alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2010225EN.01000102.xml

| 20.8.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 225/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.8.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 225/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5889 — United Airlines/Continental Airlines)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2010/C 225/02

On 27 July 2010, 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:

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

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/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 (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32010M5889. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32010M5889. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
# C_2010116EN.01000401.xml

| 5.5.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 116/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.5.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 116/4

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

4 May 2010

2010/C 116/03

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,3089 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 123,66 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4428 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,86325 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,5896 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,4325 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,8235 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,710 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 273,40 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7071 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,9585 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,1420 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,9704 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4293 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3329 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,1624 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,8045 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,8012 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 459,71 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 9,8402 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,9352 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,2590 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 11 814,18 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,2048 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 58,437 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 38,5400 |
| THB | Thai baht | 42,232 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,2792 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 16,1756 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 58,3970 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,3089

JPY

Japanese yen

123,66

DKK

Danish krone

7,4428

GBP

Pound sterling

0,86325

SEK

Swedish krona

9,5896

CHF

Swiss franc

1,4325

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,8235

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,710

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

273,40

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7071

PLN

Polish zloty

3,9585

RON

Romanian leu

4,1420

TRY

Turkish lira

1,9704

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4293

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3329

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,1624

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,8045

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,8012

KRW

South Korean won

1 459,71

ZAR

South African rand

9,8402

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,9352

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,2590

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

11 814,18

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,2048

PHP

Philippine peso

58,437

RUB

Russian rouble

38,5400

THB

Thai baht

42,232

BRL

Brazilian real

2,2792

MXN

Mexican peso

16,1756

INR

Indian rupee

58,3970

---

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

1

Source

---
# C_2011010EN.01000201.xml

| 14.1.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 10/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 10/2

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

13 January 2011

2011/C 10/02

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,3199 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 109,50 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4500 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,83575 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 8,9005 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2823 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,7970 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 24,370 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 274,61 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7012 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,8656 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,2583 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,0455 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,3203 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3052 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,2613 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7153 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,6986 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 469,15 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 9,0312 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,7174 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3985 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 11 967,43 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,0330 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 58,275 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 39,6800 |
| THB | Thai baht | 40,164 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,2054 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 15,9292 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 59,6110 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,3199

JPY

Japanese yen

109,50

DKK

Danish krone

7,4500

GBP

Pound sterling

0,83575

SEK

Swedish krona

8,9005

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2823

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,7970

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

24,370

HUF

Hungarian forint

274,61

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7012

PLN

Polish zloty

3,8656

RON

Romanian leu

4,2583

TRY

Turkish lira

2,0455

AUD

Australian dollar

1,3203

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3052

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,2613

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7153

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,6986

KRW

South Korean won

1 469,15

ZAR

South African rand

9,0312

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,7174

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3985

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

11 967,43

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,0330

PHP

Philippine peso

58,275

RUB

Russian rouble

39,6800

THB

Thai baht

40,164

BRL

Brazilian real

2,2054

MXN

Mexican peso

15,9292

INR

Indian rupee

59,6110

---

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

1

Source

---
Case 4:11-cv-00009-RH-WCS Document 14 Filed 04/21/11 Page 1 of 2
Case 4:11-cv-00009-RH-WCS Document 14 Filed 04/21/11 Page 2 of 2
I

k

A

IMIA ML. 1, 

STATE OF LOUISIANA

VERSUS

RANDY MILLER

NO. 2024 KW 0165

In Re: Randy Miller, applying for supervisory writs, 21st

Judicial District Court, Parish of Livingston, No. 

40507. 

BEFORE: WELCH, WOLFE, AND STROMBERG, JJ. 

WRIT DENIED AS MOOT. The records of the Livingston Parish

Clerk of Court reflect that the district court denied the motion

to quash on January 10, 2024. 

e --

COURT NOF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

DUTYY CLERK OF COURT tPlUIR THE COURT
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

BEN JERMAINE HUGHES, III,

Plaintiff,

v. 3:11cv8-WS

J.B. BURCH, et al.,

Defendants.

 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Before the court is the magistrate judge's report and recommendation (doc. 27)

docketed October 25, 2011. The magistrate judge recommends that this case be

dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with an order of the court.

Upon review of the record, this court has determined that the recommendation

should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

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

incorporated by reference in this order of the court.

2. The plaintiff's complaint, and this action, are hereby DISMISSED without

prejudice for failure to comply with an order of the court.

3. The clerk is directed to enter judgment, stating: "All claims are dismissed

without prejudice."

Case 3:11-cv-00008-WS-EMT Document 28 Filed 11/29/11 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

DONE AND ORDERED this 29th day of November , 2011.

s/ William Stafford 

WILLIAM STAFFORD

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:11-cv-00008-WS-EMT Document 28 Filed 11/29/11 Page 2 of 2
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

JOHNATHAN J. MAXWELL,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No. 5:10cv285/RS/EMT

WALTER A. McNEIL, et al.,

Defendants. 

