alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs. CASE NO. 4:11cr8-SPM

SANTOS HERNANDEZ-DOMINGUEZ,

a/k/a "Santos Hernandez,"

 

Defendant.

 /

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Defendant proposed to enter a guilty plea to Count One of this indictment. The

district judge referred this matter to me for purposes of hearing Defendant's proposed

change of plea pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 11 and to enter a report and recommendation

as to whether to accept the change of plea. All parties consented to this procedure, and

the written consent has been entered. After hearing, it is found that:

1. Defendant understands the nature of the charge or charges as to which the

plea is offered.

2. Defendant understands the right to trial by jury, to persist in a plea of not

guilty, to assistance of counsel at trial, and to confront and cross examine adverse

witnesses, and understands the right against compelled self-incrimination.
Page 2 of 3

3. Defendant understands the maximum possible sentence if the guilty plea is

accepted, including the effect of a supervised release term, understands that the

sentencing guidelines are advisory, and understands that the court has discretion to

depart from those guidelines and sentence up to the statutory maximum sentence.

4. The plea of guilty by the Defendant has been knowingly and voluntarily made,

and is not the result of force or threats, or of promises except for promises contained in

the written plea agreement between the parties.

5. Defendant is competent to plead guilty.

6. Defendant understands that answers given by the Defendant during the plea

colloquy, which were under oath, may be later used against the Defendant in

prosecution for perjury or false statement.

7. There is a factual basis for Defendant's guilty plea.

8. There is a plea agreement which should be accepted by the court. Defendant

understands the terms of the plea agreement.

9. Defendant has voluntarily consented to go forward with this plea of guilty

before me. Defendant knowingly and voluntarily has waived the ten day period for filing

objections to this report and recommendation, and agrees that written objections, if any,

must be filed within twenty-four hours from receipt of a copy of this report and

recommendation. The United States also consents to this procedure, including the

shorter period for objections.

Case No. 4:11cr3-SPM
Page 3 of 3

Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that the court ACCEPT the plea agreement

and defendant's plea of guilty.

IN CHAMBERS at Tallahassee, Florida, on March 16, 2011. 

s/ William C. Sherrill, Jr. 

WILLIAM C. SHERRILL, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

 

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and

recommendations within 24 hours after receiving a copy of this report and

recommendation.

Case No. 4:11cr3-SPM
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

FRANKLIN FATUSIN, 

Petitioner,

v. CASE NO. 4:11cv163-MP-CAS

ERIC H. HOLDER, et al., 

Respondents.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge's Report and

Recommendation dated August 2, 2012. (Doc. 41). The parties have been furnished a

copy of the Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an opportunity to file

objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). I have made a de

novo determination of any timely filed objections.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and any objections thereto

timely filed, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted. 

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows: 

1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and

incorporated by reference in this order.

2. Petitioner’s emergency motion for summary judgment (doc. 40) is DENIED.

DONE and ORDERED this 6th day of September, 2012.

 s/ M. Casey Rodgers 

M. CASEY RODGERS

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:11-cv-00163-MP-CAS Document 45 Filed 09/06/12 Page 1 of 1
Case 4:11-cv-00085-RH-WCS Document 1 Filed 02/25/11 Page 1 of 3
Case 4:11-cv-00085-RH-WCS Document 1 Filed 02/25/11 Page 2 of 3
Case 4:11-cv-00085-RH-WCS Document 1 Filed 02/25/11 Page 3 of 3
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

SCOTT KYLE PETTY,

Petitioner,

v. CASE NO. 1:09-cv-171-MMP-AK

WALTER MCNEIL,

Respondent.

___________________________/

O R D E R 

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 1, Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by

Stanley E. Miles, Jr. Petitioner has paid the filing fee. The Court has reviewed the petition, and

Respondent will now be required to file an answer addressing the allegations in the petition. §

2254 Rule 5(b). "In addition, [the answer] must state whether any claim in the petition is barred

by a failure to exhaust state remedies, a procedural bar, non-retroactivity, or a statute of

limitations." Id. Respondent may respond to the merits without waiving the exhaustion

requirement. See § 2254(b)(2) and § 2254(b)(3). Respondent shall include references to the

record (included with the answer pursuant to § 2254 Rule 5(d)) and citations to relevant legal

authority. 

