alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : CRIMINAL ACTION

:

v. :

:

AQUIL LOTT : NO. 04-786

ORDER

AND NOW, this 19th day of January, 2012, for the

reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum, it is hereby

ORDERED that:

(1) the motion of defendant "for reconsideration of

sentence pursuant to Title 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)" (Doc. #72) and

supplemental motion of defendant for reduction of his sentence

(Doc. #76) are GRANTED to the extent that he seeks a reduction of

three months on his term of imprisonment for Counts I and III. 

Defendant's sentence is reduced to 100 months' imprisonment on

Counts I and III plus a consecutive term of 60 months'

imprisonment on Count II for a total sentence of 160 months'

imprisonment. All other terms and conditions of the original

sentence shall remain unchanged; and

(2) the motions are otherwise DENIED. 

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Harvey Bartle III 

J.

Case 2:04-cr-00786-HB Document 82 Filed 01/19/12 Page 1 of 1
H. Res. 780 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

March 15, 2018. 

Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall 

be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 4061) to 

amend the Financial Stability Act of 2010 to improve the 

transparency of the Financial Stability Oversight Council, to 

improve the SIFI designation process, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are 

waived. An amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 115–64, modified by the amendment printed in part A of the report of the 

Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, shall be 

considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, 

as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening 

motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and 

controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the 
2 

•HRES 780 EH 

Committee on Financial Services; and (2) one motion to recommit with or without instructions. 

SEC. 2. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 

order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 4293) to reform 

the Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review process, the 

Dodd-Frank Act Stress Test process, and for other purposes. 

All points of order against consideration of the bill are 

waived. In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Financial Services 

now printed in the bill, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 115– 

63, modified by the amendment printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, 

shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be 

considered as read. All points of order against provisions in 

the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall 

be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any 

further amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided 

and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of 
3 

•HRES 780 EH 

the Committee on Financial Services; and (2) one motion to 

recommit with or without instructions. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
Bulletin No. 2021-05

Retention: December 31, 2021

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 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, 2021, through December 31, 2021,

is 1 percent. This rate reflects the average investment rates for the 12-month

period ending September 30, 2020.

4. Application

Federal agencies are to apply the CVFR percentage when:

Assessing interest charges for outstanding debts owed the government

Page 1 of 2
(See 31 U.S.C. § 3717),

Evaluating the cost-effectiveness of a cash discount, see The Prompt

Payment website, and

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

offered by the card issuer. (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 TFM Volume I, Bulletin No. 2020-06.

6. Effective Date

This bulletin is effective on January 1, 2021.

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

Date: November 19, 2020

Page 2 of 2
---

CERTIFICATIONS

The undersigned, Ross J. Tocher, hereby certifies, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

|(1) | the annual report on Form 20-F/A of Qwick Media Inc. for
      the year ended December 31, 2013 (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 Qwick Media Inc.                                                                 



Dated: September 19, 2014

| | /s/
      Ross J. Tocher             
| | -------------------------------------
| | Ross J. Tocher                       
| | President and Chief Executive Officer
| | (Principal Executive Officer)        

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 required by Section 906, has been provided to Qwick Media Inc.
and will be retained by Qwick Media Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
No. 66275.

#### Juillard Fancy Foods Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 58/18277, etc. (San Francisco).

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of fried herring or fish cakes similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Richter Bros., Inc.*v. *United States*(44 C.C.P.A. 128, C.A.D. 649), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
EXHIBIT 13.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 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 of Alto Palermo Sociedad
Anónima (the company) for the year ended June 30, 2006 as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Alejandro G. Elsztain, as Chief Executive Officer of the company,
hereby certifies, 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 and 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/ ALEJANDRO G. ELSZTAIN
|By: |  | Alejandro G. Elsztain    
|    |  | Chief Executive Officer  
|    | 
|    |  | December 30, 2008        

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 and shall not, except as to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
### IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 16

- 00263

- CV

ANDREW HUSBAND

, Appellant

v.

ZEKES TRUCKING CO. I NC., AND KELLY DARSE Y

, Appellee

From the County Court at Law

Walker County, Texas

Trial Court No. 12308CV

F I N A L O RDER

No brief has been filed for Appellant.

Pursuant to Rules 38.8(a)(1) and 42.3 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure,

appellant is notified that the Court will dismiss this appeal, without further notification,

for want of prosecution unless, within 21 days of the date of this Order, appellant files

appellant’s brief.

This Court has already extended the due date for the brief f a r longer than the time

period contemplated by the rules. Moreover, a ppellant only responded with a motionHusband v. Zekes Trucking Co. Inc. Page 2

for extension of time to file the brief when notified the brief was late. The brief is late,

again. No furthe r extensions will be granted.

