alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JU NE 27, 2014

NO. 03

- 12

- 00713

- CR

Daniel Joe Hernandez, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 167TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE JONES, J USTICES PEMBERTON AN D FIELD

AFFIRMED

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE FIELD

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the trial court. Having reviewed

the rec ord and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the

trial court’s judgment . Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment of conviction

. The

appellant shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in th is Court and the court below.

### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JU NE 27, 2014

NO. 03

- 12

- 00714

- CR

Daniel Joe Hernandez, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 167TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE JONES, J USTICES PEMBERTON AN D FIELD

AFFIRMED

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE FIELD

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the trial court. Having reviewed

the rec ord and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the

trial court’s judgment . Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment of conviction

. The

appellant shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in th is Court and the court below.
Exhibit 32.2




ICONIX BRAND GROUP,
INC.




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 Iconix Brand Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended
March 31, 2009 (the “Report”), I, Warren Clamen, 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 to the best of my
knowledge:




(1) The Report fully complies with the
requirements of section 13(a) 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/ Warren
      ClamenWarren
    ClamenExecutive Vice President and Chief
      Financial OfficerDate: May 8,
      2009
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter II

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to subchapter A appear at 78 FR 60697, Oct. 2, 2013.

#### § 308.1 Issue.

Federal Reserve Banks, as Fiscal Agents of the United States, and the Treasury Department may issue full-paid interim certificates in lieu of definitive securities, against full-paid allotments of subscriptions, when specifically authorized by the Secretary of the Treasury in connection with the issue, hereafter, to the public, of United States securities. Interim certificates shall be in such form, and in such denominations, as the Secretary of the Treasury may determine when an issue is authorized.
39961.

#### DARBY v. INTERSTATE LIFE *&*ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY.

Decided February 26, 1963.

*Howard T. Oliver, Jr.,*for plaintiff in error.

*Wheeler, Robinson & Thompson, B. Carl Buice,*contra.

Eberhakdt, Judge.

Where an insurance company seeks to invoke an exclusion contained in its policy, it has the burden of showing that the facts came within the exclusion. *Gaynor v. Travelers Ins. Co.,*12 Ga. App. 601 (5) (77 SE 1072). Thus, in the case sub judice, when the insurance company, in defense to plaintiff’s action, contended that the insured was intentionally shot by one Davis, the burden was on it to show that such was the case. In Davis’ affidavit he asserted that he “meant to shoot him [the insured] because he said he had a gun and reached into his pocket.” The facts established by this affidavit are sufficient to carry the burden and to pierce the pleadings and, nothing else appearing, would also be sufficient to entitle defendant to a summaiy judgment.

*410Does any “material issue of fact” remain? *Code Ann.*§ 110-1201. Plaintiff filed affidavits in support of her motion and in opposition to defendant’s. These affidavits establish nothing to contradict the Davis affidavit other than to set out that someone other than the affiant testified on Davis’ commitment hearing that no gun was found near the body of the deceased. Therefore, the only matter that may appear as to why the defendant’s summary judgment should not be affirmed would seem to be the question of the credibility of Davis in the light of his possible self-interest in making the affidavit.

The question of the credibility of witnesses and the related right of cross-examination is a murky area of the summary judgment law with conflicting concepts in hostile array. Cases like this, having as an essential factor the state of mind or intent of a person, are difficult of solution. However, this issue was not raised in the trial court, as it might have been, under *Code Ann.*§ 110-1206, which procedure would have invoked the court’s discretion. *McCarty v. National Life &c. Ins. Co.,*107 Ga. App. 178 (129 SE2d 408); Accord: 6 Moore, Federal Practice (2d Ed. 1953) p. 2344, § 56.24. This failure would not bar the trial court from denying a summary judgment, since denial is never appealable, but plaintiff cannot wait until the case reaches this level before raising the issue. Dyer v. McDougall, 201 F2d 264 (2d Cir.); 6 Moore, Federal Practice, supra, at p. 2350, § 56.24; 3 Barron & Holtzoff, Federal Practice & Procedure (1958 Rev.) p. 176, § 1239.

There having been no issue invoked as to the credibility of the witness, the trial court properly granted summary judgment for the defendant on the basis of the affidavit.

Since the motion for summary judgment was good, the general demurrer thereto was properly overruled (assuming a general demurrer to a motion for summary judgment would lie).

