 2014 (revoked)F1

Made

27th February 2014

Coming into force

*21st* March 2014                        

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

F1Order revoked (retrospective and with effect in accordance with art. 2 of the amending Order) by The Salaries (Assembly Ombudsman and Commissioner for Complaints) Order (Northern Ireland) 2015 (S.R. 2015/18), arts. 1, **2**
<PAGE>



                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

                           PROVINCE HEALTHCARE COMPANY

                           CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO

       RULE 13a-14(b) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED,
               AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the Report of Province Healthcare Company (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") on the date hereof (the
"Report"), Martin S. Rash, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and
Christopher T. Hannon, Chief Financial Officer of the Company certify, 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) that:

         (1)      The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
                  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
                  "Exchange Act"); and

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

Date: March 8, 2004

                                       /s/ Martin S. Rash
                                       -----------------------------------
                                       Martin S. Rash
                                       Chief Executive Officer

                                       /s/Christopher T. Hannon
                                       ------------------------------------
                                       Christopher T. Hannon
                                       Chief Financial Officer
# The Welfare of Animals at the Time of Killing (Revocation) Regulations 2014

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

Statutory Instruments

# 2014 No. 1258

Animals

Prevention Of Cruelty

# The Welfare of Animals at the Time of Killing (Revocation) Regulations 2014

Made

15th May 2014

Laid before Parliament

16th May 2014

Coming into force

19th May 2014

The Secretary of State is designated for the purposes of section 2(2) of the European Communities Act 1972(1) in relation to the common agricultural policy of the European Union(2) and makes these Regulations in exercise of those powers, and the powers conferred by paragraph 1A of Schedule 2 to that Act,                           and with the consent of the Treasury under section 56(1) of the Finance Act 1973(3).                        

## Citation and commencementU.K.

1.—(1) These Regulations may be cited as the Welfare of Animals at the Time of Killing (Revocation) Regulations 2014.                  

(2) These Regulations come into force on 19th May 2014.

## RevocationU.K.

2.  The Welfare of Animals at the Time of Killing Regulations 2014(4) are revoked.                  

George Eustice

Parliamentary Under Secretary of State

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

15th May 2014

We consent

David Evennett

Sam Gyimah

Two of the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury

15th May 2014

## EXPLANATORY NOTE

(This note is not part of the Regulations)

The Regulations revoke the Welfare of Animals at the Time of Killing Regulations 2014 (S.I. 2014/1240). An impact assessment has not been produced for this instrument as no impact is foreseen on the private, voluntary or public                     sectors.                  

1

1972 c. 68; section 2(2) was amended by section 27(1)(a) of the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006 (c. 51) and section 3(3) of the European Union (Amendment) Act 2008 (c. 7). The function of the former Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food of making regulations under section 2(2) was transferred                              to the Secretary of State by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Dissolution) Order 2002 (S.I. 2002/794).                           

2

S.I. 1972/1811.                           

3

1973 c. 51; section 56 was amended by S.I. 2011/1043, article 6(1)(e).                           

4

S.I. 2014/1240.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Michael T. Diefenbacher, Appellant.

(Appeal No. 2.)

[801 NYS2d 200]

Appeal from a resentence of the Oswego County Court (Walter W. Hafner, Jr., J.), rendered August 12, 2003. Defendant was resentenced upon a conviction for burglary in the second degree (two counts), assault in the second degree and criminal mischief in the fourth degree.

It is hereby ordered that the resentence so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously reversed on the law and the matter is remitted to Oswego County Court for further proceedings in accordance with the same memorandum as in *People v Diefenbacher*(21 AD3d 1293 [2005]). Present—Green, J.P., Scudder, Kehoe, Smith and Lawton, JJ.