The response shall be styled as an answer unless a motion to dismiss the entire petition is

appropriate. If a motion to dismiss is filed, Respondent need not also file an answer unless

directed by the Court. If an answer is filed raising a procedural defense to any ground for relief,
Page 2 of 2

Respondent may await a ruling before responding on the merits to that particular ground. 

Petitioner may file a reply to any of Respondent's arguments within the time set by this

order, but is not required to do so. § 2254 Rule 5(e).

The Court will review the record after the answer and Petitioner’s reply (if any) are filed. 

If it does not appear that a hearing or additional argument is warranted, then the undersigned will

enter a report and recommendation for disposition of the § 2254 petition. If an evidentiary

hearing is warranted and permitted,1

 counsel will be appointed. § 2254 Rule 8.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. The clerk shall serve a copy of Doc. 1, along with this order, to Respondent and the

Attorney General of the State of Florida via certified mail, return receipt requested. 

2. Respondent shall file an answer or other pleading on or before October 13, 2009. If

voluminous exhibits or records (such as transcripts) are submitted in support of the answer,

paper copies shall be provided to the court. 

3. Petitioner shall have until November 13, 2009, to file a reply, if desired.

DONE AND ORDERED this 12th day of August, 2009.

 s/A. Kornblum 

ALLAN KORNBLUM

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1

 Section 2254(e)(2) generally bars the court from granting an evidentiary hearing if the

Petitioner failed to properly develop the facts in support of his claim in state court. Schriro v.

Landrigan, 127 S.Ct. 1933, 1940, n. 1, 167 L.Ed.2d 836 (U.S. 2007) (citing § 2254(e)(2)). Even

where not barred by the statute, the Court has the discretion to deny a hearing if the record

refutes the allegations or otherwise precludes relief. 127 S.Ct. at 1940, 1943-44 (citations

omitted).

Case No: 5:09-cv-200-RS-AK
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.                  

###### Commodity Futures Trading Commission

# AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING:

Commodity Futures Trading  Commission. 

# Time and Date:

11 a.m., Friday, January 25, 2008. 

# Place:

1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission Conference Room. 

# Status:

Closed. 

# Matters to be Considered:

Surveillance Matters. 

# Contact Person For More Information:

Sauntia S. Warfield, 202-418-5084. 

David A. Stawick, 

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 07-6247 Filed 12-26-07; 11:15 am] 

BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

BYRON J. EVERIDGE,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 3:10cv466/MCR/CJK

SERGEANT CANNON, et al.,

Defendants.

_______________________/

O R D E R

Upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge

filed on November 1, 2011, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), and after reviewing

objections to the Recommendation (doc. 19), the Recommendation is adopted as the

opinion of the Court.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The magistrate judge's report and recommendation is adopted and

incorporated by reference in this order.

2. The plaintiff’s federal claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE under 28

U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for plaintiff’s failure to state a claim upon which relief may be

granted.

3. To the extent the complaint raises state law claims, such claims are

DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to plaintiff’s re-filing them in the appropriate state

court.

4. The clerk is directed to close the file.

DONE AND ORDERED this 18th day of November, 2011.

M. Casey Rodgers

M. CASEY RODGERS

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:10-cv-00466-MCR-CJK Document 20 Filed 11/18/11 Page 1 of 1
# C_2009291EN.01000801.xml

| 1.12.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 291/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.12.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 291/8

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

30 November 2009

2009/C 291/04

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,5023 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 129,77 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4424 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,91155 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,4533 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,5071 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,5125 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 26,135 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 273,88 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7088 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,1441 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,2706 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,2980 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6452 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5882 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 11,6431 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 2,1019 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,0789 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 746,88 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 11,1421 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 10,2564 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3160 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 14 222,64 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 5,0966 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 70,918 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 43,9800 |
| THB | Thai baht | 49,951 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,6251 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 19,3984 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 69,7590 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,5023