PER CURIAM

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins

Order issued and filed April 5 , 2017
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT

MICHAEL ANDRE JACKSON, ) a/k/a MICHAEL A. JACKSON, JR., ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D18-101 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ) Opinion filed December 14, 2018. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Polk County; Wayne M. Durden, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Richard Sanders, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Donna S. Koch, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

LaROSE, C.J., and VILLANTI and SLEET, JJ., Concur.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-10908

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JUAN ROMERO-CAMACHO,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 6:10-CR-15-1

Before DAVIS, SMITH and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

*

Juan Romero-Camacho pleaded guilty to unlawful reentry and was

sentenced to 37 months in prison, at the bottom of the advisory guidelines range

of 37 to 46 months. On appeal, he argues that the district court gave inadequate

reasons for rejecting his nonfrivolous arguments for a sentence below the

guidelines range. Finding no reversible error, we affirm.

As a threshold matter, we conclude that Romero-Camacho’s general

objection to procedural and substantive reasonableness, which was tied

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

April 12, 2011

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: 10-10908 Document: 00511442449 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/12/2011
No. 10-10908

specifically to the grounds he raised for a nonguidelines variance, did not

preserve his specific challenge to the adequacy of the district court’s reasons for

the sentence. See United States v. Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d 357, 361 (5th

2009). Thus, we review only for plain error. See id.

To demonstrate reversible plain error, Romero-Camacho must identify an

error that is clear or obvious and that affects substantial rights. See id.; Puckett

v. United States, 129 S. Ct. 1423, 1429 (2009). Even if he makes that showing,

this court will not exercise its discretion to correct the error unless it “seriously

affect[s] the fairness, integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings.”

Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d at 361 (internal quotation marks and citation

omitted).

Prior to imposing sentence, the district court had Romero-Camacho’s

sentencing memorandum and the presentence report before it. Further, the

court heard Romero-Camacho’s arguments for a sentence below the range as

well as the Government’s counter-arguments. The court then imposed a

sentence at the bottom of the range, stating that the sentence adequately

addressed the objectives of punishment and deterrence. Although the court

could have given more explanation, we cannot say that its reasons were

insufficient in light of the record. See Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 358-59

(2007); United States v. Rodriguez, 523 F.3d 519, 525-26 (5th Cir. 2008). There

was no error, and certainly no clear or obvious error. Further, Romero-Camacho

has not demonstrated that the lack of additional reasons affected his substantial

rights, that is, he has not shown that further explanation would have resulted

in a lesser sentence. See Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d at 364-65.

For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the district court is

AFFIRMED.

2

Case: 10-10908 Document: 00511442449 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/12/2011
# C_2016314EN.01001301.xml

| 29.8.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 314/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.8.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 314/13

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Højesteret (Denmark) lodged on 6 July 2016 — Port of Assens v Navigators Management (UK) Limited

(Case C-368/16)

(2016/C 314/18)

Language of the case: Danish

Referring court

Referring court

Højesteret

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Port of Assens

Applicant:

Defendant: Navigators Management (UK) Limited

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Must Article 13.5, read in conjunction with Article 14.2(a), of the Regulation on Jurisdiction (Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 (1) of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters) be interpreted as meaning that an injured party who is permitted under national law to bring an action directly against the company providing insurance cover for the party which caused the injury is bound by an agreement on jurisdiction validly concluded between the insurer and the policy-holder in accordance with Article 13.5, read in conjunction with Article 14.2(a), of the Regulation on Jurisdiction?

1

---

(1)  OJ 2001 L 12, p. 1.

1

---
p. 1 

# OAR Box 1802 Prepped by Charmelle Mathews



### Document

Number: 

# 11 ) I V-E-0 6 Docket Number: 

# A-90-3 7

Printed 11/4/2008 11:57:59 AM

Sheet 11 of 117P. 2 

# -3 7 

# 0 6 Februar y 6,199 7 MEMORANDU

M SUBJECT : FROM : TO : Attendanc e a t Worksho p Sponsored by th e America n Fores t & Pape r Associatio n (AF&PA) on Februar

y 4,1997 . r ^ J7\ /) Da n J . deRoeck , Environmenta l Enginee r (MD-12 ) 7_JT^ZJ Informatio n Transfe

r & Progra mIntegratio n Division , OAQP S Ai r Docke t No . A-90-3 7 t ;*!^-:-/0_ '

O n Februar y 4,1997, 1 attende d a

n industr y worksho p entitle d "Environmenta

l Challenges : Wha

t s New i n th e Woo d Product s Industry? " sponsore d b y th e AF&P A Th e 3SH P T-T

