alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
reverse its prior decision, finding instead that appellant was "not the type

of person" who should receive the "substantial benefit" of having his criminal records sealed due to •his other arrests and convictions. In making this determination, the district court relied on this court's decision
in 

### State v. Cavaricci, 108 Nev. 411, 413, 834 P.2d 406, 408 (1992) (holding that the district court abused its discretion in sealing criminal records due to petitioner's criminal history). This appeal followed.

After reviewing appellant's arguments and the record on appeal, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to seal the criminal records at issue here. 

### See id. at 412-13, 834 P.2d at 408 (reviewing a district court decision to seal criminal records in accordance with NRS 179.255 for an abuse of discretion). To the extent that appellant argues that there was no proof of his arrest, that contention is meritless because his petition in the district court, signed under penalty of perjury, stated as much and because the documentation attached to the petition further demonstrated that appellant was, in fact, arrested for child abuse, neglect and endangerment. Similarly, appellant's argument that the district court should have granted the petition as unopposed is also without merit, as there was no opposing party to the petition and the prosecuting attorney merely had the option, but was not required, to present evidence and testimony in response to such a petition. 

### See NRS 179.255(4) (stating that after receiving notice of the petition from the court, the prosecuting attorney "may testify and present evidence" regarding the petition).

Appellant also argues that the district court improperly determined that he would not receive a substantial benefit from having his records sealed. In making this argument, however, appellant

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2
(01 1947A 

### e

### Cherry

misconstrues the district court's order, as the district court actually stated that appellant was not the type of person who should receive such a substantial benefit based on his criminal record, not that he would not receive a benefit if the records were sealed. 2

For the reasons discussed above, we ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

Hardesty


# LA -e r 1 Douglas

cc: Hon. Jerry A. Wiese, District Judge Clyde H. Means Eighth District Court Clerk

2 

### We have reviewed appellant's remaining arguments and conclude that they lack merit.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 

### 3

(0) 1947A stftp
No. 54536.

#### G. H. Seffert Co. *v.*United States,

protests 155053-K (B) and 155055-K (B) (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

DALE ROBERT STONEROAD,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 158 MAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 14th day of August, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

: CIVIL ACTION

Timothy Doris

:

 v.

:

No. 02-2751

:

Marriot International, Inc., et al

:

NOTICE OF ARBITRATION HEARING

Please take note that the above-captioned civil action case has been scheduled for

ARBITRATION at 9:30 am on Tuesday, January 14, 2002. PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS

ARBITRATION HEARING WILL BE HELD IN THE ROBERT N.C. NIX BUILDING, 900

MARKET ST., PHILADELPHIA, PA 19107. REPORT TO ROOM 339 FOR YOUR ROOM

ASSIGNMENT. NOTE: Arbitrators shall not participate in settlement discussions.

Michael E. Kunz

Clerk of Court

By: 

Tashia C. Irving

Deputy Clerk

Phone:267-299-7071

Date:September 16, 2002

Copies: Lenora Kashner, Courtroom Deputy to Judge Michael M. Baylson

Docket Clerk - Case File

Counsel: Thomas S. Farnish, Esq.

Gregory J. Kelley, Esq.

Robert G. Kelly, Esq.

ARB2.FRM

Case 2:02-cv-02751-MMB Document 14 Filed 09/16/2002 Page 1 of 1
# Oct22

# Nov22

# Dec22

# Jan23

# Feb23

# Mar23

# Apr23

# May23

# June23

# July23

# Aug23

# Sep23
Exhibit 10.1



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 of Telefónica Móviles, S.A. (the Company) on Form 20-F for the period ending December 31,
2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned hereby certify that to the best of our 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 results of operations of the Company.
| | -- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



In accordance with the interim guidance for Section 906 certification issued by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission on March 21, 2003 in
Release No. 33-8212, this certification will not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. Such certification will not be deemed to be
incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.



