alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 216 (Thursday, November 8, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 63214]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-5605]


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

UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE BOARD OF GOVERNORS


Sunshine Act Meeting

Date and Time: Wednesday, November 14, 2007, at 12:30 p.m.; and 
Thursday, November 15, 2007, at 8:30 a.m. and 10:30 a.m.

Place: Washington, DC, at U.S. Postal Service Headquarters, 475 
L'Enfant Plaza, SW., in the Benjamin Franklin Room.

Status: November 14--12:30 p.m.--Closed; November 15--8:30 a.m.--Open; 
November 15--10:30 a.m.--Closed.

Matters to be Considered 

Wednesday, November 14 at 12:30 p.m. (Closed)

    1. Strategic Issues.
    2. Audit and Finance Committee Report and Review of FY 2007 Year-
End Financial Statements.
    3. Financial Update.
    4. Rate Case Update.
    5. Postal Regulatory Commission Opinion and Recommended Decision in 
Negotiated Service Agreement with Bank of America, Docket No. MC2007-1.
    6. Labor Negotiations Update.
    7. Personnel Matters and Compensation Issues.
    8. Governors' Executive Session--Discussion of prior agenda items 
and Board Governance.

Thursday, November 15 at 8:30 a.m. (Open)

    1. Minutes of Previous Meeting, September 24-26, 2007.
    2. Remarks of the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Board.
    3. Remarks of the Postmaster general and CEO Jack Potter.
    4. Committee Reports.
    5. Quarterly Report on Service Performance.
    6. Consideration of Fiscal Year 2007 Audited Financial Statements.
    7. Tentative Agenda for the December 10-11, 2007, meeting in 
Washington, DC.

Thursday, November 15 at 10:30 a.m. (Closed)--if needed.

    1. Continuation of Wednesday's closed session agenda.

Contact person for More Information: Wendy A. Hocking, Secretary of the 
Board, U.S. Postal Service, 475 L'Enfant Plaza, SW., Washington, DC 
20260-1000. Telephone (202) 268-4800.

Wendy A. Hocking,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 07-5605 Filed 11-6-07; 1:38 pm]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-M
EXHIBIT 32.2

CFO CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

I, Kevin T. Michaels, Chief Financial Officer of Powerwave
Technologies, Inc. (the Company), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:



| | 1. | the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the annual period ended December 30, 2007 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 780(d)); 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: February 28, 2008 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ KEVIN T. MICHAELS
|                        |  |  |  |     |  |                       |  | Kevin T. Michaels           
|                        |  |  |  |     |  |                       |  | Chief Financial Officer     
|                        |  |  |  |     |  |                       |  | Powerwave Technologies, Inc.
#### STATE v. DEESE

No. 23.

Case below: 32 N.C. App. 786.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 13 June 1977. Appeal dismissed ex mero motu 13 June 1977.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20-7206

LORENZA GERALD FEREBEE,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

KAREN STAPLETON, Virginia Department of Corrections Offender Disciplinary 

Manager; JEFF KISER, Warden Red Onion State Prison; AMEE DUNCAN, 

Building Unit Manager Red Onion State Prison; LARRY A. MULLINS, Institutional 

Hearing Officer Red Onion State Prison; J.G. LYALL, Lieutenant Red Onion State 

Prison; E.A. MILLER, Lieutenant Red Onion State Prison; S.M. SIFFORD, Food 

Service Clerical Red Onion State Prison,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at 

Roanoke. Pamela Meade Sargent, Magistrate Judge. (7:19-cv-00254-PMS)

Submitted: February 18, 2021 Decided: February 22, 2021

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lorenza Gerald Ferebee, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Lorenza Gerald Ferebee, Jr., appeals the magistrate judge’s order denying relief on

Ferebee’s postjudgment motions in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action.

*

 We have reviewed the 

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. Ferebee v. Stapleton, No. 

