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

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1794/2004

of 15 October 2004         

reducing, for the 2004/05 marketing year, the amount of aid to producers of certain citrus fruits following an overrun of the processing threshold in certain Member States

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2202/96 of 28 October 1996 introducing a Community aid scheme for producers of certain citrus fruits (1), and in particular Article 6 thereof,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Where Greece, Italy and Portugal are concerned, and for the 2004/05 marketing year, the amounts of aid to be granted under Regulation (EC) No 2202/96 for oranges delivered for processing shall be as indicated in Annex I to this Regulation.

Article 2

Where Greece and Spain are concerned, and for the 2004/05 marketing year, the amounts of aid to be granted under Regulation (EC) No 2202/96 for grapefruit and pomelos delivered for processing shall be as indicated in Annex II to this Regulation.

Article 3

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

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

Done at Brussels, 15 October 2004.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER            

Member of the Commission

----

(1)OJ L 297, 21.11.1996, p. 49. Regulation as last amended by the Act of Accession of 2003.

(2)OJ L 317, 2.12.2003, p. 5.

----

ANNEX I

----

ANNEX II

----
**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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Applix, Inc. (the “Company”) for theperiod ended June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), the undersigned, David C. Mahoney, President and Chief Executive Officer of theCompany, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:     (1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and     (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.                                           /s/ David C. Mahoney  Date: August 14, 2006 David C. Mahoney   President and Chief Executive Officer  
31
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 Quarterly Report of Clean Power Technologies Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended November 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Diane Glatfelter, CFO and Principal Accounting Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.







Date:  January 22, 2007

By:  /s/ Diane Glatfelter

Name:  Diane Glatfelter

Title:    Chief Financial Officer (Principal Accounting Officer)
State of North Carolina v. Bobby R. Grady

No. 249P11-5

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 18, 2016

Bobby Grady, Mark Montgomery, Attorney at Law, for Grady, Bobby R.

K. D. Sturgis, Special Deputy Attorney General, Matthew Delbridge, District Attorney, for State of N.C.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 20th of May 2016 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals *789pursuant 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 18th of August 2016."
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-2660

BILLY M. BLEDSOE,

Petitioner,

versus

DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board.

(96-208-BLA)

Submitted: April 17, 1997 Decided: April 24, 1997

Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Billy M. Bledsoe, Petitioner Pro Se. C. William Mangum, Christian

P. Barber, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Washington, D.C., for

Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks review of the Benefits Review Board's decision

and order affirming the administrative law judge's denial of black

lung benefits pursuant to 30 U.S.C.A. §§ 901-945 (West 1986 & Supp.

1996). Our review of the record discloses that the Board's decision

is based upon substantial evidence and is without reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board. Bledsoe v.

Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, No. 96-208-BLA

(B.R.B. Oct. 31, 1996). 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.

AFFIRMED
H. R. 4197 

One Hundred Thirteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Friday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and fourteen 

An Act 

To amend title 5, United States Code, to extend the period of certain authority 

with respect to judicial review of Merit Systems Protection Board decisions relating 

to whistleblowers, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘All Circuit Review Extension 

Act’’. 

SEC. 2. JUDICIAL REVIEW OF MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD 

DECISIONS RELATING TO WHISTLEBLOWERS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 7703(b)(1)(B) of title 5, United States 

Code, is amended by striking ‘‘2-year’’ and inserting ‘‘5-year’’. 

(b) DIRECTOR REVIEW.—Section 7703(d)(2) of such title is 

amended by striking ‘‘2-year’’ and inserting ‘‘5-year’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

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

         In  connection  with the Annual  Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2002 (the "Report") of TF Financial  Corporation (the "Company") as
filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission,  we,  John R.  Stranford,
President  and Chief  Executive  Officer,  and Dennis R.  Stewart,  Senior  Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer  (Principal  Accounting  Officer),  hereby
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss.1350,  as adopted  pursuant to ss.906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

         (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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.


/s/John R. Stranford                            /s/Dennis R. Stewart
-------------------------------------           --------------------------------
John R. Stranford                               Dennis R. Stewart
President and Chief Executive Officer           Senior Vice President
                                                and Chief Financial Officer


March 26, 2003
United States Court of Appeals

For the First Circuit

No. 07-1293

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Appellee,

v.

ANTHONY LIPSCOMB,

Defendant, Appellant.

ERRATA SHEET

The opinion of this Court issued on August 21, 2008, is

amended as follows:

On p.7, ll. 3-4: Insert "denial of the" after "the district

court's"
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

    Certifications Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act Of 2002

  In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Western Ohio Financial
Corporation (the "Company") for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, John W. Raisbeck, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to Section 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.