Date: June 27, 2003

/s/    ANTONIO VIANA-BAPTISTAChairman and Chief Executive Officer


Date: June 27, 2003

/s/    ERNESTO LÓPEZ MOZOChief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32(i)

CERTIFICATIONS OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

The
undersigned hereby certifies that, to his knowledge, (i) the Form 10-K filed by Carolina Bank Holdings, Inc. (the Issuer) for the year ended December 31, 2008, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) the information contained in that report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer on the dates and for the
periods presented therein.



|                     |  |                                                         
|-------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------
|Date: March 30, 2009 |  | /s/ Robert T. Braswell                                  
|                     |  | Robert T. Braswell                                      
|                     |  | President and Chief Executive Officer                   
|                     | 
|Date: March 30, 2009 |  | /s/ T. Allen Liles                                      
|                     |  | T. Allen Liles                                          
|                     |  | Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, March 11, 2022.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, March 11, 2022

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A22D0256. KAREN WEINSTOCK v. NOAM SMALL.

Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby DENIED.

LC NUMBERS:

2021CV354214
Exhibit 12.2



Certifications



I, Stephen Pearce, certify that:



1.

I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 20-F of Golden Goliath Resources Ltd.;



2.

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this Annual Report;



3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4.

The companys other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the company and have: (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the company and have:



(a)

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;



(b)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the companys disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



(c)

Disclosed in this report any change in the companys internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the Registration Statement that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the companys internal control over financial reporting; and



5.

The Companys other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the companys auditors and the audit committee of the companys board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



(a)

All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the companys ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



(b)

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the companys internal control over financial reporting.





Date: July 21, 2009





/s/ Stephen Pearce

Stephen Pearce, Chief Financial Officer



#
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE J. CREW
GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FOR THE NINE MONTHS AND THREE MONTHS ENDED OCTOBER 28,
2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                                  <C>                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                        9-MOS              3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                    FEB-03-2001        FEB-03-2001
<PERIOD-END>                         OCT-28-2000        OCT-28-2000
<CASH>                                    21,737                  0
<SECURITIES>                                   0                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0                  0
<INVENTORY>                              164,623                  0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                         217,560                  0
<PP&E>                                   252,295                  0
<DEPRECIATION>                          (94,468)                  0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           401,601                  0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                    151,138                  0
<BONDS>                                  290,687                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                    193,042                  0
<PREFERRED>                                    0                  0
<COMMON>                                       0                  0
<OTHER-SE>                             (289,351)                  0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             401,601                  0
<SALES>                                  514,231            193,971
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         516,400            194,767
<CGS>                                    280,800            104,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                            498,800            178,017
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0                  0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        27,233              9,213
<INCOME-PRETAX>                          (9,633)              7,537
<INCOME-TAX>                               3,900            (3,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                      (5,733)              4,537
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0                  0
<CHANGES>                                      0                  0
<NET-INCOME>                             (5,733)              4,537
<EPS-BASIC>                                  0                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0                  0


</TABLE>
# C_2015171EN.01003402.xml

| 26.5.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 171/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.5.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 171/34

---

Action brought on 23 March 2015 — hyphen v OHIM — Skylotec

(Case T-146/15)

(2015/C 171/41)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: hyphen GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: M. Gail, lawyer)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Skylotec GmbH (Neuwied, Germany)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark (Representation of a polygon) — Community trade mark No 2 255 537

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before OHIM: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Procedure before OHIM

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 9 March 2015 in Case R 1506/2014-4

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

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

—

order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 15(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation No 207/2009; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 15(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation No 207/2009;

| — | Infringement of Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009.

---
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 99.1



                        CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

I, Jonathon K. Heffron of Bank United Corp. Litigation Contingent Payment Rights
Trust (the "CPR Trust"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that: (1) the Annual Report on Form 10-K of
the CPR Trust for the year ended December 31, 2002 (the "Report") fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 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 CPR Trust.