7:19-cv-00254-PMS (W.D. Va. July 27, 2020). Ferebee’s emergency motion for 

retaliation is denied. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

* The parties consented to jurisdiction before a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

PLANET BINGO, LLC, a California

Limited Liability Company,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO. 5:10cv64/RS-MD

WILD BILL’S BINGO, INC., a Florida

corporation,

Defendant.

_____________________________________

WILD BILL’S BINGO, INC., a Florida

corporation,

Counter-Claimant,

vs.

PLANET BINGO, LLC, a California

Limited Liability Company,

Counter-Defendant.

________________________________________/

ORDER

Before me is the Notice Of Voluntary Dismissal Of Count Two With Prejudice

(Doc. 67).

IT IS ORDERED that Count Two of Plaintiff’s Complaint is dismissed with prejudice.

ORDERED on January 31, 2011.

/S/ Richard Smoak 

RICHARD SMOAK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Jonathan
          A. Siegler
 Additional
          Employment Arrangements
  On
          January 3, 2007, TXU Corp. (the “Company”) informed Jonathan A. Siegler that it
          had decided to waive the requirement under Paragraph 2.1 of Mr. Siegler’s
          Employment Agreement, dated August 2, 2004 (the “Employment Agreement”), that he
          be required to provide notice of his intention not to renew the term of
          the
          Employment Agreement for an additional year no later than February 1, 2007.
          The
          waiver applies only to calendar year 2007 and gives Mr. Siegler the option
          to
          notify the Company at any time prior to June 1, 2007 (2 months prior to
          expiration of the current term of the Employment Agreement) of his intention
          not
          to renew the term for an additional year.
  In
          addition, Mr. Siegler has been promoted to Senior Vice President, he has
          received an increase in annual base salary to $300,000, and his target
          bonus
          under the TXU Corp. Executive Annual Incentive Plan has been increased
          to 50% of
          his annual base salary.
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2401 

To amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit the importation or 

transportation of child sex dolls, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 31, 2019 

Mr. KENNEDY introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit the importation or transportation of child sex dolls, and for 

other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Jurists United to Stop 

5 Trafficking Imitation Child Exploitation Act of 2019’’ or 

6 the ‘‘JUSTICE Act of 2019’’. 

7 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

8 The Congress finds as follows: 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•S 2401 IS

1 (1) There is a correlation between possession of 

2 the obscene dolls, and robots, and possession of and 

3 participation in child pornography. 

4 (2) The physical features, and potentially the 

5 ‘‘personalities’’ of the robots are customizable or 

6 morphable and can resemble actual children. 

7 (3) Some owners and makers of the robots have 

8 made their children interact with the robots as if the 

9 robots are members of the family. 

10 (4) The robots can have settings that simulate 

11 rape. 

12 (5) The dolls and robots not only lead to rape, 

13 but they make rape easier by teaching the rapist 

14 about how to overcome resistance and subdue the 

15 victim. 

16 (6) For users and children exposed to their use, 

17 the dolls and robots normalize submissiveness and 

18 normalize sex between adults and minors. 

19 (7) As the Supreme Court has recognized, ob20 scene material is often used as part of a method of 

21 seducing child victims. 

22 (8) The dolls and robots are intrinsically related 

23 to abuse of minors, and they cause the exploitation, 

24 objectification, abuse, and rape of minors. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
3 

•S 2401 IS

1 SEC. 3. PROHIBITION OF IMPORTATION OR TRANSPOR2 TATION OF CHILD SEX DOLLS. 

3 Section 1462 of title 18, United States Code, is 

4 amended— 

5 (1) in paragraph (a), by striking ‘‘or’’ at the 

6 end; 

7 (2) in paragraph (b), by striking ‘‘or’’ at the 

8 end; 

9 (3) by inserting after paragraph (c) the fol10 lowing: 

11 ‘‘(d) any child sex doll; or’’; and 

12 (4) by adding at the end the following: 

