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

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 939/2004

of 30 April 2004         

concerning tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender for the export of husked long grain B rice to the island of Réunion referred to in Regulation (EC) No 1878/2003

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 of 22 December 1995 on the common organisation of the market in rice (1), and in particular Article 10(1) thereof,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2692/89 of 6 September 1989 laying down detailed rules for exports of rice to Réunion (2), and in particular Article 9(1) thereof,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

No action shall be taken on the tenders submitted from 26 to 29 April 2004 in response to the invitation to tender referred to in Regulation (EC) No 1878/2003 for the subsidy on exports to Réunion of husked long grain B rice falling within CN code 1006 20 98.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 May 2004.

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

Done at Brussels, 30 April 2004.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER            

Member of the Commission

----

(1)OJ L 329, 30.12.1995, p. 18. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 411/2002 (OJ L 62, 5.3.2002, p. 27).

(2)OJ L 261, 7.9.1989, p. 8. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1453/1999 (OJ L 167, 2.7.1999, p. 19).

(3)OJ L 275, 25.10.2003, p. 23.

----
<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 nine month
period ended September 27, 1997, and is qualified in its entirety by reference
to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-03-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-29-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-27-1997
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  115,752
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (6,676)
<INVENTORY>                                     88,051
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               239,506
<PP&E>                                         224,887
<DEPRECIATION>                               (154,998)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 377,835
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          228,010
<BONDS>                                          3,589
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        12,947
<OTHER-SE>                                     118,049
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   377,835
<SALES>                                        556,832
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               556,832
<CGS>                                          274,095
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  274,095
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               206,901
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,255
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,498
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 71,338
<INCOME-TAX>                                    29,248
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             42,090
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    42,090
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.08
        

</TABLE>
ACCEPTED12-14-00130-crTWELFTH COURT OF APPEALSTYLER, TEXAS2/20/2015 2:35:06 PMCATHY LUSKCLERK
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 18

- 1723 Filed February 5, 2020

NICOLAS COLE JACOBS , Applicant

- Appellant,

vs. STATE OF IOWA, Respondent

- Appellee.

________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, Michael J. Schilling , Judge.

An a pplicant appeals the district court’s denial of his postconviction

- relief application. AFFIRME D.

Nate Nieman , Rock Island, Illinois , for appellant. Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Israel Kodiaga , Assistant Attorney General, for appellee State.

Considered by Bower, C .J. , and May and Greer, JJ.2

MAY , Judge

. When he was sixteen, Nicolas Jacobs told police he had inappropriately touched a seven - year - old child. The trial court denied a motion to suppress Jacobs’ s admission. Jacobs then pled guilty to lascivious acts with a child , a forcible felony , and was sentenced accordingly. Later, J acobs filed this postconviction

- relief (PCR) action. The PCR court denied relief

. This appeal followed. Jacobs contends trial counsel was ineffective for failing to challenge Iowa Code section 232.11 (2015) on equal protection grounds

. Section 232.11 p rovides children with a “ right to be represented by counsel” that can only be waived under limited circumstances. For example, waiver by a child who is sixteen “is valid only if a good faith effort has been made to notify the child’s parent, guardian, or custodian” of specific information, including their right to “visit and confer with the child.” Iowa Code § 232.11(2). But these protections only apply during certain

“ proceedings within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court.” Id . § 232.11(1)

. And pursuant to section 232.8(1)(c), violations by children sixteen or older “ which constitute [] forcible felon [ies] are excluded from the jur isdiction of the juvenile court.” So the protections of section 232.11 do not apply to children sixteen or

o lder who are suspected of a forcible felony

. Jacobs claims this is unconstitutional

. He claims section 232.11 violates equal protection because it treats children differently based on the charges they face

. We previously addressed th e same issue in State v. J ennings

. No. 14

- 2098, 2016 WL 3269545, at *6

– 7 (Iowa Ct. App. June 15, 2016). There, we3

rejected an applicant’s claim that “ he received ineffective assistance because defense counsel did not challenge the exclusion for forcible felonies in the applicatio n of section 232.11 as a violation of equal protection. ” Id. at *6. We see no reason to reach a different conclusion here. W e affirm the denial of Jacobs’s PCR application.
AFFIRMED.
# L_2007019EN.01002701.xml

| 26.1.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 19/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.1.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 19/27

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 68/2007

of 25 January 2007

determining the extent to which applications lodged in January 2007 for import licences for certain pigmeat sector products pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1233/2006 can be accepted

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1233/2006 of 16 August 2006 opening and providing for the administration of an import tariff quota of pigmeat allocated to the United States of America (1), and in particular Article 5(5) thereof,

Whereas:

The applications for import licences lodged for the period 1 January to 31 March 2007 are less than the quantities available and can therefore be fulfilled entirely,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

1.   Applications for import licences for the period 1 January to 31 March 2007 submitted pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1233/2006 shall be met as referred to in the Annex to this Regulation.

