alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Official Journal L 27/2018

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 27 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6131 January 2018 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 27

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6131 January 2018

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Council Regulation (EU) 2018/120 of 23 January 2018 fixing for 2018 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in Union waters and, for Union fishing vessels, in certain non-Union waters, and amending Regulation (EU) 2017/127 | 1 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Council Regulation (EU) 2018/120 of 23 January 2018 fixing for 2018 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in Union waters and, for Union fishing vessels, in certain non-Union waters, and amending Regulation (EU) 2017/127

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
**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 of Triangle Petroleum Corporation (the
      “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending April 30, 2008 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. 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 and 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.





Date:
                June 10, 2008
            By:*/s/
                MARK GUSTAFSON*Mark
                GustafsonPrincipal
                Executive Officer
STATE of North Carolina v. Zachary John ROSE

No. COA17-190

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: October 17, 2017

NO PLAIN ERROR IN PART. NO ERROR IN PART. REVERSED. REMANDED IN PART.
STATE of North Carolina v. Antione Cedric MCKENITH, Defendant.

No. COA17-81

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: September 19, 2017

NO ERROR.
Exhibit 32

Certification Pursuant to 18 USC Section 1350,

as adopted pursuant to

Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

The undersigned, the President and Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of First State
Financial Corporation (the Company), each certify that, to such officers knowledge on the date of this certification:



| | (a) | The quarterly report of the Company for the period ending September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on this date fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (b) | The information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                        |  |  |  |     |  |                        |  |                                      
|----------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | ---------------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|                        |  |  | 
|Date: November 13, 2006 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Corey J. Coughlin 
|                        |  |  |  |     |  |                        |  | Corey J. Coughlin                    
|                        |  |  |  |     |  |                        |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|                        |  |  | 
|Date: November 13, 2006 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Dennis Grinsteiner
|                        |  |  |  |     |  |                        |  | Dennis Grinsteiner                   
|                        |  |  |  |     |  |                        |  | Chief Financial Officer
# C_2008223EN.01006304.xml

| 30.8.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 223/63 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 223/63

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 6 March 2008 — Gering v Europol

(Case F-68/07) (1)

1

(2008/C 223/123)

Language of the case: Dutch

Language of the case: Dutch

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

---

(1)  OJ C 247, 20.10.2008, p. 42.

1

---
ROCK v. EXECUTIVE OFFICE PARK OF DURHAM ASSOCIATION, INC.

428P17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 22, 2017

Martin E. Rock, for Rock, Martin E.

J. Matthew Waters, Attorney at Law, Hope Derby Carmichael, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for Executive Office Park of Durham Association, Inc.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 22nd of December 2017 by Respondent for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 22nd of December 2017."
William PATTON III and Renee Hazleton, Individually and as Guardians Ad Litem of Liam Patton, a Minor, Plaintiffs, v. The CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG HOSPITAL AUTHORITY, Defendant.

No. COA16-812

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: August 1, 2017

DISMISSED IN PART. AFFIRMED IN PART.
Barry D. EDWARDS, XMC Films, Incorporated, Aegis Films, Inc., and David E. Anthony v. Clyde M. FOLEY, Ronald M. Foley, Lavonda S. Foley, Samuel L. Scott, CRS Trading Co. LLC, Brown Burton, Ronald Jed Meadows, and American Solar Kontrol, LLC

No. 200P17

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 7, 2017

Walter L. Tippett, Jr., Attorney at Law, Raleigh, Kimberly M. Marston, Attorney at Law, for Foley, Clyde M., et al.

Michael Kaeding, Attorney at Law, Durham, Alexander C. Dale, Attorney at Law, Wilmington, Bryan M. Knight, Attorney at Law, Edward J. Coyne, III, Attorney at *572Law, Wilmington, for Edwards, Barry D., et al.

***ORDER***

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 20th of June 2017 by Defendants for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Dissolved by order of the Court in conference, this the 7th of December 2017."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendants on the 20th of June 2017 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 7th of December 2017."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 20th of June 2017 by Defendants 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 7th of December 2017."
* 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. 98-10392

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MARCEL EZE,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:97-CR-290-ALL-X

- - - - - - - - - -

February 22, 1999

Before JOLLY, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Marcel Aghajiuba Eze challenges his conviction of possession

with intent to distribute heroin in violation of 21 U.S.C.