__________________________________/

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This cause is before the court upon referral from the clerk. Plaintiff commenced this action

by filing a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Doc. 1). By order of this court dated

January 7, 2011, Plaintiff was given thirty (30) days in which to file an amended complaint (see

Doc. 13). Plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint; therefore, on February 11, 2011, the court

issued an order requiring Plaintiff to show cause, within twenty-one (21) days, why this action

should not be dismissed for failure to comply with an order of the court (Doc. 15). The time for

compliance with the show cause order has now elapsed, and Plaintiff has failed to file an amended

complaint.

 Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED:

That this case be DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff’s failure to comply with an

order of the court.

At Pensacola, Florida, this 10th day of March 2011.

/s/ Elizabeth M. Timothy 

ELIZABETH M. TIMOTHY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Page 2 of 2

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

Any objections to these proposed findings and recommendations must be filed within

fourteen (14) days after being served a copy thereof. Any different deadline that may appear

on the electronic docket is for the court’s internal use only. A copy of objections shall be

served upon all other parties. Failure to object may limit the scope of appellate review of

factual findings. See 28 U.S.C. § 636; United States v. Roberts, 858 F.2d 698, 701 (11th Cir.

1988).

Case No: 5:10cv285/RS/EMT
### NUMBER 13 - 1 4 - 00 258 - CV 

## COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI
- EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________ THE CITY OF ALAMO, T EXAS , A ppellant ,
v. PRO - MEDIC EMS, LLC , A ppellee

.

____________________________________________________________

On a ppeal from the County Court at Law No. 7

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________



## MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Benavides, Perkes , and Longoria Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam This appeal was abated by this Court on October 1, 2014 , pending r esolution of an issue with the final judgment

. This cause is now before the Court on appellant ’ s unopposed motion to dismiss the appeal o n grounds this interlocutory appeal is now moot and appellant elects to dismiss this appeal. Appellant requests that this Court dismiss the appeal. Accordingly, this case is hereby REINSTATED

.2

The Court, having considered the documents on file and appell ant ’ s unopposed motion to dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. See
T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 42.1(a). Appellant ’ s motion to dismiss is GRANTED , and the appeal is hereby DISMISSED. Costs will be taxed against appellant. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 42.1(d) ("Absent agreement of the parties, the court will tax costs against the appellant."). Having dismissed the appeal at appellant ’s request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith.
PER CURI AM
D elivered and filed the 12th day of February , 20 1 5

.
## In The **Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo** 

________________________ No. 07 - 13 - 00 0 99 - CR

________________________ CLYDE GARNETT LAND, III, APPELLANT v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE On Appeal from the 242 nd District Court Hale County, Texas Tri a l Court No . B17581 - 0803, Honorable Edward Self , Presiding 

### May 22 , 2013 ON ABATEMENT AND REMAND Before QUI NN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK , JJ. Appellant Clyde Garnett Land , III appeals from his conviction for theft. The district clerk has requested an extension of time to file the record, stating that ap pellant has not paid or made arrangements to pay for the record. Accordingly, we abate this appeal and remand the cause to the 242nd District Court of Hale County (trial court) for fur ther proceedings. Upon remand, the trial cour t shall determine the following:2 1. whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal; 2. whether appellant is indigent; and, if so, 3. whether appellant is entitled to a free record or appointed couns el. The trial court is also directed to enter such orders necessary to address the aforementioned questions. So too shall it include its findings on those matters (including the name, address, and phone number of any attorney it may appoint to represent appellant in this appeal) in a supplemental record and cause that record to be f iled with this court by June 21 , 2013. Should further time be needed to perform these tasks, then same m ust be requested before June 21 , 2013. It is so ordered. Per Curiam D o not publish.
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

STEPHEN M. PRICE, 

Petitioner,

v. CASE NO. 1:10-cv-00065-MP-GRJ

SECRETARY, FLORIDA

DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS,

Respondent.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This cause comes on for consideration upon the Magistrate Judge's Report and

Recommendation dated July 1, 2013. (Doc. 21). 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 hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

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

by reference in this order. 

2. The petition for writ of habeas corpus, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (doc. 1)

is DENIED.
Page 2 of 2

3. A certificate of appealability is DENIED, pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules

Governing Section 2254 Cases in the U.S. District Courts.

DONE AND ORDERED this 25th day of September, 2013

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case No: 1:10-cv-00065-MP-GRJ
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 13.2

          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 Annual Report on Form 20-F of Durban Roodepoort
Deep, Limited (the "Company") for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2004, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
Ian Louis Murray, as Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 2002, that, to the best of his
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/ Ian Louis Murray
      ----------------------------
      By: Ian Louis Murray
      Title: Chief Executive Officer and
             Chief Financial Officer
      Date: November 15, 2004
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

JOANSELLA STEVENS,

a/k/a LISA YOUNG,

Petitioner, 

vs. Case No.: 5:11cv52/RS/EMT

KENNETH S. TUCKER, 

Respondent

_____________________________________/

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This cause is before the court upon referral from the clerk. Petitioner commenced this action

on February 22, 2011, by filing a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (doc. 1). On January 23,

2012, Respondent filed a motion to dismissthe petition due to Petitioner’s abandonment of the case,

as evidenced by her failure, upon her release from the Florida Department of Corrections (“FDOC”),

to provide the court and Respondent with a current mailing address, and the fact that documents sent

to Petitioner by the court at Petitioner’s address of record were returned as undeliverable (see doc.