Date: March 26, 2004

                                  /s/ John W. Raisbeck
                                  ----------------------------------------------
                                  John W. Raisbeck, Chief Executive Officer

  In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Western Ohio Financial
Corporation (the "Company") for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Robert A. Kuehl, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
Section 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.

Date: March 26, 2004

                                  /s/Robert A. Kuehl
                                  ----------------------------------------------
                                  Robert A. Kuehl, Chief Financial Officer

         This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

                                                                              43
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS




We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form
S-3 No. 333-31287 and 333-59498) and Registration Statements (Form S-8 Nos.
33-96624, 333-48597, 333-52927 and 333-51884) of our report dated March 27,
2002, with respect to the financial statements of Net4Music Inc. included in the
Annual Report (Form 10-KSB) for the year ended December 31, 2001.




/s/ Ernst & Young LLP
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA
March 27, 2002







                                       51
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN THE INTEREST OF C. A. S., JR AND 

S. E. R. S., CHILDREN,

 

 Appellant. 

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-22-00027-CV

Appeal from the

109th District Court

of Andrews County, Texas 

(TC# 21,851)

O R D E R

In order to protect the identity of the minor children who are the subject of this appeal, the 

Court has determined on its own motion that it is necessary to identify the children by their initials, 

C. A. S., Jr. and S. E. R. S., and the parent by initials as well, in all papers submitted to the Court, 

including letters, motions, and briefs. See Tex.R.App.P. 9..8. The Court will also refer to the 

children and parent by their initials in correspondence, orders, and in its opinion and judgment.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 21st day of January, 2022.

PER CURIAM

Before Rodriguez, C.J., Palafox and Alley, JJ.
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 402 

To provide for the retention of the name of Mount McKinley. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 23, 2013 

Mr. RYAN of Ohio introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To provide for the retention of the name of Mount McKinley. 

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

3 SECTION 1. RETENTION OF NAME OF MOUNT MCKINLEY. 

4 Notwithstanding any other authority of law, the 

5 mountain located 63 degrees 04 minutes 12 seconds north, 

6 by 151 degrees 00 minutes 18 seconds west shall continue 

7 to be named and referred to for all purposes as Mount 

8 McKinley. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
# C_2008171EN.01003601.xml

| 5.7.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 171/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 171/36

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 8 May 2008 — Frankin and Others v Commission

(Case T-92/07 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Civil Service - Officials and members of the temporary staff - Pension - Transfer of pension rights - Appeal manifestly inadmissible - Appeal manifestly unfounded)

(2008/C 171/66)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellants: Jacques Frankin (Sorée, Belgium) and the 482 other officials and members of the temporary staff of the Commission of the European Communities whose names are listed in the annex to the judgment (represented by: F. Frabetti, lawyer)

Appellants:

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: C. Berardis-Kayser and D. Martin, agents)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (First Chamber) of 16 January 2007 in Frankin and Others v Commission (Case F-3/06, not yet published in the ECR) seeking the annulment of that judgment.

Frankin and Others

Commission

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The appeal is dismissed; |
| --- | --- |

1.

The appeal is dismissed;

| 2. | Mr Jacques Frankin and the 482 other officials and members of the temporary staff of the Commission whose names are listed in the annex to the judgment shall bear their own costs and the costs incurred by the Commission in the context of the present instance. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mr Jacques Frankin and the 482 other officials and members of the temporary staff of the Commission whose names are listed in the annex to the judgment shall bear their own costs and the costs incurred by the Commission in the context of the present instance.

---

(1)  OJ C 117 of 26.5.2007.

1

---
Order entered February 7, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-18-00629-CV

No. 05-18-01125-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF S.C. AND K.C., CHILDREN

On Appeal from the 256th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DF-11-16417

ORDER

Before Chief Justice Burns, Justice Molberg, and Justice Nowell

These two appeals follow a final order in suit to modify the parent-child relationship. 

Cause number 05-18-00629-CV challenges the modification order as well as several orders, 

entered during the pendency of the modification suit, enforcing a fee provision in the parties’ 

divorce decree. Cause number 05-18-01125-CV challenges a post-modification order enforcing 

the same fee provision. The record in both appeals has been filed. Appellant’s brief in cause 

number 05-18-00629-CV is due February 16, 2019, and his brief in cause number 05-18-01125-

CV is due February 7, 2019.

The fee provision at issue in these two appeals is also at issue in appellate cause number 

05-18-01158-CV, an original proceeding filed by appellant. Relief has been denied, but a 

motion for rehearing en banc is pending. 
In light of the same fee provision being at issue in the appeals and original proceeding, 

we SUSPEND, on our own motion, the briefing deadlines in the appeals pending the Court’s 

determination of the en banc motion. 