13 ‘‘In this section, the term ‘child sex doll’ means an 

14 anatomically-correct doll, mannequin, or robot, with the 

15 features of, or with features that resemble those of, a 

16 minor, intended for use in sexual acts.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
Case 3:10-cv-00143-RV -MD Document 1 Filed 05/04/10 Page 1 of 17
Case 3:10-cv-00143-RV -MD Document 1 Filed 05/04/10 Page 2 of 17
Case 3:10-cv-00143-RV -MD Document 1 Filed 05/04/10 Page 3 of 17
Case 3:10-cv-00143-RV -MD Document 1 Filed 05/04/10 Page 4 of 17
Case 3:10-cv-00143-RV -MD Document 1 Filed 05/04/10 Page 5 of 17
Case 3:10-cv-00143-RV -MD Document 1 Filed 05/04/10 Page 6 of 17
Case 3:10-cv-00143-RV -MD Document 1 Filed 05/04/10 Page 7 of 17
Case 3:10-cv-00143-RV -MD Document 1 Filed 05/04/10 Page 8 of 17
Case 3:10-cv-00143-RV -MD Document 1 Filed 05/04/10 Page 9 of 17
Case 3:10-cv-00143-RV -MD Document 1 Filed 05/04/10 Page 10 of 17
Case 3:10-cv-00143-RV -MD Document 1 Filed 05/04/10 Page 11 of 17
Case 3:10-cv-00143-RV -MD Document 1 Filed 05/04/10 Page 12 of 17
Case 3:10-cv-00143-RV -MD Document 1 Filed 05/04/10 Page 13 of 17
Case 3:10-cv-00143-RV -MD Document 1 Filed 05/04/10 Page 14 of 17
Case 3:10-cv-00143-RV -MD Document 1 Filed 05/04/10 Page 15 of 17
Case 3:10-cv-00143-RV -MD Document 1 Filed 05/04/10 Page 16 of 17
Case 3:10-cv-00143-RV -MD Document 1 Filed 05/04/10 Page 17 of 17
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

FRANK G. MELTON,

Petitioner,

v. CASE NO. 5:09cv293-SPM/MD

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Respondent.

______________________/

ORDER

THIS CAUSE comes for consideration upon the magistrate judge’s report

and recommendation. Doc. 15. Petitioner has been furnished a copy and has

filed objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). Doc.

16. Despite the objections, I have determined that the report and

recommendation is correct and should be adopted. Petitioner has not presented

circumstances that would justify an interest of justice transfer under § 1631. See

Guenther v. Holt, 173 F.3d 1328, 1330-31 (11th Cir. 1999). Accordingly, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED: 

1. The magistrate judge’s report and recommendation (doc. 15) is

ADOPTED and incorporated by reference in this order.

2. The 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for writ of habeas corpus (doc. 1) is
Page 2 of 2

dismissed without prejudice.

3. The clerk shall close this case and send to petitioner the Eleventh

Circuit’s form application for leave to file a second or successive petition. 

Petitioner should read the instructions carefully to determine whether he can

satisfy the conditions for filling a second or successive motion.

4. The Court will not issue a certificate of appealability.

DONE AND ORDERED this 5th day of February, 2010.

 s/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

Chief United States District Judge

CASE NO. 5:09cv293-SPM/MD
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

ROBERT LEROY SMITH,

Petitioner,

v. CASE NO. 1:10-cv-00094-MP -GRJ

SECRETARY, 

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

Respondent.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 15, Petitioner’s motion to file a Second

Amended Petition, and Doc. 17, Respondent’s response to the motion and motion to

re-set the response deadline. Respondent states that he does not oppose Petitioner’s

motion to amend, subject to Respondent’s right to assert any applicable timeliness or

procedural bars. Upon due consideration, it is ORDERED:

1. Petitioner’s motion, Doc. 15, is GRANTED. The Clerk is directed to file the

attachment to the motion as Petitioner’s Second Amended Petition.

