alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## tS^L courtofappeals Sixth District „ ,ftic SIXTHAPPELLATE DISTRICT NOV 3 0 2015 STATE OF TEXAS Texarksna, Texas * * Dabra Autrey, Clerk RE: APPELLATE CASE NUMBER: 06-15-00006-CV TRIAL COURT CASE NUMBER: 2013-392 

### STYLE: BILLIE MURPHYTREMBLE, SHARON TREMBLE DONALDSON, SELIA TREMBLE SHAWKEY, WILMER FORREST TREMBLE, JR., 

### THE ESTATE OF WILMER FORRESTTREMBLE, SRV Appellants,
Vs. LUMINANT MINING COMPANY LLC, ENERGY FUTURE HOLDINGS 

### CORPORATION, AND SUBSIDIARIES, Appellees. TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: In response to the court date of October 27, 2015, we the Tremble 

### Familyare asking the court to reinstate the Appeal on our behalfin reference to the NoSummary Judgment.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
financial statements included in this report and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                         144,676
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,731,271
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (370,000)
<INVENTORY>                                  3,954,563
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,762,138
<PP&E>                                         490,113
<DEPRECIATION>                               (198,016)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,366,628
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,527,738
<BONDS>                                         20,541
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           422
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,485,678
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,366,628
<SALES>                                      4,596,705
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,596,705
<CGS>                                        3,067,305
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,067,305
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,977,230
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                20,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             120,736
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (541,236)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (541,236)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (541,236)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.13)


</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 13.2

                                 CERTIFICATION

           PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
(SUBSECTIONS (A) AND (B) OF SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES
                                     CODE)

     Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a)
and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the
undersigned officer of Allianz Aktiengesellschaft, a German company (the
"Company"), hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that:

     The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2003 (the
"Report") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.

Date: July 15, 2004

                                          /s/ HELMUT PERLET
                                          --------------------------------------
                                          Dr. Helmut Perlet
                                          Chief Financial Officer
Federal Depository Library ProgramPersistent URL Home Page      

# Target for /GPO/LPS4696 lost

The target resource for this PURL can no longer be traced. The following is a list of the targets this PURL was previously assigned to.

Powered by the Federal Depository Library Program.                A service of the U.S. Government Publishing Office.
Bulletin No. 2020-06

Retention: December 31, 2020

To: Heads of Government Departments, Agencies and Others Concerned

Subject: Current Value of Funds Rate (CVFR)

1. Purpose

The Secretary of the Treasury is responsible for computing and publishing the rate that is used for federal

debt collection, cash discounts, and rebate evaluation. The Current Value of Funds Rate (CVFR) is a

percentage based on the current value of funds to the Department of the Treasury (Treasury).

2. Background

The CVFR percentage is based on the investment rates for the Treasury Tax and Loan accounts set for

purposes of Public Law 95-147, 91 Stat. 1227 (October 28, 1977).

Treasury annually computes the CVFR percentage by averaging investment rates for the 12-month period

ending on September 30, rounding it to the nearest whole percentage. If the annual average (on a 12-

month moving average basis) changes by 2 percent per quarter, Treasury's Bureau of the Fiscal Service

publishes the presiding rate in the Federal Register and in a Treasury Financial Manual (TFM) bulletin.

Current and previous rates can be obtained from the CVFR website.

3. Percentage Rate Used When Assessing Interest Charges on Outstanding Debts Owed to the

Government, Evaluating the Cost-Effectiveness of Cash Discounts, and Considering Payment Dates

for Purchase Card Invoices

The CVFR percentage for the period January 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020, is 2 percent. This rate

reflects the average investment rates for the 12-month period ending September 30, 2019.

4. Application

Federal agencies are to apply the CVFR percentage when:

Assessing interest charges for outstanding debts owed the government (see 31 U.S.C. § 3717).

Evaluating the cost-effectiveness of a cash discount, see the Prompt Payment website. 

Considering the date to pay purchase card invoices if a rebate is offered by the card issuer

Page 1 of 2
(see 5 CFR Part 1315.8). The Prompt Payment website provides a calculator that

automatically calculates the net savings to the government, enabling the agency to determine

whether it should pay the invoice early or on the Prompt Payment due date.

5. Rescission

This bulletin will rescind the previous bulletin, 2019-04.

6. Effective Date

This bulletin is effective on January 1, 2020.

7. Inquiries

Department of the Treasury

Bureau of the Fiscal Service

Payment Management

E-Commerce Division (LC-RM 349B)

3201 Pennsy Drive, Building E

Landover, MD 20785

Telephone: 202-874-9428

November 22, 2019

Page 2 of 2
Before the Third Division,

January 18, 1951

No. 55147.