JPY

Japanese yen

129,77

DKK

Danish krone

7,4424

GBP

Pound sterling

0,91155

SEK

Swedish krona

10,4533

CHF

Swiss franc

1,5071

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,5125

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

26,135

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

273,88

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7088

PLN

Polish zloty

4,1441

RON

Romanian leu

4,2706

TRY

Turkish lira

2,2980

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6452

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5882

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

11,6431

NZD

New Zealand dollar

2,1019

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,0789

KRW

South Korean won

1 746,88

ZAR

South African rand

11,1421

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

10,2564

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3160

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

14 222,64

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

5,0966

PHP

Philippine peso

70,918

RUB

Russian rouble

43,9800

THB

Thai baht

49,951

BRL

Brazilian real

2,6251

MXN

Mexican peso

19,3984

INR

Indian rupee

69,7590

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS 

Appeal of-- ) 

) 

Sauer, Inc. ) 

) 

Under Contract No. W91278-07-D-0030 ) 

APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT: 

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: 

ASBCA No. 59172 

Kevin J. Kelly, Esq. 

General Counsel 

William L. Martin, III, Esq. 

Keefe, Anchors and Gordon, P.A. 

Fort Walton Beach, FL 

Thomas H. Gourlay, Jr., Esq. 

Engineer Chief Trial Attorney 

Laura J. Arnett, Esq. 

Benjamin T. Clark, Esq. 

Engineer Trial Attorneys 

U.S. Army Engineer District, Savannah 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

The dispute has been settled. The appeal is dismissed with prejudice. 

Dated: 23 September 2016 

Administrative Judge 

Acting Chairman 

Armed Services Board 

of Contract Appeals 

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the Armed 

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA No. 591 72, Appeal of Sauer, Inc., rendered 

in conformance with the Board's Charter. 

Dated: 

JEFFREY D. GARDIN 

Recorder, Armed Services 

Board of Contract Appeals
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 3 (Friday, January 4, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 847-852]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-6284]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

[Transmittal Nos. 08-01]


36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification

AGENCY: Department of Defense, Defense Security Cooperation Agency.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text 
of a section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. This is published to 
fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated 21 
July 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. B. English, DSCA/DBO/CFM, (703) 
601-3740.
    The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives, Transmittals 08-01 with attached transmittal, policy 
justification, and Sensitivity of Technology.

    Dated: December 27, 2007.
L.M. Bynum,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M

[[Page 848]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN04JA08.005


[[Page 849]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN04JA08.006


[[Page 850]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN04JA08.007


[[Page 851]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN04JA08.008


[[Page 852]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN04JA08.009

[FR Doc. 07-6284 Filed 1-3-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-C
H. R. 5238 

One Hundred Fifteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and eighteen 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1234 Saint 

Johns Place in Brooklyn, New York, as the ‘‘Major Robert Odell Owens Post Office’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. MAJOR ROBERT ODELL OWENS POST OFFICE. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 1234 Saint Johns Place in Brooklyn, New York, 

shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Major Robert Odell Owens 

Post Office’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Major Robert Odell Owens Post Office’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
March 10, 1997

Asset-Backed Securities Trust Services, MRAC 1996-C1
LaSalle National Bank
135 South LaSalle Street, Suite 1740
Chicago, IL  60603

               MRAC Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates
                                 Series 1996-C1


                             OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE


Pursuant to the requirements of that certain Pooling & Servicing Agreement
governing the referenced Trust, it is hereby certified that (i) the undersigned
has completed a review of the Servicer's performance of its obligations under
the PSA for the current calendar year; (ii) to the best of the undersigned's 
knowledge, on the basis of that review the Servicer has fulfilled all of its
obligations under the PSA throughout such period (iii) to the best of the
undersigned's knowledge, the sub-servicer, if any, has fulfilled its obligations
under its sub-servicing agreement in all material respects; and (iv) no notice
has been received from any governmental agency or body which would indicate a 
challenge or question as to the status of the Trust's qualification as a REMIC
under the Code.

/s/ Charles J. Sipple       3-11-97
Charles J. Sipple             Date
Senior Vice President



/s/ Paula J. Mickelson      3-11-97
Paula J. Mickelson            Date
Assistant Secretary


<PAGE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

PANAMA CITY DIVISION 

HANCOCK BANK, a Mississippi 

banking corporation, 

Plaintiff/ Counter-defendant 

vs. CASE NO. 5:11-cv-94/RS-CJK

BOYD BROTHERS, INC., a Florida 

corporation, et al., 

Defendants/ Counterclaimants 

_________________________________________/ 

ORDER

Before me is Plaintiff’s Response to Show Cause Order (Doc. 35). 