§ 841(a)(1) & (b)(1)(B). He asserts that the district court

erred in giving the jury an instruction on deliberate ignorance

and by admitting over objection evidence of other packages he had

received from Thailand.

The district court did not err by instructing the jury on

deliberate ignorance. Sufficient evidence existed to support the

conclusion that Eze was subjectively aware that he was involved 
No. 98-10392 

-2-

in an ongoing scheme to smuggle drugs into the United States. 

See United States v. Scott, 159 F.3d 916, 922 (5th Cir. 1998);

United States v. Posada-Rios, 158 F.3d 832, 875 (5th Cir. 1998). 

Furthermore, the evidence of the other packages Eze had received

from Thailand was relevant to the charge of deliberate ignorance. 

The district court thus did not abuse its discretion in admitting

it. See United States v. Torres, 114 F.3d 520, 526 (5th Cir.),

cert. denied, 118 S. Ct. 316 (1997); United States v. Beechum,

582 F.2d 898 (5th Cir. 1978) (en banc). 

AFFIRMED.
# United States **Court of Appeals** 

**for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

February 11, 2020

ERRATA

______________________

Appeal No. 2019

- 1334

IN RE: DENNIS S. FE RNANDEZ,

Appellant

Decided: February 6, 2020

Non

- Precedential Opinion

______________________

Please make the following change:

On page 8, line 17, replace “reversable” with “reversible” Case: 19-1334 Document: 49 Page: 1 Filed: 02/11/2020
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 188 (Thursday, September 29, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56896-56897]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-19638]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED DATE AND TIME:  Thursday, September 29, 2005, 10 
a.m. meeting open to the public. This meeting was cancelled.

DATE AND TIME:  Tuesday, October 6, 2005 at 10 a.m.

PLACE:  999 E Street, NW., Washington, DC.

STATUS: This meeting will be closed to the public.

ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED: 

Compliance matters pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 437g.

[[Page 56897]]

Audits conducted pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 437g, 438(b), and Title 26, 
U.S.C.
Matters concerning participation in civil actions or proceedings or 
arbitration.
Internal personnel rules and procedures or matters affecting a 
particular employee.
(Note: The starting time for the open meeting on Thursday, October 
6, 2005 has been changed to 2 p.m.)

DATE AND TIME:  Thursday, October 6, 2005, at 2 p.m.

PLACE:  999 E Street, NW., Washington, DC (Ninth Floor).

STATUS:  This meeting will be open to the public.

ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED: 

Correction and Approval of Minutes.
Report of the Audit Division on the Dole North Carolina Victory 
Committee, Inc.
Routine Administrative Matters.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robert Biersack, Press Officer, 
Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

Mary W. Dove,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 05-19638 Filed 9-27-05; 2:50 pm]
BILLING CODE 6715-01-M
DOSS, et al. v. ADAMS, et al.

1PA17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

July 21, 2017

David C. Pishko, Attorney at Law, Winston-Salem, for Doss, Regina Radford, et al.

Cynthia L. Van Horne, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, for Adams, Brenton D., et al.

E. Fitzgerald Parnell, III, Attorney at Law.

The following order has been entered on the joint motion filed on the 23rd of June 2017 to Dismiss Petition and Appeal:

*638"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 21st of July 2017."
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

	NO. 2-08-057-CR

MICHAEL DEAN GRAF	APPELLANT

	V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS	STATE

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

	FROM THE 213TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

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

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

	Appellant Michael Dean Graf appeals the trial court’s judgment adjudicating him guilty of indecency with a child and sentencing him to ten years’ incarceration.  We will affirm.

