alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2005296EN.01002602.xml

| 26.11.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 296/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.11.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 296/26

---

Action brought on 5 September 2005 by Susanne Sorensen v Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-335/05)

(2005/C 296/57)

Language of the case: French

Parties:

Applicant(s): Susanne Sorensen (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: S. Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis, E. Marchal, lawyers)

Applicant(s):

Defendant(s): Commission of the European Communities

Defendant(s):

Form of order sought

The applicant(s) claim(s) that the Court should:

| — | annul the decision appointing the applicant to the post of assistant, in that it fixes her classification in grade B*3, step 2; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision appointing the applicant to the post of assistant, in that it fixes her classification in grade B*3, step 2;

| — | annul the decision to cancel all the points constituting the applicant's ‘rucksack’; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision to cancel all the points constituting the applicant's ‘rucksack’;

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

—

order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant, an official of the Commission, had initially been classified in grade C2. she was successful in open competition COM/B/1/02 (at level B5/B4) and was appointed, by the contested decision of 5 August 2004, in grade B*3, step 2. In support of her action, the applicant claims that there has been a breach of the competition notice and also of the vacancy notice, in so far as both notices provided for classification in grade B5 or B4. She claims, in the same context, that there has been a breach of Articles 4, 5, 29 and 31 of the Staff Regulations. Relying on the fact that some successful candidates in the competition were appointed before 1 May 2004 (the date of the entry into force of the amendments to the Staff Regulations) in grade B5 or B4, which correspond to grade B*5 or B*6 under the new denomination, the applicant also claims that there has been a breach of the principle of equal treatment and non-discrimination. She also contends that the principle that an official should have reasonable career prospects and the principle of protection of legitimate expectations have been breached, since she had a legitimate expectation of being appointed in grade B*5 or B*4. In that context, she claims that Article 12 of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations, which also breaches the principle of legal certainty, is unlawful.

---
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 178 (Thursday, September 15, 2005)]
[Presidential Documents]
[Page 54607]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-18495]



[[Page 54605]]

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

Part II





The President





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



Presidential Determination No. 2005-35 of September 12, 2005--
Continuation of the Exercise of Certain Authorities Under the Trading 
With the Enemy Act


                        Presidential Documents 



Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 178 / Thursday, September 15, 2005 / 
Presidential Documents

___________________________________________________________________

Title 3--
The President

[[Page 54607]]

                Presidential Determination No. 2005-35 of September 12, 
                2005

                
Continuation of the Exercise of Certain 
                Authorities under the Trading with the Enemy Act

                Memorandum for the Secretary of State [and] the 
                Secretary of the Treasury

                Under section 101(b) of Public Law 95-223 (91 Stat. 
                1625; 50 U.S.C. App. 5(b) note), and a previous 
                determination on September 10, 2004 (69 Fed. Reg. 
                55497), the exercise of certain authorities under the 
                Trading with the Enemy Act is scheduled to terminate on 
                September 14, 2005.

                I hereby determine that the continuation for 1 year of 
                the exercise of those authorities with respect to the 
                applicable countries is in the national interest of the 
                United States.

                Therefore, pursuant to the authority vested in me by 
                section 101(b) of Public Law 95-223, I continue for 1 
                year, until September 14, 2006, the exercise of those 
                authorities with respect to countries affected by:

(1)

 the Foreign Assets Control Regulations, 31 C.F.R. part 500;

(2)

 the Transaction Control Regulations, 31 C.F.R. part 505; and

(3)

 the Cuban Assets Control Regulations, 31 C.F.R. part 515.

                The Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and 
                directed to publish this determination in the Federal 
                Register.

                    (Presidential Sig.)B

                THE WHITE HOUSE,

                    Washington, September 12, 2005.

[FR Doc. 05-18495
Filed 9-14-05; 8:45 am]
Billing code 4811-33-P
STATE v. John Lewis WRAY, Jr.

No. 382P10-5.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 17, 2016.

