alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Official Journal C 396/27 N

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 396 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5827 November 2015 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 396

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5827 November 2015

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2015/C 396/1 | Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 October 2015 to 31 October 2015(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council) | 1 |
| 2015/C 396/2 | Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 October 2015 to 31 October 2015(Decisions taken pursuant to Article 34 of Directive 2001/83/EC or Article 38 of Directive 2001/82/EC) | 7 |

Notice No

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2015/C 396/1

Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 October 2015 to 31 October 2015(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council)

(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council)

1

2015/C 396/2

Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 October 2015 to 31 October 2015(Decisions taken pursuant to Article 34 of Directive 2001/83/EC or Article 38 of Directive 2001/82/EC)

(Decisions taken pursuant to Article 34 of Directive 2001/83/EC or Article 38 of Directive 2001/82/EC)

7

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**





**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**





In
      connection with the amended Quarterly Report of Triangle Petroleum Corporation
      (the "Company") on Form 10-Q/A for the period ending October 31, 2007, as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
      I, Mark Gustafson, Principal Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
      2002,
      to my knowledge that:





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





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





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      Triangle Petroleum Corporation and will be retained by Triangle Petroleum
      Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
      staff
      upon request.




/s/
      MARK
      GUSTAFSON


Mark
      Gustafson


President
      (Principal Executive Officer)


April
      30,
      2008
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO  18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of MakeMusic! Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, William R. Wolff, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to
§906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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

|Dated: March 26, 2004 | /s/WILLIAM R. WOLFFWilliam R. Wolff
Chief Financial Officer
|--------------------- | -----------------------------------------------------------

---

QuickLinks
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-41058

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JESUS ERASMO ALANIZ-GARCIA, also known as Jesus Alaniz-Garcia

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No.7:06-CR-363-1

Before KING, BARKSDALE, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

TheFederalPublic Defender appointed to represent Jesus Erasmo AlanizGarcia (Alaniz) has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in

accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Alaniz has not filed

a response. Our independent review of the 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 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

October 22, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
STATE of North Carolina v. Maechel Shawn PATTERSON

No. 597P01-3

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 8, 2017

Maechel Shawn Patterson, for Patterson, Maechel Shawn.

Joseph L. Hyde, Assistant Attorney General, Seth H. Edwards, District Attorney, for State of N.C.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 28th of April 2017 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, 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 8th of June 2017."

Ervin, J. recused
Cooper v. Berger, et al.

52P17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 13, 2017

Camden R. Webb, Attorney at Law, Elizabeth Connolly Stone, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for Abrons Family Practice And Urgent Care, PA, et al.

Amar Majmundar, Special Deputy Attorney General, Olga Vysotskaya de Brito, Assistant Attorney General, for North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services.

Jennifer K. Van Zant, Attorney at Law, Greensboro, Charles F. Marshall, III, Attorney at Law, Bryan Starrett, Attorney at Law, Greensboro, Bryant C. Boren, Jr., Attorney at Law, Ryan L. Bangert, Attorney at Law, Van H. Beckwith, Attorney at Law, for Computer Sciences Corporation.

Mark S. Thomas, Attorney at Law, Raleigh.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 9th of February 2017 by Plaintiff for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 13th of February 2017."

Defendant (NCDHHS) shall have up to and including the 29th day of March 2017 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.
**EXHIBIT 31.1**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Vincent A. Tortorici, Jr., certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10- Q of Brown JordanInternational, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this quarterly report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cashflows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand have:
 a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known tous by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this quarterly report is being prepared;
 b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the endof the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
 c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter inthe case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunction):
 a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability torecord, process, summarize and report financial information; and
 b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.        *Date: October 8, 2004* By:  */s/ Vincent A. Tortorici*    *Vincent A. Tortorici*    *Chief Financial Officer*
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3953 

To amend title I of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act concerning 

the notice requirements regarding the extent of health plan coverage 

of abortion. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 28, 2014 

Mr. CARTWRIGHT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To amend title I of the Patient Protection and Affordable 

Care Act concerning the notice requirements regarding 

the extent of health plan coverage of abortion. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Health Plan Notice 

5 Requirements Act’’. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 3953 IH

1 SEC. 2. REVISION OF ACA NOTICE REQUIREMENTS RE2 GARDING DISCLOSURE OF EXTENT OF 

3 HEALTH PLAN COVERAGE OF ABORTION. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subparagraph (A) of section 

5 1303(b)(3) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care 

6 Act (42 U.S.C. 18023(b)(3)) is amended to read as fol7 lows: 

8 ‘‘(A) NOTICE.—Each qualified health plan 

9 shall provide to enrollees a notice on the extent 

10 of coverage (if any) of services described in 

11 paragraph (1)(B)(i) or (1)(B)(ii) by such plan. 