2.   Application for import licences for the period 1 April to 30 June 2007 may be lodged pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1233/2006 for the total quantity as referred to in the Annex to this Regulation.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 26 January 2007.

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

Done at Brussels, 25 January 2007.

For the Commission

Jean-Luc DEMARTY

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 225, 17.8.2006, p. 14.

1

---

ANNEX

| Order No | Percentage of acceptance of import licences submitted for the period of 1 January to 31 March 2007 | Total quantity available for the period of 1 April to 30 June 2007
  (t) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 09.4170 | 100 | 3 719,7 |
| ‘—’ | : | No application for a licence has been sent to the Commission. |

Order No

Percentage of acceptance of import licences submitted for the period of 1 January to 31 March 2007

Total quantity available for the period of 1 April to 30 June 2007

(t)

09.4170

100

3 719,7

‘—’

:

No application for a licence has been sent to the Commission.

---
Document

Exhibit 10.29




Master Agreement Change Order
															
					
					


General Services Agreement Change Order




Change Order Number: CW1718895
Bank of America General Services Agreement Number: CW251208




This General Services Agreement (GSA) Change Order CW1718895 which is effective upon the 
date of the last signature, extends the term of GSA number CW251208, including Amendments 
CW372019, CW811075, CW1417829, CW1569602, CW641256, and CW967765 thereto,
through March 31, 2022. All other terms and conditions of the original GSA, except as mutually 
amended, will remain unchanged. 





									
	Agreed to:		Agreed to:
	Bank of America, N.A	 	Cardlytics, Inc.
		 	
	/s/ Sam Griffin		/s/ Andrew Christiansen
	W Sam Griffin		Andrew Christiansen
	Sr. Procurement Specialist		Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

L.S., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, 

Wheaton, MD, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 22-0303

Issued: January 28, 2022

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

On December 20, 2021 appellant filed an appeal from a September 18, 2020 nonmerit 

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

Boards assigned Docket No. 22-0303.

The Board has duly considered the matter and notes that the Board has jurisdiction to 

review final adverse decisions of OWCP issued under the Federal Employees’Compensation Act.1 

For final adverse decisions of OWCP issued on or after November 19, 2008, the Board’s review 

authority is limited to appeals which are filed within 180 days from the date of issuance of OWCP’s 

decision.2

The 180th day following the September 18, 2020 decision was March 17, 2021. As 

appellant did not file an appeal with the Board until December 20, 2021, more than 180 days after 

the September 18, 2020 OWCP decision, the Board finds that the appeal docketed as No. 22-0303

is untimely filed. The Board is without jurisdiction to review the appeal. Appellant has not offered 

1

5 U.S.C. § 8149; 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3(a) (2009).

2

Id. at § 501.3(e).
2

a reason to explain the failure to timely file an appeal with supporting documentation sufficient to 

establish compelling circumstances.

The Board’s decisions and orders are “final upon the expiration of 30 days from the date 

of their issuance.”

3

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the appeal docketed as No. 22-0303 is dismissed.

Issued: January 28, 2022

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

3

Id. at § 501.6(d).
**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 Otelco Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q
      for the period ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
      Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Michael D. Weaver, Chief
      Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
      as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
      to my
      knowledge:




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.






/s/
      Michael D. Weaver





Michael
      D. Weaver


Chief
      Executive Officer


August
      9,
      2007
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION OF

THE TRUSTEE*

OF THE SAN JUAN BASIN ROYALTY TRUST

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350

In connection with the accompanying
report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015, and filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Joshua R. Peterson, Vice President and Senior Trust Officer of Compass Bank, on behalf of
Compass Bank, the Trustee of the San Juan Basin Royalty Trust (the Trust), not in its individual capacity but solely as Trustee of the Trust, hereby certify that:



| | 1. | The Report fully complies in all material respects with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (as explained in
Note 3 to the Trusts financial statements, in accordance with the Securities and Exchange Commission Staff Accounting Bulletin Topic 12:E, Financial Statements of Royalty Trusts , the Trust prepares its financial statements in a manner that
differs from generally accepted accounting principles; such presentation is customary to other royalty trusts); and
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Trust.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