Derrick Mertz, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State of North Carolina.

John L. Wray, Jr., Laurinburg, for Wray, John Lewis, Jr.

Mike Miller, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 12th of February 2016 by Defendant for Notice of Appeal:

> "Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 17th of March 2016."

BEASLEY, J. recused.
Rodney HALL, Dante Branham, Ehramis Chism, Tyriuq Gordon, Malik Maignan (minor) by his Guardian Ad Litem, Benika Rayford, Benika Rayford, Individually and Erik Staley, Plaintiffs, v. Michael L. GREENE and Mount Zion Christian Academy, Defendants.

No. COA15-486.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Feb. 16, 2016.

**Case Reported Without Published Opinion**

Affirmed.
# C_2008209EN.01007101.xml

| 15.8.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 209/71 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 209/71

---

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 22 May 2008 — Pascual-García v Commission

(Case F-145/06) (1)

1

(Staff case - Open competition - Conditions of eligibility - Required professional experience - Refusal to recruit a candidate on the reserve list - Discretion of selection board and appointing authority)

(2008/C 209/129)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Cesar Pascual-García (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: B. Cortese and C. Cortese, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: J. Currall and M. Velardo, agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Annulment of the decision of 7 April 2006 of the Director General of the Joint Research Centre of the Commission refusing to take the applicant's application into consideration for the post referred to in vacancy notice COM/2005/2969 — B/3/B*11 — IHCP — Ispra, and adding a comment in the reserve list of competition EPSO/B/23/04, informing the Commission's departments that the applicant does not meet the conditions of eligibility for that competition

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

| 1. | annuls the decision of 7 April 2006 of the Director General of the Joint Research Centre (JRC) of the Commission of the European Communities refusing to take the application of Mr Pascual-García into consideration for vacancy notice COM/2005/2969, and adding a comment in the reserve list of the open competition EPSO/B/23/04, informing the departments that the applicant did not meet the conditions of eligibility for that competition; |
| --- | --- |

1.

annuls the decision of 7 April 2006 of the Director General of the Joint Research Centre (JRC) of the Commission of the European Communities refusing to take the application of Mr Pascual-García into consideration for vacancy notice COM/2005/2969, and adding a comment in the reserve list of the open competition EPSO/B/23/04, informing the departments that the applicant did not meet the conditions of eligibility for that competition;

| 2. | orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 56 of 10.3.2007, p. 42

1

---
STATE of North Carolina v. Sherry Endoleen AUSTIN.

No. 384P15.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Jan. 28, 2016.

M. Alexander Charns, Durham, for Austin, Sherry Endoleen.

Derek L. Hunter, Assistant Attorney General, for State of North Carolina.

N. Lorrin Freeman, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 19th of November 2015 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 28th of January 2016."
# C_2008064EN.01007101.xml

| 8.3.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 64/71 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.3.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 64/71

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 22 January 2008 — Erbežnik v Parliament

(Case F-106/06) (1)

1

(2008/C 64/117)

Language of the case: Slovenian

Language of the case: Slovenian

The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register, following amicable settlement.

---

(1)  OJ 2006 C 281, 46.

1

---
Stan J.H. Lee, CPA



|
|



To Whom It May Concerns:

The firm of Stan J.H. Lee, Certified Public Accountants, consents to the inclusion of our report of August 9, 2010, on the reviewed consolidated financial statements of Environmental Credits, Ltd. as of June 30, 2010 and for the period then ended in any filings that are necessary now or in the near future with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Very truly yours,



