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



Exhibit 13.1 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 Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2004 of
Vivendi Universal, S.A. (the Registrant), as filed with the United States Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Jean-Bernard Lévy, Chief Executive Officer of the
Registrant certify, pursuant to 18. U.S.C.1350, that, to my knowledge:  (1)

The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and(2)

The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant. /s/ Jean-Bernard LévyJean-Bernard LévyChief
Executive OfficerJune 29, 2005
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### F LORIDA 

### S ECOND 

### D ISTRICT

KRISTEN DOUGHERTY

,

Appellant

,

v.

PHIL JASON HABERMAN; KELLY LYNN SCOVILL; PHIL DRAGER; PHIL DRAGER AS INCORPORATOR OF K9 GLOBAL RESCUE; SARASOTA STATE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE; ED BRODSKY; NICHOLAS KEI SATO; NORTH PORT POLICE DEPARTMENT; TODD R. GARRISON; JAMES KELLER # 304; SHANNON FORTUNO # 231; FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION AND PROBATION; STE PHANIE DITROIA;
SARASOTA COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE; TOM KNIGHT AS
SHERIFF OF SARASOTA COUNTY; SARASOTA COUNTY JAIL; MAJOR BRIAN MEINBERG; UNITED STATES MARSHALS OFFICE FLORIDA; MICHAEL C. VAN; JON A. BAROCAS; JON
A. BOROCAS ACTING AS INCORPORATOR OF K9 GLOBA L SERVICES; UNITED STATES MARSHALS OFFICE NEVADA; UNKNOWN DOE EMPLOYEES; NEVADA HIGHWAY PATROL;
HEATHER NICHOLE RHOADSANDERS; VIKTORIA FAYE

GAVRE; DOES 1

- 100

,

Appellee s

.

No. 2D 2023

- 0489

June 26, 2024

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Sarasota County; Hunter W. Carroll, Judge

.

Kristen Dougherty, pro se

.2

Shannon L. Troutman and Brandon S. Vesely of The Florida Appellate Firm, P.A., St. Petersburg , for Appellee Jon A. Barocas

.

No appearance for remaining Appellees

.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

SLEET, C.J., and CASANUEVA and KHOUZAM , JJ., Concur.

__________________________

Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

ROSA HOOD and HAROLD M. HOOD :

: CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-CV-4154

Plaintiffs, :

:

v. :

:

BAYER CORPORATION;

BAYER AG;

GLAXOSMITHKLINE, PLC;

GLAXOSMITHKLINE;

SMITHKLINE BEECHAM

:

:

:

:

:

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

:

Defendants. :

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

To the Clerk of the Court:

Kindly enter the appearances of Hope S. Freiwald, Aline Fairweather, Erin

Brennan and Kirstin J. Miller as attorneys for defendant GlaxoSmithKline PLC.

Respectfully Submitted,

_____________________________ _____________________________

Hope S. Freiwald Aline Fairweather

_____________________________ _____________________________

Erin Brennan Kirstin J. Miller

DECHERT PRICE & RHOADS

4000 Bell Atlantic Tower

1717 Arch Street

Philadelphia, PA 19103-2793

(215) 994-4000

Case 2:02-cv-04154-BWK Document 6 Filed 09/11/2002 Page 1 of 1
# C_2016068EN.01004302.xml

| 22.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 68/43 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 68/43

---

Action brought on 29 December 2015 — Deutsche Lufthansa v Commission

(Case T-764/15)

(2016/C 068/55)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Deutsche Lufthansa AG (Cologne, Germany) (represented by: A. Martin-Ehlers, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Annul the decision of the European Commission of 1 October 2014 in Case SA.32833 (2011/C) (ex 20111NN) — Hahn Airport; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the European Commission of 1 October 2014 in Case SA.32833 (2011/C) (ex 20111NN) — Hahn Airport;

| — | Order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant submits, in essence, the following:

| — | procedural defects due to failing to hold further talks with the applicant in 2014, |
| --- | --- |

—

procedural defects due to failing to hold further talks with the applicant in 2014,

| — | incomplete presentation of the case, although the facts of the case were known to the defendant at the time of the adoption of the contested decision, |
| --- | --- |