	In 2005, Graf pleaded guilty to the offense of indecency with a child younger than seventeen years.  Pursuant to the plea agreement, the trial court deferred adjudication of Graf’s guilt, placed him on community supervision for ten years, and assessed a $1,000.00 fine.  The plea agreement contained a condition that Graf was to not have contact with the injured child—his eight- year-old stepdaughter at the time of the offense.  The trial court also ordered Graf, among other conditions, to not possess a firearm or have any unsupervised contacts with any minor children while on community supervision. 	On September 25, 2007, the State filed a motion to proceed with an adjudication of guilt, alleging that Graf had violated three conditions of his community supervision.  Graf entered pleas of “true” to the allegations that he had contact with the injured party, that he had unsupervised contact with a minor child, and that he knowingly possessed a firearm.  In his sole point, Graf argues that the trial court abused its discretion by adjudicating him guilty.

	Appellate review of the decision to adjudicate guilt is “in the same manner” as review of the revocation of community supervision.  Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42.12, § 5(b) (Vernon Supp. 2008).  Appellate review of a community supervision revocation is limited to determining whether the trial court abused its discretion, and we examine the evidence in the light most favorable to the trial court’s findings.2  See Cardona v. State, 665 S.W.2d 492, 493–94 (Tex. Crim. App. 1984).  Under this standard, proof by a preponderance of the evidence of any one of the alleged violations of community supervision is sufficient to support a revocation order.  Moore v. State, 605 S.W.2d 924, 926 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1980); Sanchez v. State, 603 S.W.2d 869, 871 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1980).  A plea of true to any alleged violation is sufficient to satisfy the State’s burden as to that allegation.  See Watts v. State, 645 S.W.2d 461, 463 (Tex. Crim. App. 1983); Cole v. State, 578 S.W.2d 127, 128 (Tex. Crim. App. 1979).

	Here, Graf pleaded true to all of the violations of his community supervision alleged in the State’s petition.3  Thus, the State met its burden, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion by basing its judgment on Graf’s pleas of true.  Therefore, we overrule Graf’s sole point and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

							PER CURIAM

PANEL:  HOLMAN, WALKER, and MCCOY, JJ.	

DO NOT PUBLISH

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

DELIVERED:  October 23, 2008
STATE of North Carolina v. Zachary John ROSE

No. 367P17

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

November 27, 2017

Mr. Douglas E. Kingsbery, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for Rose, Zachary John.

Ms. Melissa Hill, Attorney at Law, Raleigh.

Mr. John F. Oates, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Mr. Roger A. Echols, District Attorney, for the State of North Carolina.

***ORDER***

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 2nd of November 2017 by State of NC for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Dissolved by order of the Court in conference, this the 27th of November 2017."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by State of NC on the 2nd of November 2017 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:

"Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 27th of November 2017."
In the MATTER OF: S.M.C. and V.M.J.C.

No. COA16-681

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: March 21, 2017

AFFIRMED.
STATE of NC EX REL. UTILITIES COMMISSION, et al. v. N.C. WASTE AWARENESS & REDUCTION NETWORK

350A17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

November 20, 2017

Matthew D. Quinn, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, John D. Runkle, Attorney at Law, for N.C. Waste Awareness and Reduction Network (NC WARN).

Sam Watson, General Counsel, David T. Drooz, Staff Attorney, Robert B. Josey, Jr., Attorney at Law, for State of North Carolina (ex rel. Utilities Commission).

Monica E. Webb, Attorney at Law.

Antionette R. Wike, Chief Counsel, for Public Staff-NC Utilities Commission.

Lawrence B. Somers, Deputy General Counsel, Dwight W. Allen, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, Britton H. Allen, Attorney at Law, for Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, et al.

*311Edward Breitschwerdt, Attorney at Law, Horace P. Payne, Jr., Attorney at Law, Pittsburgh, PA, Andrea R. Kells, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for Virginia Electric and Power Company, et al.

David L. Neal, Lauren Joy Bowen, Attorneys at Law, for N.C. Interfaith Power and Light, et al.

Joseph W. Eason, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for N.C. Electric Membership Corporation.

Daniel C. Higgins, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for N.C. Eastern Municipal Power Agency, et al.