/s/ ROBERT D. BURNS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE
EXHIBIT 32.1
                           SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

    CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 13 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the quarterly report of Logica Holdings, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ended September 30, 2007 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
we, Giuseppe Pino Baldassarre as Chief Executive Officer and Enzo Taddei as
Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 13 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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.


Date: March 27th, 2008.




/s/ Giuseppe Pino Baldassarre
--------------------------------
Name: Giuseppe Pino Baldassarre
Chief Executive Officer





/s/ Enzo Taddei
--------------------------------
Name: Enzo Taddei
Chief Financial Officer
STATE of North Carolina v. Howard Franklin EUBANKS

No. 436P16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 16, 2017.

James Rainsford, Attorney at Law, Hillsborough, Cyrus Quinn Griswold, Attorney at Law, for Eubanks, Howard Franklin.

Neil C. Dalton, Special Deputy Attorney General, James R. Woodall, Jr., District Attorney, for State of North Carolina

*ORDER*

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 2nd of December 2016 by Defendant for Temporary Stay:

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

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 2nd of December 2016 for Writ of Supersedeas of the judgment of the Court of Appeals, 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 16th of March 2017."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 20th of December 2016 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 16th of March 2017."
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 186 (Tuesday, September 27, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 56365]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-19202]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2005-21873; Airspace Docket No. 05-ACE-27]


Modification of Legal Description of the Class D and Class E 
Airspace; Salina Municipal Airport, KS

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Direct final rule, confirmation of effective date.

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

SUMMARY: This document confirms the effective date of the direct final 
rule which modifies the legal description for Class D and Class E 
airspace at Salina Municipal Airport, KS.

EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, October 27, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brenda Mumper, Air Traffic Division, 
Airspace Branch, ACE-520A, DOT Regional Headquarters Building, Federal 
Aviation Administration, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64276; telephone: 
(816) 329-2524.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA published this direct final rule 
with a request for comments in the Federal Register on July 29, 2005 
(70 FR 43742). The FAA uses the direct final rulemaking procedure for a 
non-controversial rule where the FAA believes that there will be no 
adverse public comment. This direct final rule advised the public that 
no adverse comments were anticipated, and that unless a written adverse 
comment, or a written notice of intent to submit such an adverse 
comment, were received within the comment period, the regulation would 
become effective on October 27, 2005. No adverse comments were 
received, and this notice confirms that this direct final rule will 
become effective on that date.

    Issued in Kansas City, MO, on September 8, 2005.
Elizabeth S. Wallis,
Acting Area Director, Western Flight Services Operations.
[FR Doc. 05-19202 Filed 9-26-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4927-13-M
* 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. 07-60918

Summary Calendar

MACKLIN ARISTIDES HERNANDEZ-PORTILLO

Petitioner

v.

MICHAEL B MUKASEY, U S ATTORNEY GENERAL

Respondent

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

BIA No. A95 069 861

Before GARZA, DeMOSS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Macklin Aristides Hernandez-Portillo, a native and citizen of El Salvador,

petitions this court for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA)

decision dismissing his appeal of the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) denial of his

application for withholding of removal. Hernandez-Portillo contends that his

due process rights were violated when the IJ failed to conduct a fair and

accurate hearing and properly consider all of the evidence presented in support

of his application for withholding of removal. Because he failed to raise this

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

October 22, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 07-60918

2

issue before the BIA, this court lacks jurisdiction to consider the issue. See Roy

v. Ashcroft, 389 F.3d 132, 137 (5th Cir. 2004).

Hernandez-Portillo also contends that the BIA erred in affirming the IJ’s

denial of withholding of removal because he demonstrated a clear probability of

persecution on account of his membership in particular social group. Even if

Hernandez-Portillo established that he was a member of a particular social

group, the BIA’s determination that he failed to establish past persecution is

supported by substantial evidence, and the record does not compel a contrary

conclusion. See Mikhael v. INS, 115 F.3d 299, 304 (5th Cir. 1997). Further,

because Hernandez-Portillo failed to establish past persecution, he is not

entitled to a presumption that his life or freedom would be threatened upon his

return to El Salvador. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(b)(1)(i). Moreover, although

Hernandez-Portillo argues generally thatit is more likely than not that he would

be persecuted upon his return because “[t]here is a pattern and practice of

persecution directed towards young males in El Salvador forced and intimidated

into becoming gang members,” he failed to raise this issue before the BIA, and,

thus,this courtlacks jurisdiction to consider the issue. See Roy, 389 F.3d at 137.

Accordingly, Hernandez-Portillo’s petition for review is DENIED IN PART

and DISMISSED IN PART for lack of jurisdiction.