31). On January 25, 2012, the court directed Petitioner to file a response to the motion to dismiss

within twenty-one (21) days (doc. 32). At the court’s direction, the clerk sent a copy of the order to

Petitioner’s address of record and Petitioner’s release address indicated on the FDOC website (id.). 

Petitioner failed to respond to the court’s January 25, 2012 order; therefore, on February 22,

2012, the court issued an orderrequiring Petitioner to show cause, within twenty-one (21) days, why

this action should not be dismissed for failure to comply with an order of the court (doc. 33). The

time for compliance with the show cause order has now elapsed with no response from Petitioner.

Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED:

That this case be DISMISSED without prejudice for Petitioner’s failure to comply with an

order of the court.

Case 5:11-cv-00052-RS-EMT Document 35 Filed 03/19/12 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

At Pensacola, Florida, this 19 day of March 2012. th

/s/ Elizabeth M. Timothy 

ELIZABETH M. TIMOTHY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

Any objections to these proposed findings and recommendations must be filed within

fourteen (14) days after being served a copy thereof. Any different deadline that may appear

on the electronic docket is for the court’s internal use only, and does not control. A copy of

objections shall be served upon all other parties. Failure to object may limit the scope of

appellate review of factual findings. See 28 U.S.C. § 636; United States v. Roberts, 858 F.2d

698, 701 (11th Cir. 1988).

Case No: 5:11cv52/RS/EMT

Case 5:11-cv-00052-RS-EMT Document 35 Filed 03/19/12 Page 2 of 2
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 Astro Aerospace Ltd. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the three and six months ended June 30, 2019 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Bruce Bent, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial 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:

 

            (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 result of operations of the Company.

 

/s/Bruce Bent

Bruce Bent

Chief Executive Officer

Chief Financial Officer

 

September 30, 2019
# C_2010316EN.01000901.xml

| 20.11.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 316/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.11.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 316/9

---

Vacancy notice for a Director (Grade AD 14)

2010/C 316/04

The European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training, Cedefop, is a body of the European Union located in Thessaloniki, Greece. It assists the European Commission and other stakeholders in encouraging the promotion and development of vocational education and training.

As Director you will be responsible for directing, managing and representing Cedefop and you will be accountable to the Governing Board and the European Parliament. You must have a good understanding of the institutional framework of an EU organisation and enjoy working at a top level in an international environment. The contract is for a period of five years and may be renewed.

The full requirements for qualifications and experience are described in detail in the vacancy notice and include:

| — | National of EU Member State |
| --- | --- |

—

National of EU Member State

| — | Born after December 1951 |
| --- | --- |

—

Born after December 1951

| — | University degree, preferably in a field relevant to Cedefop |
| --- | --- |

—

University degree, preferably in a field relevant to Cedefop

| — | 15 years of professional experience after graduation, including 5 years of senior management experience |
| --- | --- |

—

15 years of professional experience after graduation, including 5 years of senior management experience

| — | Relevant experience in vocational education and training |
| --- | --- |

—

Relevant experience in vocational education and training

| — | Good knowledge of languages |
| --- | --- |

—

Good knowledge of languages

| — | Ability to lead and motivate an international organisation |
| --- | --- |

—

Ability to lead and motivate an international organisation

| — | Ability to interact and negotiate internationally at senior level with EU institutions, public authorities and social partners. |
| --- | --- |

—

Ability to interact and negotiate internationally at senior level with EU institutions, public authorities and social partners.

The application form can be found in the Vacancy Notice, available on Cedefop’s website: http://www.cedefop.europa.eu

Applications must be submitted and postmarked not later than 7 January 2011.

An HR company will assist in the evaluation of applicants.

---
Exhibit 32.1




CERTIFICATION




Each of
the undersigned officers of CFO Consultants, Inc. (the “Company”) hereby
certifies that, to their knowledge, the Company’s Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q/A to which this certification is attached (the “Report”), as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and that
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.








Date:
      January 18, 2011
            /s/  Joanny
      KwokJoanny
      Kwok, Chief Executive Officer
              (the
      Principal Executive Officer)






Date:
      January 18, 2011
            /s/  Ken
      TsangKen
      Tsang, Chief Financial Officer
              (the
      Principal Financial Officer and Principal AccountingOfficer)






This
certification is being furnished and not filed, and shall not be incorporated
into any document for any purpose, under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or
the Securities Act of 1933.