Perrin Wells de Jong, Attorney at Law, Asheville, Howard M. Crystal, Attorney at Law, Washington, DC, Anchun Jean Su, Attorney at Law, for Center for Biological Diversity, et al.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 16th of November 2017 by Amicus Howard M. Crystal for Admission Pro Hac Vice:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 20th of November 2017."
In the MATTER OF K.E.J., A.K.J.J., M.O.P., R.A.A.P.

No. COA16-1223

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: July 5, 2017

Affirmed.
STATE of North Carolina v. Timothy Terrell CRANDELL

No. 266P16-2

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 3, 2017

Patrick S. Wooten, Assistant Attorney General, Susan I. Doyle, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

Timothy T. Crandell, for Crandell, Timothy Terrell

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 16th of March 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 3rd of May 2017."

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 16th of March 2017 by Defendant to Proceed In Forma Pauperis:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 3rd of May 2017."

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 16th of March 2017 by Defendant to Appoint Counsel:

"Motion Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 3rd of May 2017."
Exhibit 32(a)

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 NewMarket Corporation (the
Company) for the period ending June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Thomas E. Gottwald, chief 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, 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.



|    |  |                                      
|--- |  | -------------------------------------
|By: |  | /s/ Thomas E. Gottwald               
|    |  | Thomas E. Gottwald                   
|    |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|    |  | July 29, 2009
Andy Learon CRABTREE and Carol Ann Crabtree v. Elesha M. SMITH d/b/a The Law Firm of Elesha M. Smith; Bank of America, N.A. f/k/a BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP; Rushmore Loan Management Services, LLC; and U.S. Bank, N.A.

No. 176P17

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 7, 2017

Mr. Benjamin D. Busch, Attorney at Law, Durham, for Crabtree, Andy Learon, et al.

Mr. Scott I. Perle, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, for Bank of America, N.A.

Ms. Renner Jo St. John, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, Mr. John T. Benjamin, Jr., Attorney at Law, Ms. Aleksandra E. Anderson, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for Rushmore Loan Management Services, LLC, et al.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 5th of June 2017 by Plaintiffs 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:

*153"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 7th of December 2017."
ORDER OF THE CIVIL SERVICE TRIBUNAL (First Chamber)

18 February 2009

Case F-70/07

**Luigi Marcuccio**

**v**

**Commission of the European Communities**

(Civil service – Officials – Action for damages – Taxation of costs – Manifest lack of jurisdiction – Referral pursuant to Article 8(2) of the Annex to the Statute of the Court of Justice – Manifest inadmissibility)

**Application:**brought under Articles 236 EC and 152 EA, in which Mr Marcuccio essentially seeks an order that the Commission pay compensation
for the harm allegedly suffered as a result of the refusal to reimburse him in respect of the recoverable costs purportedly
incurred in order of 6 March 2006 in Case T-176/04 *Marcuccio* v *Commission*, not published in the ECR.

**Held:**The action is referred back to the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in so far as concerns the taxation
of the recoverable costs relating to Case T‐176/04. The remainder of the action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible. The
costs of the action are reserved in so far as the action relates to the taxation of the recoverable costs relating to Case
T‐176/04. Each party is to bear its own costs relating to the remainder of the application.

**Summary**

*Procedure – Costs – Taxation – Recoverable costs – Court having jurisdiction*

*(Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 92(1))*

A claim seeking the annulment of a contested decision and of the decision rejecting a complaint lodged against that contested
decision, as well as a claim seeking an order that an institution pay an official a sum of money with default interest and
the capitalisation of interest, the actual aim of which is to obtain payment by the institution of recoverable costs relating
to an action which the Court of First Instance has concluded and for which an order as to the costs has been made, must be
regarded, in view of their purpose, as an application for taxation of costs. Since, under Article 92(1) of the Rules of Procedure
of the Court of First Instance, such an application should have been made to that Court, the Civil Service Tribunal does not
have jurisdiction to rule on the abovementioned claims.

In that respect, it is for the court alone to assess and not for the parties to decide on the precise legal characterisation
of the claims in an action for the purpose of determining whether the court has jurisdiction to consider them.

(see paras 16-18)
In the Matter of: B.E., C.E., C.E., D.E., S.E.

No. COA16-494

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: December 20, 2016

AFFIRMED.