#### F. W. Myers & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 158658-K (Ogdensburg).

Opinion by

Cune, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protest.
# C_2015245EN.01003701.xml

| 27.7.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 245/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.7.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 245/37

---

Action brought on 18 May 2015 — Aldi Einkauf v OHIM — Dyado Liben OOD (Casale Fresco)

(Case T-254/15)

(2015/C 245/43)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Aldi Einkauf GmbH & Co. oHG (Essen, Germany) (represented by: N. Lützenrath, U. Rademacher, C. Fürsen and N. Bertram, Lawyers)

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: Dyado Liben OOD (Sofia, Bulgaria)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Applicant/Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Applicant/Proprietor of the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘Casale Fresco’ — Application No 010 886 604

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Procedure before OHIM

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Chamber of the Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11.03.2015 in Case R 1138/2014-4

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.

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.

---
##### 



Exhibit 32.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
ELECTRO-OPTICAL SCIENCES, INC.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  /s/ Joseph V. GulfoJoseph V. GulfoPresident and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)August 10,
2006/s/ Richard I. SteinhartRichard I. SteinhartVice President & Chief Financial Officer(Principal Accounting and Financial Officer)August 10,
2006
 
 *
    
    A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 has been provided to Electro-Optical Sciences, Inc. and will be retained by Electro-Optical
Sciences, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
This written statement accompanies the Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission, and will not be incorporated by reference into any filing of
Electro-Optical Sciences, Inc. under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
No. 53442.

protest 116676-K (San Francisco).

#### Glaser Bros. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

For the reasons stated in *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
**Exhibit      99.12**

**CERTIFICATION        PURSUANT TO**

**18        U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS        ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION        906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

| (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                  Fund. |
|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/                  Robert J. Waters                                                                                                 |   |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Robert                  J. WatersSenior                  Vice President and Chief                  Financial Officer of EnerMark Inc. |   |

*The        foregoing certification shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of Section        18        of the Exchange Act 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 or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the        registrant specifically incorporates it by reference.*
No. P68/189.

protests 59/31726, etc. (Honolulu).

#### Aloha Factors and American Customs Brokerage Co. et al. *v.*United States,

Richardson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of Iso peanuts, peanut crackers, and Japanese rice crackers similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Hilo Rice Mill Co., Ltd., American Customs Brokerage Company et al.*v. *United States*(52 CCPA 106, C.A.D. 866), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. 61262.

protest 300698-K (New York).

#### D. Hauser, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of cat criers similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 37663, except that the merchandise herein is in chief value of paper and not composed of mineral or earthy substances, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
# C_2018072EN.01001101.xml

| 26.2.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 72/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.2.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 72/11

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 20 December 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Københavns Byret — Denmark) — Criminal proceedings against Bent Falbert, Poul Madsen, JP/Politikens Hus A/S

(Case C-255/16) (1)

1

((References for a preliminary ruling - Information procedure in the field of technical rules and regulations - National legislation clarifying or introducing a prohibition on unauthorised offering of gaming, lotteries and betting and introducing a prohibition on unauthorised offering of advertising for gaming, lotteries and betting))

(2018/C 072/13)

Language of the case: Danish

Referring court

Referring court

Københavns Byret

Party/parties in the main proceedings

Party/parties in the main proceedings

Bent Falbert, Poul Madsen, JP/Politikens Hus A/S

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 1 of Directive 98/34/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations and of rules on Information Society services, as amended by Directive 98/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 July 1998, must be interpreted as meaning that a national provision such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which provides for criminal sanctions where an unauthorised offer is made of gaming, lotteries or betting on the national territory, does not constitute a technical regulation within the meaning of that provision, subject to the notification obligation under Article 8(1) of that directive. However, a national provision such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which provides for sanctions in the event of advertising for unauthorised gaming, lotteries or betting, does constitute a technical regulation within the meaning of that provision, subject to the notification obligation under Article 8(1) of that directive, as it is clear from the travaux préparatoires for that provision of national law that its object and purpose was to extend a pre-existing prohibition on advertising to cover online gaming services, which it is for the national court to determine.

---

(1)  OJ C 251, 11.7.2016.

1

---
# C_2016211EN.01003002.xml

| 13.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 211/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 211/30

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Den Haag (Nederland) lodged on 21 March 2016 — Christian Louboutin, Christian Louboutin SAS v Van Haren Schoenen BV

(Case C-163/16)

(2016/C 211/39)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Rechtbank Den Haag

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Christian Louboutin, Christian Louboutin SAS

Defendant: Van Haren Schoenen BV

Question referred

Is the notion of ‘shape’ within the meaning of Article 3(1)(e)(iii) of Directive 2008/95/EC (1) (‘Form’, ‘vorm’ and ‘forme’ in the German, Dutch and French language versions of the Trade Marks Directive respectively) limited to the three-dimensional properties of the goods, such as their contours, measurements and volume (expressed three-dimensionally), or does it include other (non three-dimensional) properties of the goods, such as their colour?