COMPASS BANK, AS TRUSTEE OF THESAN JUAN BASIN ROYALTY TRUST/s/ Joshua R. PetersonBy:

Joshua R. PetersonVice President and Senior Trust OfficerDate: February 29, 2016




|* | The Trust has no executive officers.
|- | ------------------------------------
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

The Board of Directors
The Cerplex Group, Inc.:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No.
333-60027) on Form S-8, of The Cerplex Group, Inc. (formerly known as Aurora
Electronics, Inc.) of our report dated December 28, 1998, relating to the
consolidated balance sheet of The Cerplex Group, Inc. and subsidiaries as of 
September 30, 1998, the related consolidated statements of operations, 
stockholders' equity (deficit) and cash flows for the year then ended and 
related schedule, which report appears in the September 30, 1998 annual report 
on Form 10-K of The Cerplex Group, Inc.

Our report dated December 28, 1998, contains an explanatory paragraph that 
states that the Company has suffered recurring losses from operations, has net 
stockholders' and working capital deficiencies and does not have the necessary 
funds to pay certain debt obligations, which mature in fiscal 1999, which raise
substantial doubt about the Company's ability to continue as a going concern. 
The consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule do not 
include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.


                                             KPMG LLP


Orange County, California
January 11, 1999
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15**  **- 6824** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. SHIRLEY INGRAM, a/k/a Raheem , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Charlotte
. Frank D. Whitney , Chief District Judge. ( 3:10

- cr - 00069

- FDW

- 1 )

Submitted : August 27 , 2015 Decided: September 1, 2015

Before GREGORY, AGEE, and THACKER , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Shirley Ingram, Appellant Pro Se. William A. Brafford, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Shirley Ingram seeks to appeal the district court’s order directing him to file a response within 30 days indicating whether he agrees to the recharacterization of his Fed. R. Crim. P. 37 motion as a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) m otion . This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C.
§ 1291 (20 12 ), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (20 12 ); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp. , 337 U.S. 541 , 545

- 46 (1949 ). The order Ingram seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are ade quately prese nted in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
### I N THE UNI TED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FI F TH CI RCUI T

No. 13-40357 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. PAULO SANTIBANEZ-LUVIANO, Defendant-Appellant

A ppeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:12-CR-983-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Appealing the judgment in a c riminal c a s e, Paulo Santibanez-Luviano raises an argument that he concedes i s foreclosed by United States v. RodriguezEscareno , 700 F

. 3 d 7 5 1 , 7 53-54 (5th Cir. 2012), cert. denied , 133 S. Ct. 2044 (2013), which h eld that the sentence e nhanc e m e n t provided f or in U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(i) applies to a conviction f or the federal cri m e of conspiracy to commit a federal drug-trafficking offense. The appellant’s motion for summary disposition is GRANTED, a nd the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. U n i t e d S t a te s C o u r t o f A p p e al s

F i f t h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D Aug ust 20, 2013 Ly l e W . Cay ce Clerk

* Purs uant to 5 T H C I R

. R

. 47. 5, the court has d eterm ined that this op inion should not be p ublis hed and is not p reced ent excep t und er the lim ited circum s tances s et forth in 5 T H C I R

. R. 47. 5. 4. Case: 13-40357 Document: 00512347479 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/20/2013
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.                  

###### Federal Election Commission

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Robert Biersack, Press Officer, telephone (202) 694-1220.

Mary W. Dove,

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 05-2206  Filed 2-1-05; 2:19 pm]

BILLING CODE 6715-01-M
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

G.K., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, MILITARY 

SEALIFT COMMAND, Norfolk, VA, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 23-0054

Issued: July 20, 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

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

JAMES D. McGINLEY, Alternate Judge

On October 19, 2022 appellant filed a timely appeal from an October 14, 2022 decision

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

assigned Docket No. 23-0054.

In a letter dated June 15, 2023 and received on June 16, 2023, appellant requested that the 

appeal be dismissed.

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

dismissal of the appeal should be granted. Accordingly, 
2

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

is granted. The appeal docketed as No. 23-0054 is dismissed.

Issued: July 20, 2023

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

James D. McGinley, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board