2. Respondent’s motion, Doc. 17, is GRANTED. Respondent shall have until

January 6, 2011, to file a response to the Second Amended Petition. Petitioner

shall have until February 8, 2011, to file a reply, if any.

DONE AND ORDERED this 22 day of November 2010. 

nd

s/Gary R. Jones

GARY R. JONES

United States Magistrate Judge
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. CASE NO.: 4:10cr58-SPM

RHONDA LEANNE JOHNSON,

Defendant.

____________________________/

ACCEPTANCE OF GUILTY PLEA

Pursuant to the Report and Recommendation of the United States

Magistrate Judge, to which there have been no timely objections, and subject to

the Court’s consideration of any Plea Agreement pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P.

11(e)(2), the plea of guilty of the defendant, RHONDA LEANNE JOHNSON, to

Counts One and Two of the indictment is hereby ACCEPTED. All parties shall

appear before this Court for sentencing as directed.

DONE AND ORDERED this 16th day of September, 2010.

 s/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

Chief United States District Judge
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

SEAN REILLY

Petitioner,

vs. CASE NO.: 4:10-CV-310-SPM/GRJ

LARRY CAMPBELL,

Respondent.

___________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court for consideration of the Magistrate

Judge’s Report and Recommendation (doc. 43). Petitioner has been afforded an

opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section

636(b)(1). Petitioner filed objections (doc. 45). Pursuant to Title 28, United

States Code, Section 636(b)(1), I have conducted a de novo review of the

sections of the report to which objections have been made. I find that the Report

and Recommendation is correct and should be adopted.

Respondent filed a motion to dismiss the petition for a writ of habeas

corpus stating that this Court lacks jurisdiction over this matter. The Report and

Recommendation states, and this Court agrees, that because Petitioner was not

in custody pursuant to the sentence for the misdemeanor which led to his

Case 4:10-cv-00310-SPM-GRJ Document 46 Filed 09/12/11 Page 1 of 2
petition, this Court does not have jurisdiction. In Petitioner’s objections he

argues that when the actual innocence exception is invoked, the “in custody”

requirement becomes a moot issue. To show actual innocence, Petitioner must,

“with new reliable evidence - whether it be exculpatory scientific evidence,

trustworthy eyewitness accounts, or critical physical evidence,” demonstrate that

“it is more likely than not that no reasonable juror would have convicted him.” 

Schlup v. Delo, 513 U.S. 298, 324, 327 (1995). Petitioner has failed to make the

requisite showing so no additional inquiry is necessary. Therefore, this Court

finds that it lacks jurisdiction in this matter.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows:

1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (doc. 43) is

adopted and incorporated by reference into this order.

2. The Motion to Dismiss Petition (doc. 31) is granted and this case is

dismissed with prejudice.

3. A certificate of appealability is denied.

DONE AND ORDERED this 12th day of September, 2011.

S/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

Senior United States District Judge

2

Case 4:10-cv-00310-SPM-GRJ Document 46 Filed 09/12/11 Page 2 of 2
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-7144

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

DAVID MICHAEL BLACKMON, a/k/a Black, a/k/a Concord,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, 

Senior District Judge. (3:01-cr-00184-GCM-5)

Submitted: November 1, 2012 Decided: November 6, 2012

Before SHEDD, GREGORY, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

David Michael Blackmon, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina; 

Gretchen C. F. Shappert, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, 

Washington, D.C., for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

David Michael Blackmon appeals the district court’s 

order denying his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 

U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). We have reviewed the record and 

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the 

reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. 

