alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Supreme Court

In the Matter of Matthew Jeffrey Lester, Respondent.
Appellate Case No. 2016-000535

Opinion No. 27661 Submitted August 9, 2016 – Filed August 24, 2016

DISBARRED

Lesley M. Coggiola, Disciplinary Counsel, and Sabrina C. Todd, Assistant Disciplinary Counsel, both of Columbia, for Office of Disciplinary Counsel.

Matthew Jeffrey Lester, Pro Se

.

PER CURIAM: By order of the Superior Court of Wake County, North Carolina dated October 3, 2013, respondent was disbarred from the practice of law in North Carolina. 1 The order was forwarded to this Court by the Office of Discip linary Counsel (ODC) on March 11, 2016. T hereafter, pursuant to Rule 29(b) of the Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enfo rcement, Rule 413, SCACR, ODC and respondent were notified by letter of the Clerk of this Court t hat they had thirty days to inform the Court of any claim that imposition of the id entical discipline in

1 The order is a Consent Order of D isbarment that states respond ent resigned from the North Carolina State Bar in light of a pending investigation into mis appropriation of client funds. The order further states respondent acknowledged the material facts upon which the investigation was predicated were true and that he could not successfully defend against disciplinary charges if brought. The order concluded that by misappropriating client f unds, respondent violated Rule 8.4 of the North Carolina Rules of Professional Conduct and the conduct constituted grounds for discipline. Finally, the order concluded respondent had engage d in professional misconduct warranting disbarment. Accordi ngly, respondent was disbarred f rom the practice of law in North Carolina.South Carolina is not warranted a nd the reasons for any such cl aim. 2 ODC submitted a letter stating it has no information that would ind icate imposition of identical discipline against re spondent in South Carolina is no t warranted. Respondent did not respond to the Clerk's letter.

We find disbarment is the appropr iate sanction to impose as rec iprocal discipline, as none of the reasons set forth in Rule 29(d) of the Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement for the imposition of different discipline exists i n this matter.

DISBARRED.

PLEICONES, C.J., BEATTY, KITTRED GE, HEARN and FEW, JJ., concur.

2 This letter was mailed to the tw o most recent addresses respon dent provided in the Attorney Information System (AIS), both in North Carolina. ODC also att empted to contact respondent using the email address he provi ded in AIS but r eceived no resp onse.
FILEDlN WR-82, 103-01

COURT OF CrTmINALAPPEALS C0URT 0F ^'^T^TEXa!

January 2 2015 Transmitted 1/2/2015 1:22:04 PM

Accepted 1/2/2015 1:25:16 PM

ABEL ACOSTA, CLERK TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ABEL A5°fIA

CLERK

WR-82, 103-01

Ex Parte

On Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus

Cause Number 1300886 in the

337th District Court from Harris County -+"0

Christopher Dowden C^^^ s

Applicant's Motion To Extend Time

To File Brief

To The HonorableJudges Of The Court Of Criminal Appeals:

Comes Now, Christopher Dowden, and files this his Motion to Extend Time to

File Brief, and in support thereof, would respectfully show the Court the following:

I.

This Court ordered briefing in this case from both parties to be due on December 30,

2014. No previous extensions have been requested.

II.

Applicant's attorney requests this extension because in this past month, counsel has

suffered a very unpleasant and lingering virus and counsel's child has also been ill,

which has disrupted counsel's work schedule in addition to holiday obligations and

counsel's work on many cases including a trial setting on December 23, 2014. Counsel

has also been working on the following matters:

• InreKC, Juvenile Trial Court No. 2012-04759J

• CraigBeal, 01-12-00896-CR

• Abner Washington, 01-14-00885-CR

• ForestPenton, 14-14-00406-CR

• Rodney Robins, 01-14-00582-CR

• Hugo Pachas-Luna, 01-14-00516-CR, et. seq.
III.

Appellee's attorney requests this extension of 30 days, which is necessary so that the

brief can be thoroughly written and timely filed. This motion is not made for the

purpose of delay.

PRAYER

Wherefore, Premises Considered, Applicant prays that this Honorable Court

grants this requested extension of time to file the brief in the above cause and extend

the time for filing to January 30, 2015.

Respectfully submitted,

Alexander Bunin

Chief Public Defender

Harris County, Texas

/ S/ c^a^aA Z/. 6%/a&a

Sarah V. Wood

Assistant Public Defender

Harris County, Texas

Texas Bar Number 24048898

1201 Franklin, 13th Floor

Houston Texas 77002

713.368.0016 (phone)

713.368.9278 (fax)

Sarah.Wood@pdo.hctx.net

Certificate of Service

By my signature below, I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the above and

foregoing Appellee's Motion to Extend Time to File Brief has been served on Roe

Wilson, Assistant District Attorney of Harris County, Texas via the electronic e-file

system.