—

incomplete presentation of the case, although the facts of the case were known to the defendant at the time of the adoption of the contested decision,

| — | incorrect legal assessment of the measures in favour of the airport concerned in so far as certain measures were not classified as State aid for the purposes of Article 107(1) of TFEU and others were classified as State aid which is compatible with the common market, |
| --- | --- |

—

incorrect legal assessment of the measures in favour of the airport concerned in so far as certain measures were not classified as State aid for the purposes of Article 107(1) of TFEU and others were classified as State aid which is compatible with the common market,

| — | failure to take into consideration that all the aid referred to in the contested decision in favour of the airport concerned was, in end effect, passed on to Ryanair as the most important user of that airport. |
| --- | --- |

—

failure to take into consideration that all the aid referred to in the contested decision in favour of the airport concerned was, in end effect, passed on to Ryanair as the most important user of that airport.

---
Case 2:03-cv-04822-RBS Document 66-2 Filed 08/14/2009 Page 1 of 15
Case 2:03-cv-04822-RBS Document 66-2 Filed 08/14/2009 Page 2 of 15
Case 2:03-cv-04822-RBS Document 66-2 Filed 08/14/2009 Page 3 of 15
Case 2:03-cv-04822-RBS Document 66-2 Filed 08/14/2009 Page 4 of 15
Case 2:03-cv-04822-RBS Document 66-2 Filed 08/14/2009 Page 5 of 15
Case 2:03-cv-04822-RBS Document 66-2 Filed 08/14/2009 Page 6 of 15
Case 2:03-cv-04822-RBS Document 66-2 Filed 08/14/2009 Page 7 of 15
Case 2:03-cv-04822-RBS Document 66-2 Filed 08/14/2009 Page 8 of 15
Case 2:03-cv-04822-RBS Document 66-2 Filed 08/14/2009 Page 9 of 15
Case 2:03-cv-04822-RBS Document 66-2 Filed 08/14/2009 Page 10 of 15
Case 2:03-cv-04822-RBS Document 66-2 Filed 08/14/2009 Page 11 of 15
Case 2:03-cv-04822-RBS Document 66-2 Filed 08/14/2009 Page 12 of 15
Case 2:03-cv-04822-RBS Document 66-2 Filed 08/14/2009 Page 13 of 15
Case 2:03-cv-04822-RBS Document 66-2 Filed 08/14/2009 Page 14 of 15
Case 2:03-cv-04822-RBS Document 66-2 Filed 08/14/2009 Page 15 of 15
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-30136

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff–Appellee,

versus

ISAAC ABDI HASHI,

Defendant–Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 1:12-CR-165-1

Before JOLLY, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Isaac Hashi appeals the sentence imposed for his conviction of assaulting,

resisting, or impeding a federal officer in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 111(a)(1)

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

September 12, 2013

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

 Case: 13-30136 Document: 00512371792 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/12/2013
No. 13-30136

and (b). He claims the district court erred by enhancing his offense level pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3A1.2(b), because there was insufficient evidence on which to

find that his attack was motivated by the victim’s status as a federal officer and

that the application of the six-level enhancement amounted to double-counting

of the victim’s status. Because Hashi preserved those arguments in the district

court, we review for harmless error. United States v. Delgado-Martinez, 564

F.3d 750, 753 (5th Cir. 2009).

The district court determined that Hashi was a career offender and

applied U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1 to arrive at the total offense level. The court then

upwardly departed pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 4A1.3(a)(1) based on its conclusion

that Hashi’s criminal history was underrepresented by the guidelines calculations. The six-level enhancement was not used to arrive at Hashi’s total offense

level, “did not affect the district court’s selection of the sentence imposed,” and

did not affect substantial rights. See Delgado-Martinez, 564 F.3d 750, 753; see

also United States v. Chon, 713 F.3d 812, 821 (5th Cir. 2013), petition for cert.

filed (July 9, 2013) (No. 13-50). Accordingly, any error was harmless. See

United States v. Guevara, 408 F.3d 252, 261 (5th Cir. 2005). 

The judgment is AFFIRMED.