/s/ Stan J.H. Lee

August 9, 2010
Fort Lee, NJ 07024



Registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board
Member of New Jersey Society of CPAs
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                          3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                      OCT-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                         NOV-01-1996  
<PERIOD-END>                           JAN-31-1997
<CASH>                                     71,663
<SECURITIES>                               60,416
<RECEIVABLES>                             270,284
<ALLOWANCES>                               57,552
<INVENTORY>                            10,382,344
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                0
<PP&E>                                  5,828,273
<DEPRECIATION>                         (2,138,622)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                         18,698,813
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           0
<BONDS>                                60,129,559
<COMMON>                                3,484,560
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           0
<PREFERRED>                                     0
<OTHER-SE>                            (46,371,652)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>           18,698,813
<SALES>                                 2,481,474
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        2,636,452
<CGS>                                   1,766,885
<TOTAL-COSTS>                           2,236,694
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         40,072
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           365,339
<INCOME-TAX>                              146,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       219,339
<DISCONTINUED>                                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 0
<CHANGES>                                       0
<NET-INCOME>                              219,339
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 .06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   0
        

</TABLE>
# C_2008209EN.01004401.xml

| 15.8.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 209/44 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 209/44

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 8 July 2008 — Franchet and Byk v Commission

(Case T-48/05) (1)

1

(Non-contractual liability - Civil service - Investigations by OLAF - ‘Eurostat’ case - Communication to national judicial authorities of information relating to facts liable to lead to criminal proceedings - Lack of advance information for the officials concerned and the supervisory committee of OLAF - Leaks in the press - Disclosure by OLAF and the Commission - Breach of the principle of presumption of innocence - Non-material damage - Causal link)

(2008/C 209/75)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Yves Franchet (Nice, France) and Daniel Byk (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: G. Vandersanden and L. Levi, avocats)

Applicants:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: J.-F. Pasquier, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

APPLICATION for compensation for material and non-material damage allegedly suffered as a result of alleged wrongful acts on the part of the Commission and OLAF in the course of investigations relating to the ‘Eurostat’ case.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Orders the Commission to pay Yves Franchet and Daniel Byk the sum of EUR 56 000; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Orders the Commission to pay Yves Franchet and Daniel Byk the sum of EUR 56 000;

| 2. | Dismisses the remainder of the action; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the remainder of the action;

| 3. | Orders the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Commission to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 93, 16.4.2005.

1

---
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

	NO.  2-08-242-CR

JAMES DONALD WESTFALL	APPELLANT

	V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS	STATE

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

	FROM THE 30TH DISTRICT COURT OF WICHITA COUNTY

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

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

	Appellant James Donald Westfall, a pro se inmate, attempts to appeal the trial court’s denial of his “Motion to Withdraw the Destruction or Removal of Any and All Evidence Related to Material Facts, Testimony, Documents Tangible Objects, Photographs, Electronic Media, Computer Files and Exhibits Presented or Available to be Presented.”  The limited record before us shows that the State had previously filed two “Notices of Intent to Destroy Evidence” under article 38.43 of the code of criminal procedure, and the trial court had entered two “Orders to Destroy Evidence,” finding that the State had complied with the notice requirements of article 38.43.  See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 38.43 (Vernon Supp. 2008).2

	On July 22, 2008, we notified Appellant that we were concerned that we lack jurisdiction over his appeal because the orders in question do not appear to be appealable orders.  We informed Appellant that we would dismiss the appeal unless he or any party desiring to continue it filed a response in this court showing grounds for continuing the appeal.  We have not received a response.

	Article 38.43, entitled “Preservation of Evidence Containing Biological Material,” provides that the State may destroy DNA evidence if it does not receive an objection within ninety-one days after giving notice to the defendant, defense counsel, and the convicting court.  See id.  Article 38.43 does not provide for any relief by the lower court, nor does it authorize an appeal to a court of appeals.  See id.; see also Chavez v. State, 132 S.W.3d 509, 510 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2004, no pet.) (“When the issue is the preservation of evidence containing biological material, the Code of Criminal Procedure does not provide for any relief by the lower court, nor authorize an appeal to the court of appeals.”); Woodall v. State, No. 02-06-00101-CR, 2007 WL 117704, at *2 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Jan. 18, 2007, pet. ref’d) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (“[T]he code of criminal procedure does not authorize an appeal to a court of appeals on the ground that the State improperly destroyed DNA evidence”).   Consequently, we are without jurisdiction to address whether the State properly destroyed DNA evidence or whether the trial court properly denied Appellant’s “Motion to Withdraw the Destruction.”  Therefore, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f).