Sarah V. Wood
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

CONSENTOF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

 

We consent to the incorporationby reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (File No. 333-111412)and on Form S-8 (File No. 333-101490), of our reports dated March 14, 2005,relating to the financial statements of General Maritime Corporation, andmanagement’s report on the effectiveness of internal control over financialreporting appearing in and incorporated by reference in the Annual Report onForm 10-K of General Maritime Corporation for the year ended December 31,2004.

 
| /s/ DELOITTE  & TOUCHE LLP |   |
|--------------------------------|--------|
|                           |
| New York, New York             |
| March 15, 2005            |

 

----
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ROBERT GUY BAKER, Petitioner - Appellant,
v. MATTHEW C. KRAMER, Respondent - Appellee. No. 11-15004D.C. No. 2:07-cv-01170-JAMJFM
MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California John A. Mendez, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted November 4, 2013 San Francisco, California Before: REINHARDT, NOONAN, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges. Petitioner Robert Baker seeks habeas relief on the ground that the admission of Lopez’s in-court identification violated his due process rights. Baker procedurally defaulted this claim in stat e court, and he must therefore show cause and prejudice to excuse the default. He attempts to do so by asserting a claim of 

# FILED
NOV 27 2013 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.ineffective assistance of counsel, whic h requires him to show both deficient performance by counsel and resulting prejudice. Strickland v. Washington , 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984). On direct appeal, the California Court of Appeal held that, even if Baker’s counsel rendered defi cient performance, Baker has not shown prejudice. We cannot say that the state court’s no-prejudice determination represents an unreasonable application of Strickland
. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1); Walker v. Martel , 709 F.3d 925, 944 (9th Cir. 2013). The prosecutor expressly told the jury during closing arguments not to rely on Lopez’s in-court identification because it was unreliable. Moreover, the jury h eard testimony from three other witnesses who directly or by implication identified Baker as the shooter, which was sufficient standing alone to support Baker’s conviction. To be sure, the credibility of each of these witnesses was challenged at trial. But the California Court of Appeal could reasonably conclude that Lopez’s in-court identification was not the differencemaker in this case. AFFIRMED.

-2-
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 Virage Logic Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Adam Kablanian, President and 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 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/ Adam A. Kablanian

Adam A. Kablanian
President and Chief Executive Officer
February 13, 2004
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS

Appeal of - )

)

First National Company ) ASBCA No. 63025

)

Under Contract No. W56KGZ-17-A-8005 )

APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT: Brian T. McLaughlin, Esq.

 Crowell & Moring LLP

 Washington, DC

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: Scott N. Flesch, Esq.

 Army Chief Trial Attorney

MAJ Jason C. Coffey, JA

CPT Ethan S. Chae, JA

Dana J. Chase, Esq.

CPT Camille J Grathwohl, JA

MAJ Heather M. Martin

 Trial Attorneys

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

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

Dated: October 13, 2022

KENNETH D. WOODROW

Administrative Judge

Armed Services Board

of Contract Appeals
2

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

Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA No. 63025, Appeal of First 

National Company, rendered in conformance with the Board’s Charter.

Dated: October 13, 2022

PAULLA K. GATES-LEWIS

Recorder, Armed Services

Board of Contract Appeals
# C_2017112EN.01001403.xml

| 10.4.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 112/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.4.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 112/14

---

Appeal brought on 1 December 2016 by Anikó Pint against the order of the General Court (First Chamber) of 14 November 2016 in Case T-660/16 Anikó Pint v European Commission

(Case C-625/16 P)

(2017/C 112/22)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Anikó Pint (represented by: D. Lazar, Rechtsanwalt)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Other party to the proceedings:

By order of 2 March 2017, the Court of Justice of the European Union (Eighth Chamber) dismissed the appeal and ordered the appellant to bear her own costs.

---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : CRIMINAL ACTION

:

v. :

:

FERNANDO GARCIA : NO. 04-662-1

ORDER

AND NOW, this 10th day of January, 2012, for the

reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum, it is hereby

ORDERED that:

(1) the petition of Fernando Garcia for relief under

28 U.S.C. § 2255 (improperly characterized as a writ of audita

querela) (Doc. #126) is DENIED;

(2) a certificate of appealability is not issued; and

(3) the motion of Fernando Garcia for appointment of

counsel (Doc. #127) is DENIED.

BY THE COURT:

 /s/ Harvey Bartle III 

 J.
Document

Exhibit 10.35

FIRST AMENDMENT
TO THE
Wolverine World Wide, Inc.
Deferred Compensation Plan




This is an Amendment made this 29th day of December, 2020, by Wolverine World Wide, Inc. ("Wolverine").