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Felton, C. J., and Bussell, J., concur.*
# L_2020149EN.01000101.xml

| 12.5.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 149/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.5.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 149/1

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2020/635

of 12 May 2020

entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Podpiwek kujawski’ (PGI))

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Poland’s application to register the name ‘Podpiwek kujawski’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Poland’s application to register the name ‘Podpiwek kujawski’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

| (2) | As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Podpiwek kujawski’ should therefore be entered in the register, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Podpiwek kujawski’ should therefore be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name ‘Podpiwek kujawski’ (PGI) is hereby entered in the register.

The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.8. Other products listed in Annex I to the Treaty (spices etc.), as listed in Annex XI to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 (3).

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

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

Done at Brussels, 12 May 2020.

For the Commission,

On behalf of the President,

Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ C 431, 23.12.2019, p. 37.

2

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).

3

---
**Exhibit 35.1**

 

**Servicer Compliance Statement of John Deere Capital Corporation**

 

 

I, Steven N. Owenson, Senior Vice President and Controller of John Deere Capital Corporation, state:

 

A review of John Deere Capital Corporation’s activities for the period from October 30, 2017 through October 28, 2018 (the “Reporting Period”) and of John Deere Capital Corporation’s performance under the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of March 2, 2017 among John Deere Capital Corporation, John Deere Receivables, Inc. and John Deere Owner Trust 2017 has been made under my supervision, and to the best of my knowledge based on such review, John Deere Capital Corporation has fulfilled all its obligations under all relevant agreements in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.

 

 

 
| Date: January 11,   2019 |   | John Deere Capital   Corporation.            |
|-------------------------------|--------|----------------------------------------------|
|                          |   |                                         |
|                          |   | * *                                     |
|                          | By:    | */s/ Steven N. Owenson*                      |
|                          |   | Steven N. Owenson                            |
|                          |   | Senior Vice President   and Controller  |

 

----
----

----

|   | (1) |   | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended March 31, 2011 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(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. |
|--------|-----|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----

----
# L_2020232EN.01004101.xml

| 20.7.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 232/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.7.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 232/41

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2020/1064

of 13 July 2020

conferring protection under Article 99 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the name ‘delle Venezie’/‘Beneških okolišev’ (PDO)

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (1), and in particular Article 99 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | In accordance with Article 97(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, the Commission has examined the application to register the name ‘delle Venezie’/‘Beneških okolišev’ sent by Italy and has published it in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

In accordance with Article 97(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, the Commission has examined the application to register the name ‘delle Venezie’/‘Beneških okolišev’ sent by Italy and has published it in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

| (2) | No statement of objection has been received by the Commission under Article 98 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

No statement of objection has been received by the Commission under Article 98 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013.

| (3) | In accordance with Article 99 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, the name ‘delle Venezie’/‘Beneških okolišev’ should be protected and entered in the register referred to in Article 104 of that Regulation. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

In accordance with Article 99 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, the name ‘delle Venezie’/‘Beneških okolišev’ should be protected and entered in the register referred to in Article 104 of that Regulation.

| (4) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for the Common Organisation of the Agricultural Markets, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for the Common Organisation of the Agricultural Markets,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name ‘delle Venezie’/‘Beneških okolišev’ (PDO) is hereby protected.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

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

Done at Brussels, 13 July 2020.

For the Commission,

On behalf of the President,

Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671.

1

(2)  
  OJ C 58, 21.2.2020, p. 21.

2

---
#### § 515.317 General license.

A general license is any license or authorization the terms of which are set forth in this part.
§ 515.311 Property; property interests. ( a ) Except as defined in § 515.203(f) for the purposes of that section the terms *property* and *property interest* or *property interests* shall include, but not by way of limitation, money, checks, drafts, bullion, bank deposits, savings accounts, debts, indebtedness obligations, notes, debentures, stocks, bonds, coupons, and other financial securities, bankers' acceptances, mortgages, pledges, liens or other rights in the nature of security, warehouse receipts, bills of lading, trust receipts, bills of sale, any other evidences of title, ownership or indebtedness, powers of attorney, goods, wares, merchandise, chattels, stocks on hand, ships, goods on ships, real estate mortgages, deeds of trust, vendors' sales agreements, land contracts, real estate and any interest therein, leaseholds, ground rents, options, negotiable instruments, trade acceptances, royalties, book accounts, accounts payable, judgments, patents, trademarks, copyrights, contracts or licenses affecting or involving patents, trademarks or copyrights, insurance policies, safe deposit boxes and their contents, annuities, pooling agreements, contracts of any nature whatsoever, services, and any other property, real, personal, or mixed, tangible or intangible, or interest or interests therein, present, future or contingent.
( b ) As used in § 515.208, the term *property* means any property (including patents, copyrights, trademarks, and any other form of intellectual property), whether real, personal, or mixed, and any present, future, or contingent right, security, or other interest therein, including any leasehold interest.
[28 FR 6974, July 9, 1963, as amended at 50 FR 27437, July 3, 1985; 56 FR 49847, Oct. 2, 1991; 61 FR 37386, July 18, 1996]
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

JASON MATTHEW SANDERS
, Appellant,

v.

