alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2007239EN.01000101.xml

| 11.10.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 239/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.10.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 239/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4877 — Groupama/Nuova Tirrena)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 239/01)

On 17 September 2007, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4877. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu). |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4877. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                           4,784
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   34,629
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     43,344
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                85,867
<PP&E>                                          99,223
<DEPRECIATION>                                  53,114
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 142,401
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           20,892
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         8,526
<OTHER-SE>                                     108,355
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   142,401
<SALES>                                        166,682
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               166,682
<CGS>                                          120,241
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  160,494
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  (91)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   642
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  74
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,279
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,770
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,509
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,509
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .82
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

K.S., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, 

Nyssa, OR, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 20-1401

Issued: March 17, 2021

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Alan J. Shapiro, Esq., for the appellant1

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Alternate Judge

On July 21, 2020 appellant, through counsel, filed an appeal from a purported June 10, 

2020 decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The Clerk of the 

Appellate Boards assigned Docket No. 20-1401.

The Board, having duly considered the matter, notes that the Board has jurisdiction to 

review final adverse decisions of OWCP issued under the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act.2 

The case record as transmitted to the Board does not contain a final adverse decision of OWCP 

issued within 180 days from the date of docketing of the July 21, 2020 appeal.3 The case record 

contains correspondence dated June 10, 2020, in which OWCP acknowledged counsel’s change 

 

1

In all cases in which a representative has been authorized in a matter before the Board, no claim for a fee for legal 

or other service performed on appeal before the Board is valid unless approved by the Board. 20 C.F.R. § 501.9(e). 

No contract for a stipulated fee or on a contingent fee basis will be approved by the Board. Id. An attorney or 

representative’s collection of a fee without the Board’s approval may constitute a misdemeanor, subject to fine or 

imprisonment for up to one year or both. Id.; see also 18 U.S.C. § 292. Demands for payment of fees to a 

representative, prior to approval by the Board, may be reported to appropriate authorities for investigation.

2 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.; 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3(a).

3 20 C.F.R. § 501.3(e) provides in pertinent part: “Any notice of appeal must be filed within 180 days from the 

date of issuance of a decision of the OWCP.”
2

of address and forwarded him a copy of the December 11, 2019 decision as requested. However, 

as the June 10, 2020 letters are purely informational in nature, neither constitutes a final adverse 

decision of OWCP from which appellant may properly appeal.

4

 

As there is no final adverse decision issued within 180 days by OWCP over which the 

Board may properly exercise jurisdiction, the Board concludes that the appeal docketed as No. 

20-1401 must be dismissed. Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the appeal docketed as No. 20-1401 is dismissed.

Issued: March 17, 2021

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

 

4

Id. at §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3(a); see also S.U., Docket No. 20-0636 (issued December 3, 2020); L.S., Docket No.

06-1199 (issued December 29, 2006).
#### STATE v. THORNTON

No. 3 PC.

Case below: 17 N.C. App. 225.

Petition by the Attorney General for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals allowed 6 March 1973.
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

V.H., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, DALLAS BULK MAIL 

CENTER, Dallas, TX, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 22-1253

Issued: July 5, 2023

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JAMES D. McGINLEY, Alternate Judge

On August 23, 2022 appellant filed a timely appeal from a June 16, 2022 merit decision

of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The Clerk of the Appellate Boards

assigned Docket No. 22-1253.

In a letter dated May 10, 2023, and received May 17, 2023, appellant requested that the 

appeal be withdrawn.

The Board has duly considered the matter and concludes that appellant’s request for the 

withdrawal of the appeal should be granted. Accordingly, 
2

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT appellant’s request for the withdrawal of the appeal 

is granted. The appeal docketed as No. 22-1253 is dismissed.

Issued: July 5, 2023

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

James D. McGinley, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board
# L_2007262EN.01003001.xml

| 9.10.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 262/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.10.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 262/30

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 1 October 2007

appointing a member of the Advisory Committee of the Euratom Supply Agency

(2007/652/Euratom)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular the second and third paragraphs of Article 54 thereof,

Having regard to Article X of the Statutes of the Euratom Supply Agency (1), as last amended by Decision 95/1/EC, Euratom, ECSC of 1 January 1995 (2),

Having regard to Council Decision 2007/514/Euratom of 10 July 2007 appointing the members of the Advisory Committee of the Euratom Supply Agency (3),

Having regard to the opinion of the Commission,

Whereas:

| (1) | A member's seat on the above Committee has fallen vacant following the resignation of Mr Jean-Luc SALANAVE, of which the Council was informed on 1 August 2007. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

A member's seat on the above Committee has fallen vacant following the resignation of Mr Jean-Luc SALANAVE, of which the Council was informed on 1 August 2007.

| (2) | That vacancy should therefore be filled. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

That vacancy should therefore be filled.

| (3) | The French Government submitted a nomination on 1 August 2007, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The French Government submitted a nomination on 1 August 2007,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Sole Article

Mr Jean-Michel GUIHEUX is hereby appointed a member of the Advisory Committee of the Euratom Supply Agency for the remainder of the Committee's term of office, which ends on 28 March 2009.

Done at Luxembourg, 1 October 2007.

For the Council

The President

M. LINO

---

(1)  
  OJ 27, 6.12.1958, p. 534/58.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 1, 1.1.1995, p. 1.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 190, 21.7.2007, p. 15.

3

---
No. 1363, Misc.