 From the pleadings, it appears that common questions of law or fact are involved 

in these five suits filed in this Court: 

Hancock Bank v. Boyd Brothers et al., 5:11-cv-94-RS-CJK 

Hancock Bank v. Boyd Brothers et al., 5:11-cv-95-RS-GRJ 

Hancock Bank v. Boyd Brothers et al., 5:11-cv-96-RS-CJK 

Hancock Bank v. Boyd Brothers et al., 5:11-cv-97-RS-EMT 

Hancock Bank v. Boyd Brothers et al., 5:11-cv-98-RS-CJK 

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 42 (a) (2), the five cases shall be consolidated. 

Case 5:11-cv-00096-RS-CJK Document 33 Filed 06/14/11 Page 1 of 2
IT IS ORDERED: 

1. The Clerk shall consolidate the cases. 

2. The Clerk shall file a copy of this Order in each of these cases. 

3. All future pleadings should be filed only in case 5:11-cv-94-RS-CJK. 

ORDERED on June 14, 2011. 

/S/ Richard Smoak

RICHARD SMOAK 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 5:11-cv-00096-RS-CJK Document 33 Filed 06/14/11 Page 2 of 2
# C_2010122EN.01000401.xml

| 11.5.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 122/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.5.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 122/4

---

Ex post publicity of Eurostat grants in 2009

Ex post

2010/C 122/04

In accordance with Article 110(2) of the Financial Regulation and Article 169 of its implementing rules, the public is hereby informed of the actions subsidised by Eurostat in the year 2009.

The electronic file showing the actions concerned can be found in list form on the EUROPA server (http://europa.eu). You can access this list via ‘Funding and grants’, ‘Grants, funds and programmes’, ‘Grants, funds and programmes by EU policy’, ‘Statistics’ and the file ‘List of grants awarded in 2009’.

List of grants awarded in 2009

The list gives the file number, the unit concerned, the name and country of the beneficiaries, the title of the action, the amount of the grant and the rate of Community co-financing for the action.

---
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

RICHARD L JOHNSON,

Petitioner,

v. CASE NO. 4:10-cv-00498-MP -GRJ

BRAIN DEMARAIS, T R KNIGHT,

Respondents.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 12, the Report and Recommendation of the

Magistrate Judge, recommending dismiss for failure to exhaust state remedies by filing an action

in state court. In his objections, however, the Petitioner claims that he did file a state court

action and took it through appeal. For this reason, the Report and Recommendation is rejected

and the matter referred back to the Magistrate Judge to determine if the claims in the objections,

Doc. 14, make a difference.

DONE AND ORDERED this 15th day of April, 2011

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge
# C_2011174EN.01000701.xml

| 15.6.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 174/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.6.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 174/7

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

14 June 2011

2011/C 174/05

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,4448 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 115,91 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4590 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,88100 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,1183 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2116 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,7965 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 24,118 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 264,51 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7086 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,9302 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,1725 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,2820 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,3573 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4074 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 11,2456 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7663 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,7804 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 564,04 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 9,7540 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 9,3609 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3995 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 12 333,84 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,3792 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 62,499 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 40,2888 |
| THB | Thai baht | 44,009 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,2871 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 17,1014 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 64,6370 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,4448

JPY

Japanese yen

115,91

DKK

Danish krone

7,4590

GBP

Pound sterling

0,88100

SEK

Swedish krona

9,1183

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2116

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,7965

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

24,118

HUF

Hungarian forint

264,51

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7086

PLN

Polish zloty

3,9302

RON

Romanian leu

4,1725

TRY

Turkish lira

2,2820

AUD

Australian dollar

1,3573

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4074

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

11,2456

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7663

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,7804

KRW

South Korean won

1 564,04

ZAR

South African rand

9,7540

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

9,3609

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3995

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

12 333,84

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,3792

PHP

Philippine peso

62,499

RUB

Russian rouble

40,2888

THB

Thai baht

44,009

BRL

Brazilian real

2,2871

MXN

Mexican peso

17,1014

INR

Indian rupee

64,6370

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---