12 Such notice shall be included as part of mar13 keting or advertising materials, comparison 

14 tools, or summaries of benefits and coverage ex15 planations made available with respect to such 

16 plan by the issuer of the plan or an Exchange 

17 during any enrollment period for such plan or 

18 prior period for purposes of comparisons of 

19 qualified health plans by potential enrollees.’’. 

20 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

21 subsection (a) shall apply with respect to materials, tools, 

22 summaries, and explanations provided on or after 90 days 

23 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 08-7626

MICHAEL MCNEILL, 

 Petitioner - Appellant, 

 v. 

THEODIS BECK, Secretary, North Carolina Department of 

Correction, 

 Respondent – Appellee. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle 

District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., 

Chief District Judge. (1:08-cv-00209-JAB-PTS) 

Submitted: October 14, 2008 Decided: October 20, 2008 

Before KING, GREGORY, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. 

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Michael McNeill, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, 

Assistant Attorney General, Mary Carla Hollis, Assistant 

Attorney General, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, 

North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

Michael McNeill seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 

dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. 

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge 

issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) 

(2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a 

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this 

standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find 

that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district 

court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural 

ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. MillerEl v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 

529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th 

Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and 

conclude that McNeill has not made the requisite showing. 

Accordingly, we deny McNeill’s motion for a certificate of 

appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 

presented in the materials before the court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 186 (Tuesday, September 27, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56528-56529]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-19282]


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

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS


Advisory Committee on Former Prisoners of War; Notice of Meeting

    The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under Public 
Law 92-463 (Federal Advisory Committee Act) that the Advisory Committee 
on Former Prisoners of War (FPOW) has scheduled a meeting for October 
24-26, 2005, at the Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, 4801 
Linwood Blvd., Kansas City, Missouri. The meeting will be held at each 
day in the medical center's recreation room from 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. 
The meeting is open to the public.

[[Page 56529]]

    The purpose of the Committee is to advise the Secretary of Veterans 
Affairs on the administration of benefits under Title 38, United States 
Code, for veterans who are former prisoners of war, and to make 
recommendations on the needs of such veterans for compensation, health 
care, and rehabilitation.
    On October 24, the meeting will begin with an introduction of 
Committee members, remarks from dignitaries, and a review of Committee 
reports. The afternoon session will consist of an update of activities 
since the last meeting and time for FPOW veterans and the public to 
address the Committee. The agenda on October 25 will include a review 
of VA's Compensation and Pension Service activities, focusing on 
outreach initiatives to FPOWs about the new presumptive medical 
conditions of heart disease and the residuals of stroke. The Committee 
will then receive a progress report on the development of special 
designations of FPOW records at VA medical facilities. The Committee 
will also receive a presentation from the Robert E. Mitchell, Center 
for Prisoner of War Studies. The day will conclude with new business 
and general discussion. On October 26, the Committee's medical and 
administrative work groups will meet to discuss their activities and 
report back to the Committee. Then the Committee will review the issues 
discussed throughout the meeting to compile a report to be sent to the 
Secretary.
    Members of the public may direct questions or submit written 
statements for review by the Committee in advance of the meeting to Ms. 
Renee L. Szybala, Director, Compensation and Pension Service (21), 
Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 
20420. Submitted materials must be received by October 15, 2005.

    Dated: September 19, 2005.

    By direction of the Secretary.
E. Philip Riggin,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 05-19282 Filed 9-26-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-M
EX-10.2



 Exhibit 10.2 

U.S. SILICA HOLDINGS, INC. 

2011 INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN 

OMNIBUS AMENDMENT TO AWARD AGREEMENTS 

July 25, 2014 
 Mr. Bryan A. Shinn 

Chief Executive Officer 
  

	 	Re:	Good Reason Termination Protection 

 Dear Bryan: 

Reference is hereby made to the following equity award agreements previously entered into by and between you and U.S. Silica Holdings, Inc.
(the “Company”) under the Company’s 2011 Incentive Compensation Plan (collectively, the “Award Agreements”): 
  

	 	1.	Restricted Stock Unit Award Agreement by and between you and the Company, dated May 17, 2013, granting 16,371 restricted stock units. 


 

	 	2.	Restricted Stock Unit Award Agreement by and between you and the Company, dated February 11, 2014, granting 18,349 restricted stock units. 


 

	 	3.	Performance Share Unit Award Agreement by and between you and the Company, dated May 17, 2013, granting 30,403 performance share units. 


 

	 	4.	Performance Share Unit Award Agreement by and between you and the Company, dated February 11, 2014, granting 34,077 performance share units. 