---

(1)  Directive 2008/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2008 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks (Codified version) (OJ 2008 L 299, p. 25).

---
Exhibit 32.01

                            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 Montgomery Realty Group, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending September 30, 2004, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Dinesh Maniar, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge
and belief:

         (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/ Dinesh Maniar
-----------------------------
Dinesh Maniar
Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer
November 15, 2004

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
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.
February 25, 2015

Zachanah WilliamsTDCJ No.1883415

Middleton Unit

13055 FM 3522

Abilene, Tx. 79601

RE: Court of Appeals Number: 05-13-0 1479-CR

Trial Court Case Number: F-1353277-J

Style: Zachariah Arthur WIlliams

V.

The State of Texas

I. The case has been submitted and is pending consideration.

2. The Court of Criminal Appeals has jurisdiction over post—conviction writs and

habeas corpus. Please contact the Court of Criminal Appeals for any forms or

information.

3. The Court has no record of an appeal on file in the above referenced name or trial

court number.

4. Enclosed is a copy of’the opinion in your appeal.

5. This Court does not appoint counsel

6. Neither the judges nor the stafl’of this Court can give legal advice. Therefore, you

may wish to contact your attorney; the trial court; or the State Counsel forOffenders, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, P.O. Box 4005, l-luntsville, TX,77342 for further information or assistance.
briefs that were filed

10. Enclosed please find the copies you requested.II - The cost for the copies you requested is

Respectfully,

/5/ Lisa Matz, Clerk of the Court

7
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

: CIVIL ACTION NOS.

:

ZUCKER : 02-3875

IVY, et al. : 02-3905

HENRY, et al. : 02-3945

BUSH : 02-4140

SIMMONS, et al. : 02-4164

PARTIE, et al. : 02-4247

TKACS : 02-4294

: :

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.

[ 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

Case 2:02-cv-04247-LP Document 3 Filed 07/25/2002 Page 1 of 2
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:

________________________________________

Louis H. Pollak, Judge

Case 2:02-cv-04247-LP Document 3 Filed 07/25/2002 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 23.1 - CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


Heritage Financial Holding Corporation
Decatur, Alabama


     We  hereby  consent  to  the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement No. 333-55942 on Form S-8 of our report dated February 6, 2004, except
for  Note  12,  which  is as of March 9, 2004, relating to the 2003 consolidated
financial  statements of Heritage Financial Holding Corporation and subsidiaries
appearing  in  and  incorporated  by reference in the Company's Annual Report on
Form  10-K  for  the  year  ended  December  31,  2003.


                                                /s/PORTER KEADLE MOORE, LLP


Atlanta,  Georgia
March  29,  2004


<PAGE>
# C_2017300EN.01000902.xml

| 11.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 300/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 300/9

---

Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 19 July 2017 — Lysoform Dr. Hans Rosemann GmbH, Ecolab Deutschland GmbH v European Chemicals Agency

(Case C-666/16 P) (1)

1

((Appeal - Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 - Making available on the market and use of biocidal products - Article 95 - European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) - Publication of a list of active substances - Inclusion of a company as a supplier of an active substance))

(2017/C 300/12)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Appellants: Lysoform Dr. Hans Rosemann GmbH, Ecolab Deutschland GmbH (represented by: M. Grunchard and K. Van Maldegem, avocats, and P. Sellar, Advocate)

Appellants:

Other party to the proceedings: European Chemicals Agency (represented by: M. Heikkilä and C. Buchanan, Agents, and P. Oliver, Barrister)

Other party to the proceedings:

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The appeal is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The appeal is dismissed.

| 2. | Lysoform Dr. Hans Rosemann GmbH and Ecolab Deutschland GmbH shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Lysoform Dr. Hans Rosemann GmbH and Ecolab Deutschland GmbH shall pay the costs.

| 3. | Lysoform Dr. Hans Rosemann GmbH, Ecolab Deutschland GmbH, the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), BASF SE and Oxea GmbH shall each bear their own costs relating to the application for leave to intervene. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Lysoform Dr. Hans Rosemann GmbH, Ecolab Deutschland GmbH, the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), BASF SE and Oxea GmbH shall each bear their own costs relating to the application for leave to intervene.

---

(1)  OJ C 53, 20.2.2017.

1

---