#### Sadness *v.*Wilkins, Warden.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency 

          - [FEMA-1604-DR] 

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security. 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Mississippi (FEMA-1604-DR), dated August 29, 2005, and related determinations. 

# Dates:

Effective October 27, 2005. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Magda Ruiz, Recovery Division, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2705. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Mississippi is hereby amended to include the following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of August 29, 2005: 

Holmes and Humphreys Counties for Individual Assistance (already designated for Public Assistance, including direct Federal assistance.) 

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and Households Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050, Individuals and Households Program—Other Needs; 97.036, Public Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.) 

R. David Paulison, 

Acting Director, Federal Emergency Management Agency. 

[FR Doc. 05-22003 Filed 11-3-05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-7179

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

DESHAWN SANDERSON,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District

Judge. (CR-00-118; CA-03-275-2)

Submitted: December 17, 2004 Decided: December 29, 2004

Before WILLIAMS, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Deshawn Sanderson, Appellant Pro Se. Raymond Edward Patricco, Jr.,

Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Deshawn Sanderson seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255

(2000). 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

his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive

procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or

wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003);

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d

676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the

record and conclude that Sanderson has not made the requisite

showing. Accordingly, we deny 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
Exhibit 31.1

SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Alfred M. Schiffrin, Chief Executive and Chief Financial Officer of Renewable
Assets, Inc. (the "Company") do hereby certify that:

     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of the Company;

     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement
of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were
made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; and

     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company as of,
and for, the period presented in this report.

     4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls
and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the
Company and have:

          (a) designed such disclosure controls and procedure, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed, to ensure that material
information relating to the Company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is
made known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the period
in which this report is being prepared;

          (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the Company's disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report my conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

          (c) disclosed in this report any changes in the Company's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the company's most recent
fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the Company's internal control over financial reporting; and

     5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the Company's
auditors and the audit committee of the Company's board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):

                                      -11-
<PAGE>

          (a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of
internal controls over financial reporting which hare reasonably likely to
adversely affect the Company's ability to record, process, summarize and report
financial information; and

          (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the Company's internal control
over financial reporting.

                                        /s/ ALFRED M. SCHIFFRIN
                                        -----------------------
                                        Alfred M. Schiffrin
                                        Chief Executive and Chief Financial
                                        Officer

September 9, 2005

                                      -12-
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM JOSTENS,
INC. CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF AND FOR THE THREE MONTH
PERIOD ENDED MARCH 29, 1997, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-03-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-29-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-29-1997
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                    11,097
<RECEIVABLES>                                  143,140
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (6,428)
<INVENTORY>                                    130,843
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               322,063
<PP&E>                                         214,603
<DEPRECIATION>                               (147,884)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 453,703
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          319,407
<BONDS>                                          3,879
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        12,909
<OTHER-SE>                                     102,384
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   453,703
<SALES>                                        150,437
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               150,437
<CGS>                                           64,396
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   64,396
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                67,464
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   422
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,704
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 16,873
<INCOME-TAX>                                     6,919
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              9,954
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     9,954
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .26
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .26
        

</TABLE>
#### BOWEN v. GARDNER

No. 30 PC.

Case below: 3 N.C. App. 529.

Petition for writ of *certiorari*to North Carolina Court of Appeals allowed 1 April 1969.
#### Roger Lewis JENAN, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Patrick J. O’HARA, Defendant—Appellee.

No. 04-15010.

D.C. No. CV-03-05839-OWW.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*870Submitted March 23, 2005.*

Decided April 11, 2005.

Roger Lewis Jenan, Visalia, CA, pro se.

Andreas 0. Garza, AGCA—Office of the California Attorney General (SAC) Department of Justice, Sacramento, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before B. FLETCHER, TROTT, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM**

Roger Lewis Jenan appeals the district court’s judgment dismissing, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that a California state court judge violated Jenan’s constitutional rights by entering an order against him under California’s vexatious litigant statute. We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

The district court entered separate judgment dismissing Jenan’s action on October 20, 2003. The district court denied Jenan’s post-judgment motion, construed as a motion for reconsideration, on November 19, 2003. Because Jenan failed to file his notice of appeal until December 30, 2003, we lack jurisdiction over this appeal. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1)(A) (providing 30 days to file a notice of appeal from entry of judgment); *Malone v. Avenenti,*850 F.2d 569, 572 (9th Cir.1988) (noting that timely-filed notice of appeal is both mandatory and jurisdictional).

We deny all pending motions.

DISMISSED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
EXHIBIT
      24.1













POWER
      OF
      ATTORNEY













KNOW
      ALL
      PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS, that each person whose signature appears below
      constitutes and appoints Jack Chen and Klaus Shen, jointly and severally, as
      his
      attorneys-in-fact, each with the power of substitution, for him in any and
      all
      capacities, to sign any amendments to this Report on Form 10-QKSB and to
      file the same, with exhibits thereto and other documents in connection therewith
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission, hereby ratifying and confirming
      all
      that each of said attorneys-in-fact, or his substitute or substitutes may do
      or
      cause to be done by virtue hereof.






Pursuant
      to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1934, this Form 10-QSB has been
      signed by the following persons in the capacities and on the dates indicated:







Signature
            Title
            Date/s/
                Jack Chen
            Chief
                Executive Officer and Director
            November
                16, 2007-
                ---------------------Jack
                Chen/s/
                Klaus Shen
            Chief
                Financial Officer
            November
                16, 2007-
                ---------------------Klaus
                Shen