2

 Case: 13-30136 Document: 00512371792 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/12/2013
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           1,286
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,849
<ALLOWANCES>                                        68
<INVENTORY>                                     12,833
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                26,353
<PP&E>                                         202,544
<DEPRECIATION>                                  16,109
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 220,712
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           10,988
<BONDS>                                        175,667
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      34,057
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   220,712
<SALES>                                         52,452
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                52,530
<CGS>                                           46,005
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,849
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               9,031
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (4,355)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,355)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    299
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,056)
<EPS-BASIC>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0



</TABLE>
# C_2016038EN.01007101.xml

| 1.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 38/71 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 38/71

---

Action brought on 1 December 2015 — Bodegas Vega Sicilia v OHIM (TEMPOS VEGA SICILIA)

(Case T-696/15)

(2016/C 038/95)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Bodegas Vega Sicilia, SA (Valbuena de Duero, Spain) (represented by: S. Alonso Maruri, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Defendant:

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘TEMPOS VEGA SICILIA’ — Application for registration No 13 066 121

Trade mark at issue:

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 30 September 2015 in Case R 285/2015-4

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul and, accordingly, declare inapplicable the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 30 September 2015 in Case R 285/2015-4; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul and, accordingly, declare inapplicable the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 30 September 2015 in Case R 285/2015-4;

| — | annul and, accordingly, declare inapplicable the refusal decision of OHIM of 8 December 2014; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul and, accordingly, declare inapplicable the refusal decision of OHIM of 8 December 2014;

| — | order OHIM to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(j) of Regulation No 207/2009 in conjunction with Article 118l of Regulation No 491/2009 on the organisation of the wine market. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(j) of Regulation No 207/2009 in conjunction with Article 118l of Regulation No 491/2009 on the organisation of the wine market.

---
No. 57621.

#### Dolliff & McGrath *v.*United States,

protest 208800-K (Boston).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

At the trial, it was established that bale YN/LP 6715/2955, No. 3, which was short-shipped, was subsequently imported and entered under entry 3732; that the entry in question, 2651, covering the original shipment upon which the shortage was reported, bore no notation that there had been an extract of the invoice for one bale covered by entry 3732, but that- entry 3732 contained such information. The court held that it was clear from the evidence that duty upon the bale involved was assessed twice. On the record presented and following *United States*v. *Browne Vintners Co., Inc.*(34 C. C. P. A. 112, C. A. D. 351), it was held that duty is not assessable upon the bale in question.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

FORT WORTH 

NO. 02-16-00131-CV 

Kent Flynn d/b/a Flynn & Company 

and d/b/a SFC Services 

v. 

Peter Gorman 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

From the 153rd District Court 

of Tarrant County (153-276438-15) 

September 8, 2016 

Per Curiam 

JUDGMENT 

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

the appeal should be dismissed. It is ordered that the appeal is dismissed for 

want of jurisdiction. 

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

PER CURIAM
Louie Northern I Ascend Aerials | 1630 W Peachtree St NE Apt.6 | Atlanta GA 30309 | 706.247.1958 | www.AscendAerials.com

March 28, 2016

United States Department of Transportation

Federal Aviation Administration

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Avenue, NE

Washington, DC 20590

Filed in www.regulations.gov, Docket FAA 2015-2042

Re: Ascend Aerials LLC Petition for Amendment to Exemption 12322, under Section 

333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act, 49 U.S.C. 44701(f), and 14 C.F.R. Part 

11, to add the Freefly Systems Alta8; request for expeditious processing

On behalf of Ascend Aerials LLC ("Ascend Aerials"), we hereby seek an amendment to

Exemption 12322, granted August 4, 2015 to allow Ascend Aerials to operate the FreeFly Systems 

Alta8 octocopter unmanned aircraft vehicle and system (“UAV” and “UAS”) to provide the same 

services as authorized in Exemption 12322.

Ascend Aerials will comply with the standard conditions and limitations as set forth in Exemption 

12322. Accordingly, we respectfully ask the FAA to expeditiously grant this petition in summary 

fashion, and obviate Federal Register publication and public comment.

Sincerely,

Louie Northern
Exhibit 4.2


 


Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm


We have issued our
report dated February 26, 2021, with respect to the financial statement of Advisors Disciplined Trust 2071 contained in Amendment
No. 1 to the Registration Statement on Form S-6 (File No. 333-253299) and related Prospectus. We consent to the use of the aforementioned
report in the Registration Statement and Prospectus, and to the use of our name as it appears under the caption “Experts”.


 


/s/ Grant
Thornton LLP


 


Chicago, Illinois


February 26, 2021
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

      ( print page 77296)    

# TIME AND DATE: 

9:00 a.m. EST, Friday, November 17, 2023.