W I T N E S S E T H :


WHEREAS, Wolverine amended and restated the Wolverine World Wide, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan ("plan") effective as of February 7, 2018; and 


WHEREAS, the plan gives Wolverine the discretion to delay payments not deductible due to Code Section 162(m); and


WHEREAS, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (“Act”) amended Code Section 162(m) to eliminate the deductibility of certain compensation that could lead to an indefinite delay of plan payments; and


WHEREAS, the Proposed Treasury Regulations published on December 20, 2019, to implement the Act permit the plan to be amended this year to remove any provision allowing for a delay due to non-deductibility under Code Section 162(m);


WHEREAS, Article 9 empowers Wolverine to amend the plan;


NOW, THEREFORE, Wolverine amends the plan, effective immediately, to remove Section 7.10 (Code Section 162(m)).


Except as herein amended, Wolverine ratifies the plan.


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Wolverine has caused this instrument to be executed by a proper officer the day and year first above written.




			
	WOLVERINE WORLD WIDE, INC.





	By: /s/ David A. Latchana
	Title: Assoc. Gen. Counsel and Asst. Secretary
# L_2022105EN.01006601.xml

| 4.4.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 105/66 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.4.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 105/66

---

Corrigendum to Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/427 of 15 March 2022 implementing Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 87 I of 15 March 2022
  )

On page 4, in entry 881, under the column ‘Identifying information’:

for:

‘DOB: 3.10.1948
  ’,

read:

‘DOB: 13.10.1948
  ’.

---
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 June 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: August 14, 2003 |  |  |  | /s/    ROBERT P.
BRACE                             
|--------------------- |  |  |  | ---------------------------------------------------
|                      |  |  |  | Robert P. Brace Chairman of the Board and President



54
# C_2015302EN.01006101.xml

| 14.9.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 302/61 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.9.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 302/61

---

Action brought on 30 June 2015 — Modas Cristal v OHIM — Zorlu Tekstil Ürünleri Pazarlama (KRISTAL)

(Case T-345/15)

(2015/C 302/76)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Modas Cristal, SL (Santa Lucía, Spain) (represented by: E. Manresa Medina, 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: Zorlu Tekstil Ürünleri Pazarlama Anonim Sirketi (Denizli, Turkey)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Applicant: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Applicant:

Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word element ‘KRISTAL’ — Application for registration No 10 574 473

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Procedure before OHIM

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 24 April 2015 in Case R 341/2014-5

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision on the ground that the use of the Spanish mark No 2 569 089 ‘MODAS CRISTAL’ for services in Class 35 has been demonstrated and that the new Community trade mark application is incompatible with the Spanish marks No 2 569 089 ‘MODAS CRISTAL’, for services in Class 35, and No 2 763 821 ‘home CRISTAL’, for goods in Class 24; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision on the ground that the use of the Spanish mark No 2 569 089 ‘MODAS CRISTAL’ for services in Class 35 has been demonstrated and that the new Community trade mark application is incompatible with the Spanish marks No 2 569 089 ‘MODAS CRISTAL’, for services in Class 35, and No 2 763 821 ‘home CRISTAL’, for goods in Class 24;

| — | order OHIM and any interveners supporting it to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order OHIM and any interveners supporting it to pay the costs.

Plea in law

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.

---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

: CIVIL ACTION NOS.

:

TODD : 02-3885

WINDING : 02-3894

HEDSTROM, et al. : 02-3908

GONZALEZ, et al. : 02-3915

GOMEZ, et al. : 02-3941

MATUSZAK, et al. : 02-3944

BICK : 02-4109

ROGERS : 02-4122

ALLEN : 02-4124

BREWER : 02-4132

SHAPIRO : 02-4198

FINCH, et al. : 02-4219

WHITESIDE, et al. : 02-4245

TKACH : 02-4248

RITTHALER, et al. : 02-4263

SCHULEIN, et al. : 02-4264

WONG, et al. : 02-4278

DENTS, et al. : 02-4303

DURAN, et al. : 02-4314

:

VS. :

:

BAYER CORPORATION, et al. :

O R D E R

AND NOW, this day of July, 2002, the Court having been previously

advised that the above action cannot proceed to trial and disposition because of the following

reason:

[ ] - Order staying these proceedings pending disposition of a related

action.

[ ] - Order staying these proceedings pending determination of

arbitration proceedings.

[ ] - Interlocutory appeal filed.

Case 2:02-cv-04278-WY Document 2 Filed 07/10/2002 Page 1 of 2
[ X ] - Other: Case is placed into suspense pending receipt of the Case

Transfer Order from the Judicial Panel on Multi District Litigation

transferring case to District of Minnesota..