Dated:  March 7, 2003


/s/ Jonathon K. Heffron
-------------------------
Jonathon K. Heffron
Litigation Trustee
Case 2:02-cv-04093-MK Document 23 Filed 09/08/2003 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:02-cv-04093-MK Document 23 Filed 09/08/2003 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 32.2



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 Duke Capital Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert P. Brace, Chairman of the Board and President 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 results of operations of the Company.



|Date: November 11, 2003 |  |  |  | /s/ Robert P. Brace                                
|----------------------- |  |  |  | ---------------------------------------------------
|                        |  |  |  | Robert P. Brace Chairman of the Board and President
-84 -82 -80 -78 -76 -74

36 38 40 

### ★

▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 500 1000 1500 500 18 12 06 00 07/27 

### NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

## Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 27 Jul 06

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 39.06 N 76.88 WMeters AGL
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

____________________________________ 

 : 

BISHNU C. BORAH, M.D., P.C., : Civil Action No. 

and BISHNUE BORAH, M.D., : 

 : 2:04-cv-03617-BMS 

 Plaintiffs, : 

 : 

v. : 

 : 

MONUMENTAL LIFE INSURANCE CO., : 

et al, : 

 :

ORDER

 AND NOW, this day of , 2005, upon consideration of the Motion 

of Sea Nine Associates to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint and Plaintiffs’ response thereto, 

 It is hereby ORDERED and DECREED as follows: 

1. The Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint of Sea Nine Associates for failure to 

properly serve is GRANTED, and the Complaint is hereby dismissed without prejudice; 

2. The Motion to Dismiss Counts I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII,IX, X, XIII & XIV is 

GRANTED and the Complaint is hereby dismissed with prejudice. 

 BY THE COURT 

 

 U.S.D.J. 
Copies furnished to 

Robert M. Bovarnick, Esquire 

Two Penn Center, Suite 1310 

1500 John F. Kennedy Blvd. 

Philadelphia, PA 19102 

Steven J. Fram, Esquire 

Archer & Greiner, P.C. 

One Centennial Square 

Haddonfield, NJ 08033 

Attorney for the Plaintiffs 

Christopher Leise, Esquire, 

White & Williams 

457 Haddonfield Road, Suite 400 

Cherry Hill, NJ 08002 

Attorney for Defendant Donald Murphy 

Charles S. Becker, Esquire 

Reed Smith, LLP 

136 Main Street, Suite 250 

Princeton, NJ 08540 

Attorney for Defendant
No. 54553.

#### Cosmos Shipping Company, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 153942-K (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

An examination of the record disclosing nothing that-would warrant the court in sustaining the plaintiff’s claim, the protest was. overruled.
Exhibit 32(i)

                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 on Form 10-QSB/A of Dialog Group,
Inc. (the "Company") for the quarter ended September 30, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, Peter V. DeCrescenzo, the Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, that:

      (1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or15(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.

Dated: November 25, 2005                /s/ Peter V. DeCrescenzo
                                        -----------------------------
                                        Peter V. DeCrescenzo, CEO
# C_2018104EN.01000901.xml

| 19.3.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 104/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.3.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 104/9

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 25 January 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof) — Maximilian Schrems v Facebook Ireland Limited

(Case C-498/16) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Area of freedom, security and justice - Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 - Articles 15 and 16 - Jurisdiction in respect of consumer contracts - Definition of ‘consumer’ - Assignment between consumers of claims against the same trader or professional))

(2018/C 104/09)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Oberster Gerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Maximilian Schrems

Applicant:

Defendant: Facebook Ireland Limited

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | Article 15 of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as meaning that the activities of publishing books, lecturing, operating websites, fundraising and being assigned the claims of numerous consumers for the purpose of their enforcement do not entail the loss of a private Facebook account user’s status as a ‘consumer’ within the meaning of that article. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Article 15 of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as meaning that the activities of publishing books, lecturing, operating websites, fundraising and being assigned the claims of numerous consumers for the purpose of their enforcement do not entail the loss of a private Facebook account user’s status as a ‘consumer’ within the meaning of that article.

| 2. | Article 16(1) of Regulation No 44/2001 must be interpreted as meaning that it does not apply to the proceedings brought by a consumer for the purpose of asserting, in the courts of the place where he is domiciled, not only his own claims, but also claims assigned by other consumers domiciled in the same Member State, in other Member States or in non-member countries. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Article 16(1) of Regulation No 44/2001 must be interpreted as meaning that it does not apply to the proceedings brought by a consumer for the purpose of asserting, in the courts of the place where he is domiciled, not only his own claims, but also claims assigned by other consumers domiciled in the same Member State, in other Member States or in non-member countries.

---

(1)  OJ C 441, 28.11.2016.

1

---