Blackmon, No. 3:01-cr-00184-GCM-5 (W.D.N.C. June 27, 2012). 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
# C_2009180EN.01000101.xml

| 1.8.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 180/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.8.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 180/1

---

2009/C 180/01

Last publication of the Court of Justice in the Official Journal of the European Union

Official Journal of the European Union

OJ C 167, 18.7.2009

OJ C 167, 18.7.2009

Past publications

Past publications

OJ C 153, 4.7.2009

OJ C 141, 20.6.2009

OJ C 129, 6.6.2009

OJ C 113, 16.5.2009

OJ C 102, 1.5.2009

OJ C 90, 18.4.2009

These texts are available on:

EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu

---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

KRISTIN TREMMEL,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO.: 1:10cv17-SPM/GRJ

I.C. SYSTEM, INC.,

Defendant.

_______________________/

ORDER ALLOWING ATTENDANCE AT MEDIATION BY TELEPHONE

Upon consideration, Plaintiff’s Motion to Allow a Telephonic Appearance of

Plaintiff’s Counsel at Mediation (doc. 34) is granted. Plaintiff’s counsel is

responsible for advising the mediator and making arrangements to ensure that

he can meaningfully participate in mediation.

DONE AND ORDERED this 27th day of January, 2011.

s/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

Chief United States District Judge
----

----

| (1)   | the      Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of United American Corporation for the year      ended December 31, 2007 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 Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year      ended December 31, 2007, fairly presents in all material respects, the      financial condition and results of operations of United American      Corporation. |
|-----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:      May      15, 2008 | By:    | /s/ Benoit      Laliberté                                                                           |   |
|------------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                         |   | Benoit      LalibertéPrincipal      Executive Officer,Principal      Financial Officer and      Director |   |
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 1:10-cr-00043-MP-GRJ

1:10-cr-00044-MP-GRJ

ROBERT ALEXANDER KRASNOW,

Defendant.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 46 in case 1:10-cr-00043 and Doc. 40 in case

1:10-cr-00044, both motions to continue sentencing filed by defendant Robert Alexander

Krasnow. The motions are granted, and sentencing is continued until August 4, 2011, at 10:30

a.m. for both cases.

DONE AND ORDERED this 28th day of June, 2011

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case 1:10-cr-00043-MW-GRJ Document 47 Filed 06/28/11 Page 1 of 1
# C_2009058EN.01001601.xml

| 12.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 58/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 58/16

---

Public holidays in 2009: EEA EFTA States and EEA institutions

(2009/C 58/11)

| 2009 | Iceland | Liechtenstein | Norway | EFTA Surveillance Authority | EFTA Court |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 January | X | X | X | X | X |
| 2 January | | X | | | |
| 6 January | | X | | | |
| 2 February | | X | | | |
| 19 March | | X | | | |
| 10 April | X | X | X | X | |
| 12 April | X | X | X | X | X |
| 13 April | X | X | X | X | X |
| 23 April | X | | | | |
| 1 May | X | X | X | X | X |
| 17 May | | | X | | |
| 21 May | X | X | X | X | X |
| 1 June | X | X | X | X | X |
| 17 June | X | | | | |
| 22 June | | X | | | |
| 23 June | | | | | X |
| 3 August | X | | | | |
| 15 August | | X | | | X |
| 8 September | | X | | | |
| 2 November | | | | X | X |
| 8 December | | X | | | |
| 24 December | | X | | | |
| 25 December | X | X | X | X | X |
| 26 December | X | X | X | X | X |
| 31 December | | X | | | |

2009

Iceland

Liechtenstein

Norway

EFTA Surveillance Authority

EFTA Court

1 January

X

X

X

X

X

2 January

X

6 January

X

2 February

X

19 March

X

10 April

X

X

X

X

12 April

X

X

X

X

X

13 April

X

X

X

X

X

23 April

X

1 May

X

X

X

X

X

17 May

X

21 May

X

X

X

X

X

1 June

X

X

X

X

X

17 June

X

22 June

X

23 June

X

3 August

X

15 August

X

X

8 September

X

2 November

X

X

8 December

X

24 December

X

25 December

X

X

X

X

X

26 December

X

X

X

X

X

31 December

X

---