# PLACE: 

Virtual meeting.

# STATUS: 

Closed.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 

                        Examinations and enforcement matters. In the event that the time, date, or location of this meeting changes, an announcement of the change, along with the new time, date, and/or place of the meeting will be posted on the Commission's website at                         *https://www.cftc.gov/​.*

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Christopher Kirkpatrick, 202-418-5964.

*Authority:*5 U.S.C. 552b.                    

Dated: November 7, 2023.

Robert Sidman,

Deputy Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 2023-24903 Filed 11-7-23; 11:15 am]

BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 76 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 76

Waiving certain enrollment requirements for the remainder of the first 
 session of the One Hundred Sixth Congress with respect to any bill or 
     joint resolution making general appropriations or continuing 
                  appropriations for fiscal year 2000.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            November 8, 1999

    Mr. Thomas introduced the following joint resolution; which was 
           referred to the Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
Waiving certain enrollment requirements for the remainder of the first 
 session of the One Hundred Sixth Congress with respect to any bill or 
     joint resolution making general appropriations or continuing 
                  appropriations for fiscal year 2000.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That the provisions of 
sections 106 and 107 of title 1, United States Code, are waived for the 
remainder of the first session of the One Hundred Sixth Congress with 
respect to the printing (on parchment or otherwise) of the enrollment 
of any bill or joint resolution making general appropriations or 
continuing appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
2000. The enrollment of any such bill or joint resolution shall be in 
such form as the Committee on House Administration of the House of 
Representatives certifies to be a true enrollment.
                                 <all>
```
August 11, 1948

No. 52502.

protests 132531-K,

#### Sandoz Chemical Works, Inc. *v.*United States,

Plaintiff’s application for rehearing granted.
Before the Second Division,

July 29, 1948

No. 52483.

protests 545529-G, etc. (New York).

#### American Straw Goods Co. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
Case 2:04-cv-01200-LP   Document 42   Filed 08/11/05   Page 1 of 2

Case 2:04-cv-01200-LP   Document 42   Filed 08/11/05   Page 2 of 2
# 2018_06 Pivot Table 5B

# 5

&F	

&P/&N
**EXHIBIT 23.1****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS**We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (Nos.333-127254, 333-117256, 333-115571, 333-134911) and Form S-8 (No. 333-106311) of our report datedMarch 13, 2007, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and management’s assessmentthat GMX Resources Inc. and Subsidiaries maintained effective internal control over financialreporting of GMX Resources Inc. and Subsidiaries, included in this amended Annual Report (Form10-K/A Amendment No. 1) for the year ended December 31, 2006.We also consent to the reference to us under the heading “Experts” in such Prospectus./s/ Smith, Carney & Co., p.c.Smith, Carney & Co., p.c.Oklahoma City, OK
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 847 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 847

  Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives on support for 
                                Georgia.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 25, 2018

 Mr. Conaway submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
                    the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives on support for 
                                Georgia.

Whereas Georgia is a valued friend of the United States and has repeatedly 
        demonstrated its commitment to advancing the mutual interests of both 
        countries, including the deployment of Georgian forces as part of the 
        International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) led by the North Atlantic 
        Treaty Organization (NATO) in Afghanistan and the Multi-National Force 
        in Iraq;
Whereas the European Deterrence Initiative builds the partnership capacity of 
        Georgia so it can work more closely with the United States and NATO, as 
        well as provide for its own defense;
Whereas in addition to the European Deterrence Initiative, Georgia's 
        participation in the NATO initiative Partnership for Peace is paramount 
        to interoperability with the United States and NATO, and establishing a 
        more peaceful environment in the region; and
Whereas despite the losses suffered, as a NATO partner of ISAF, Georgia is 
        committed to the Resolute Support Mission in Afghanistan with the 
        fourth-largest contingent on the ground: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) reaffirms United States support for Georgia's 
        sovereignty and territorial integrity within its 
        internationally-recognized borders, and does not recognize the 
        independence of the Abkhazia and South Ossetia regions 
        currently occupied by the Russian Federation; and
            (2) supports continued cooperation between the United 
        States and Georgia and the efforts of the Government of Georgia 
        to provide for the defense of its people and sovereign 
        territory.
                                 <all>
```