							PER CURIAM

PANEL: GARDNER, WALKER, and MCCOY, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED:  August 29, 2008
**Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Seventh Chamber) of 18 December 2008 – Muñiz v Commission**

**(Case T-144/05)**

Access to documents – Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 – Documents relating to a meeting of the Working Group of the ‘Tariff and Statistical Nomenclature Section (Mechanical/Miscellaneous)’
of the Customs Code Committee – Refusal of access – Exception relating to the protection of the decision-making process

European Communities – Institutions – Right of public access to documents – Regulation No 1049/2001 – Exceptions to the right of access to documents (Regulation of the European Parliament and Council No 1049/2001, Art. 2(1)
and 4(3), first para.) (see paras 74-75, 82, 84-88, 90-94)

**Re:**

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| APPLICATION for annulment of the Commission’s decision of 3 February 2005 refusing to grant access to certain documents relating to the September 2004 meeting of the Working Group of the ‘Tariff and Statistical Nomenclature Section (Mechanical/Miscellaneous) | **’** : | of the Customs Code Committee. |

**Operative part**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | Annuls the Commission’s decision of 3 February 2005 inasmuch as it refused access to documents, ‘TAXUD/1369/2003’ relating to home cinema, ‘TAXUD/974/2004’ relating to vehicles for dual use, ‘TAXUD/1342/2003’, ‘TAXUD/2465/2004’ and ‘TAXUD/2495/2004’ relating to power supply units, ‘XXI/770/1998’ relating to incomplete ADP machines, and to the minutes of the September 2004 meeting of the Working Group of the ‘Tariff and Statistical Nomenclature Section (Mechanical/Miscellaneous)’ of the Customs Code Committee (document ‘TAXUD/3010/2004 – Annex V’); |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Declares that there is no need to adjudicate on the remainder of the action; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 3. | | Orders the Commission to pay the costs incurred by Mr Pablo Muñiz. |
EXHIBIT 23
               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We have issued our report  dated March 2, 2001,  accompanying  the  consolidated
financial statements and included in the Annual Report of Xechem  International,
Inc. on Form 10-KSB for the year ended  December 31, 2000. We hereby  consent to
the  incorporation by reference of said report in the Registration  Statement of
Xechem  International,  Inc.  on Form S-8 (SEC  File  No.  333-67501,  effective
November 18, 1998).


GRANT THORNTON LLP

New York, New York
April 12, 2001
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3633 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3633

    To clarify that certain recipients of payments from the Federal 
     Government related to the delivery of health care services to 
 individuals shall not be treated as Federal contractors by the Office 
of Federal Contract Compliance Programs based on the work performed or 
actions taken by such individuals that resulted in the receipt of such 
                               payments.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            December 3, 2013

 Mr. Walberg introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To clarify that certain recipients of payments from the Federal 
     Government related to the delivery of health care services to 
 individuals shall not be treated as Federal contractors by the Office 
of Federal Contract Compliance Programs based on the work performed or 
actions taken by such individuals that resulted in the receipt of such 
                               payments.

    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 ``Protecting Health Care Providers 
from Increased Administrative Burdens Act''.

SEC. 2. NON-FEDERAL CONTRACTOR STATUS FOR ENTITIES RECEIVING CERTAIN 
              HEALTH CARE-RELATED FEDERAL PAYMENTS.

    A State, a local government, or other recipient that receives a 
payment from the Federal Government, directly or indirectly and 
regardless of reimbursement methodology, related to the delivery of 
health care services to individuals, whether or not such individuals 
are or have been employed by the Federal Government, shall not be 
treated as a Federal contractor or subcontractor by the Office of 
Federal Contract Compliance Programs based on the work performed or 
actions taken by such individuals that resulted in the receipt of such 
payments.
                                 <all>
```