KRISTINE MARIE POND
, Appellee.

No. 4D2023

- 2182

[ November 9, 2023 ]

Appeal of a nonfinal order from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Hon. Lauren Alperstein , Judge; L.T.

Case No. DVCE23004442.

Russell J

. Williams of Williams Hilal Wigand Grande PLLC, Fort Lauderdale, for app ellant.

Chad R

. Laing of Laing, Weicholz, Schley, PLLC, Boca Raton

, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed

.

W ARNER
, K UNTZ and A RTAU

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION. UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE

.

IN THE 

## A RIZONA 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEALS

D IVISION O NE

STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent ,

v.
BLAKE JOSEPH CLARK , Petitioner

.
N o . 1 CA

- CR 1 9

- 0 254 PRPC

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

No. CR2013

- 000545

- 001 DT The Honorable M. Scott McCoy , Judge
REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL
Maricopa County Attorney’s Office , Phoenix By Andrea L. Kever Counsel for Respondent
Blake Joseph Clark, Buckeye Petitioner

MEMORANDUM DECISION Presiding Judge Lawrence F. Winthrop, Judge Maria Elena Cruz and Judge David B. Gass delivered the decision of the Court. FILED 3-5-2020S TATE v. CLARK Decision of the Court

2 PER CURIAM:

¶1 Petitioner Blake Joseph Clark seeks review of the superior court’s order denying his petition for post

- conviction relief, filed pursuant to Ar izona Ru le of Criminal Procedure 3 2.1. Thi s is petitioner’s second successive petition.
¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or error of law, this court will not disturb a superior court’s ruling on a petition for post

- conviction relief. State v. Gutierrez , 229 Ariz. 573, 577, ¶ 19 (2012). It is petitioner’s burden to show that the superior court abused its discretion by denying the petition for post

- conviction relief. See State v. Poblete , 227 Ariz. 537, 538, ¶ 1 (App. 2011) (petitioner has burden of establishing abuse of discretion on review).
¶3 We have reviewed the record in this matter, the supe rior court’s order denying the petition for post

- conviction relief, and the petition for review. We find that petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion.
¶4 We grant review but deny relief.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

RAYMOND M. KRUSHIN,

Petitioner

v.

COMMON PLEAS COURT LUZERNE 

COUNTY,

Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 102 MM 2017

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 16th day of August, 2017, the Application for Leave to File 

Original Process is GRANTED, and the Petition for Writ of Mandamus and the 

Application for an Immediate Hearing are DENIED.
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Assistant Secretary for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs Todd D. Robinson Travels to Johannesburg and Pretoria, South Africa, and Accra, Ghana

# 									Assistant Secretary for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs Todd D. Robinson Travels to Johannesburg and Pretoria, South Africa, and Accra, Ghana							

Media Note

Office of the Spokesperson

May 4, 2023

Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs Todd D. Robinson will travel to Johannesburg and Pretoria, South Africa from May 4-6, where he will meet with South African officials and attend an International Law Enforcement Academy (ILEA) event, with approximately 80 ILEA Gaborone Alumni from the Republic of South Africa, Eswatini, Lesotho, and Botswana.

From May 7-9, Assistant Secretary Robinson will travel to Accra, Ghana, for meetings with INL partners and Ghanaian officials.

For more information, please contact INL-PAPD@state.gov and follow INL on Twitter, @StateINL.

Tags

Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement AffairsGhanaOffice of the SpokespersonOfficial International TravelSouth Africa

Back to Top
**Exhibit
      32.1**








**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 JACOBS FINANCIAL GROUP, INC. (the
      "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended August 31, 2008 (the “Report")
      filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, I, John M. Jacobs, 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:





(1)  The
      Company’s 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.











Date:
                October 20, 2008/s/John
                M. JacobsJohn
                M. Jacobs,  Chief Executive
                Officer
Exhibit 32.1

 

 

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 this Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report of Protein Polymer Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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/ William N. Plamondon, III

William N. Plamondon, III

Chief Executive Officer

August 16, 2006

 

 

In connection with this Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report of Protein Polymer Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ended  March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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/ Janis Y. Neves

Janis Y. Neves

Director of Finance and Corporate Secretary

August 16, 2006