The Company is pleased to inform you that the Board of Directors of the Company has approved a modification to the Award Agreements for your
benefit. Effective immediately, and notwithstanding any other provision in the Award Agreements to the contrary, in the event of your termination of employment with the Company by you for “Good Reason” (as defined in the Employment
Agreement by and between you and the Company dated March 22, 2012) at any time, such termination shall entitle you to the same rights and entitlements as would be applicable under the Award Agreements had such termination been a termination by
the Company without “Cause” (as defined in the Award Agreements) for all purposes under the Award Agreements. 
 Except as
expressly provided herein, the Award Agreements and the incentive equity awards granted thereunder shall continue to remain outstanding in full force and effect in accordance with all of the terms and conditions of the Award Agreements and the
Company’s 2011 Incentive Compensation Plan. 

*    *    *    *    *    * 







 Very truly yours, 
  

							
	U.S. SILICA HOLDINGS, INC.	 		 	 AGREED AND ACKNOWLEDGED
 as of
July 25, 2014

	By:	 	 /s/ David D. Murry
	 		 	
	Name:	 	David D. Murry	 		 	 /s/ Bryan A. Shinn

	Title:	 	Vice President of Talent Management	 		 	Bryan A. Shinn

 Signature Page to Omnibus Amendment to Award Agreements
STATE of North Carolina v. Kevin Lamont SMITH.

No. COA15-1220.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

May 3, 2016.

**Case Reported Without Published Opinion**

Affirmed.
credit for time served in the instant case, we disagree. NRS 176.055(1)

does not apply because Mower's confinement was not "pursuant to a judgment of conviction for another offense."

There is no indication in the record before us that federal authorities placed a hold on Mower after his arrest leading to the instant conviction. Further, the State does not challenge the following assertion made by Mower on appeal:

From the date of arrest through the date of sentencing, the federal government did not issue any writs to obtain custody of appellant. Additionally, there has not been any correspondence or any information indicating that the federal government is seeking custody of appellant; except for . . . a written statement made by the Presentence Investigation [report] writer that the federal government would seek parole revocation after the Nevada case is completed. It appears that Mower was taken into custody and confined solely due to the instant offense and is entitled to credit for the time served prior to his sentencing. See State v. Dist. Ct. (Jackson), 121 Nev. 413, 416, 116 P.3d 834, 836 (2005) ("[D]espite its discretionary language, the purpose of NRS 176.055 is to 'ensure that all time served is credited towards a defendant's ultimate sentence." (quoting Kuykendall v. State, 112 Nev. 1285, 1287, 926 P.2d 781, 783 (1996))). Therefore, this matter must be remanded to

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA 2
(0) 1947A 

### EWE&

, 

# an"J.

the district court for the awarding of 141 days' credit for time served and the amending of Mower's judgment of conviction. Accordingly, we

ORDER this matter REMANDED to the district court for proceedings consistent with this order. 1 2

J. Hardesty

J. Douglas

1 The fast track statement submitted by Mower does not comply with the Nevada Rules of Appellate Procedure because the procedural history and statement of facts do not contain any citations to the record. 

### See NRAP 3C(e)(1)(C) and NRAP 28(e)(1). Counsel for Mower is cautioned that the failure to comply with the briefing requirements in the future may result in the imposition of sanctions. 

### See NRAP 3C(n).

2 This order constitutes our final disposition of this appeal. Any subsequent appeal shall be docketed as a new matter.

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA 3
(0 1 , 147A

### cc. Hon. Valorie J. Vega, District Judge Clark County Public Defender Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA 

### 4
(0) 1947A

4‘ 13,..Sr:T3
STATE of North Carolina v. Jackie Emmitt MOOREHEAD

No. 23P15-2

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 16, 2017

Jackie Emmitt Moorehead, for Moorehead, Jackie Emmitt.

Anne M. Middleton, Special Deputy Attorney General, Valerie Mitchell Asbell, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 23rd of January 2017 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, Halifax 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 16th of March 2017."

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 23rd of January 2017 by Defendant to Proceed In Forma Pauperis:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 16th of March 2017."

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 23rd of January 2017 by Defendant to Appoint Counsel:

"Motion Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 16th of March 2017."
# C_2009113EN.01004401.xml

| 16.5.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 113/44 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.5.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 113/44

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 13 March 2009 — Torres v OHIM — Vinícola de Tomelloso (TORREGAZATE)

(Case T-273/07) (1)

1

2009/C 113/88

Language of the case: Spanish

Language of the case: Spanish

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

---

(1)  OJ C 235, 6.10.2007.

1

---
Madeline MOSES, Plaintiff, v. NORTH CAROLINA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION and North Carolina Department of Administration, Defendants.

No. COA16-1197

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: May 16, 2017

AFFIRMED.