It is

ORDERED that the Clerk of Court mark this action closed for statistical purposes and

place the matter in the Civil Suspense File, and it is

FURTHER ORDERED that the Court shall retain jurisdiction; and that the case be

restored to the trial docket when the action is in a status so that it may proceed to final

disposition; this order shall not prejudice the rights of the parties to this litigation.

BY THE COURT:

________________________________________

William H. Yohn, Jr., Judge

Case 2:02-cv-04278-WY Document 2 Filed 07/10/2002 Page 2 of 2
# C_2017151EN.01001301.xml

| 15.5.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 151/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.5.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 151/13

---

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 16 March 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Commissione Tributaria Provinciale di Torino — Italy) — Bimotor SpA v Agenzia delle Entrate — Direzione Provinciale II di Torino

(Case C-211/16) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Value added tax - Principle of fiscal neutrality - National legislation laying down a fixed maximum ceiling limiting the amount of refund or compensation of credit or excess value added tax))

(2017/C 151/17)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Commissione Tributaria Provinciale di Torino

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Bimotor SpA

Applicant:

Defendant: Agenzia delle Entrate — Direzione Provinciale II di Torino

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The first paragraph of Article 183 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, as amended by Council Directive 2010/45/EU of 13 July 2010, must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which limits to a set maximum amount the compensation of certain tax debts by value added tax credits, for each taxation period, to the extent that national law provides in any event the possibility for the taxable person to recover the full value added tax credit within a reasonable period.

---

(1)  OJ C 251, 11.7.2016.

1

---
# C_2016296EN.01002301.xml

| 16.8.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 296/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.8.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 296/23

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Općinski sud u Velikoj Gorici (Croatia) lodged on 15 June 2016 — VG Čistoća d.o.o. v Đuro Vladika, Ljubica Vladika

(Case C-335/16)

(2016/C 296/31)

Language of the case: Croatian

Referring court

Referring court

Općinski sud u Velikoj Gorici

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: VG Čistoća d.o.o.

Applicant:

Defendants: Đuro Vladika, Ljubica Vladika

Defendants:

Question referred

Question referred

How is the fee for the collection and transport of household waste calculated in accordance with EU law? How do Union citizens pay the invoices for the collection and transport of municipal waste, that is, do they pay for the collection and transport of household waste according to the volume of the empty bins or containers, or according to the volume of refuse collected, and is any other item included within the fee?

---
No. 59986.

#### F. W. Woolworth Co. *v.*United States,

protest 242770-K (San Francisco).

*458Opinion by

Oliver, G. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of toys in the form of figures or images of animate objects, wholly or in chief value of metal, having any movable member or part but not having a spring mechanism, and valued at 30 cents or more per pound, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

: CIVIL ACTION NOS.

:

ROCHELLE : 02-3867

MONTGOMERY : 02-3889

HINES : 02-3901

KARI, et al. : 02-3926

HABERMAN : 02-3936

MILEY : 02-3951

FRANCO, et al. : 02-3975

DAVIS : 02-4113

RUSSELL, et al. : 02-4116

HERNANDEZ, et al. : 02-4126

QUILLEN, et al. : 02-4167

SIMMONS, et al. : 02-4174

BIEDERMAN : 02-4194

DRY, et al. : 02-4225

COOK : 02-4237

STEFAN, et al. : 02-4277

WALKER, et al. : 02-4283

DUNCAN, et al. : 02-4301

:

VS. :

:

BAYER CORPORATION, et al. :

O R D E R

AND NOW, this day of July, 2002, the Court having been previously

advised that the above action cannot proceed to trial and disposition because of the following

reason:

[ ] - Order staying these proceedings pending disposition of a related

action.

[ ] - Order staying these proceedings pending determination of

arbitration proceedings.

[ ] - Interlocutory appeal filed.

Case 2:02-cv-04237-SD Document 2 Filed 07/10/2002 Page 1 of 2
[ X ] - Other: Case is placed into suspense pending receipt of the Case

Transfer Order from the Judicial Panel on Multi District Litigation

transferring case to District of Minnesota.

It is

ORDERED that the Clerk of Court mark this action closed for statistical purposes and

place the matter in the Civil Suspense File, and it is

FURTHER ORDERED that the Court shall retain jurisdiction; and that the case be

restored to the trial docket when the action is in a status so that it may proceed to final

disposition; this order shall not prejudice the rights of the parties to this litigation.

BY THE COURT:

________________________________________

Stewart Dalzell, S.J.

Case 2:02-cv-04237-SD Document 2 Filed 07/10/2002 Page 2 of 2
No. 66265.

#### Arnart Imports, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 60/7901 (A) (New York).

*392Opinion by

Oliver, O. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise, identified on the invoice as item 88/19W, consists of perfume trays, composed in chief value of base metal, plated with silver, and used exclusively in the household for holding perfume sets, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.