T^ ^ ^ b Y PerS ° n S re P resentin 8 th e pape r product s industry , but

als o include d individual s fromStat e and loca l agencie s an

d th e U.S . Environmenta

l Protectio n Agenc y (EPA) . The purpos e o f

m y attendanc e wa s to serv e a s aspeake r durin g a45-minut

e sessio n concernin g th e EPA' s propose d NS R Refor mrulemaking . Specifically , I summarized the ke y area s covered by th e proposa l and discusse d i n mor

e detai l th e propose d change s to the requirement s fo

r protectio n o f

Clas s I area s unde

r th e progra mfo r preventio n o f

significan t deterioration . Afte

r th e presentation , I answered severa l question s o f

aclarifying natur

e an d responde d to severa

l comment s critica

l o f th e proposa

l itself .

FE B 

### l 5 199 7 EP A AI R DOCKE T (,

.01
# C_2018427EN.01004102.xml

| 26.11.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 427/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.11.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 427/41

---

Judgment of the General Court of 4 October 2018 — Paice v EUIPO — Blackmore (DEEP PURPLE)

(Case T-328/16) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark DEEP PURPLE - Earlier non-registered mark DEEP PURPLE - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(4) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)) - Rules governing common-law action for passing-off - No likelihood of misrepresentation)

(2018/C 427/51)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Ian Paice (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: M. Engelman, Barrister, and J. Stephenson, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: D. Gája and D. Walicka, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Richard Hugh Blackmore (New York, New York, United States) (represented by: initially A. Edwards-Stuart, and subsequently T. Alkin, Barristers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 March 2016 (Case R 736/2015-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Mr Paice and Mr Blackmore.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Mr Ian Paice to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Ian Paice to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 305, 22.8.2016.

---
ex10_2.htm


    Exhibit
10.2

    


    FOURTH
AMENDMENT

    TO
THE

    DOLLAR
TREE, INC.

    2004
EXECUTIVE OFFICER EQUITY  PLAN

    


    


    THIS
FOURTH AMENDMENT (this “Amendment”) to the Dollar Tree, Inc. 2004 Executive
Officer Equity Plan (the “Plan”) is made as of the 13th day of March, 2008 by
Dollar Tree, Inc. (the “Company”).  All capitalized terms in this
Amendment not otherwise defined shall have their respective meanings under the
Plan.

    


    WHEREAS,
the Company wishes to amend the Plan to increase the number of shares which may
be granted under the Plan.

    


    NOW,
THEREFORE, the Company hereby adopts this Amendment upon the following terms and
conditions effective immediately upon approval of the shareholders of the
Company:

    


    1.           Section
4.2(b) shall be amended and restated in its entirety as follows:

    


    Subject
to the following provisions of this Section 4.2, the maximum number of shares of
Stock that may be delivered to Participants and their beneficiaries under the
Plan shall be equal to two million (2,000,000) shares of Stock.

    


    2.           This
Amendment shall become effective upon approval by the shareholders of the
Company.

     

    3.           Except
as modified hereby, the Plan shall continue in full force and
effect.

     

    WITNESS
the signature of the undersigned officer of Dollar Tree, Inc.

    


    


    DOLLAR
TREE, INC.

    


    


    By:_/s/ Bob
Sasser__________

       
Name:  Bob Sasser

    Title:  President
& CEO

    Date:  June
19, 2008
EXHIBIT 13.2



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 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 of Alto
Palermo S.A. (APSA) (the Company) for the year ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Alejandro G. Elsztain, as Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, hereby certifies, 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 and 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/ GABRIEL BLASI        
|Gabriel Blasi            
|Chief Financial Officer  
|Alto Palermo S.A.        
|Dated: December 23, 2005.



This certification accompanies the
Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except as to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities and Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended.
**Exhibit 15.2**

May 24, 2010 

Securities and ExchangeCommission 

100 F Street N.E. 

Washington, D.C. 20549 

We have been furnishedwith a copy of the response to Item 16F of Form 20-F for the event that occurred on November 10, 2009, to be filed by América Móvil, S.A.B. de C.V., the parent company of our former client, TracFone Wireless, Inc. We agreewith the statements made in response to that Item insofar as they relate to our Firm. 

Very truly yours, 

/s/ BDO Seidman, LLP
Case 2:04-cv-05510-JS   Document 79   Filed 02/26/07   Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 99.1

          Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted

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

     I, Steven A. Whitten, the Chief Executive Officer of FullCircle Registry,
Inc. (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my knowledge:

(1)      the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the Company 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 Company.




Dated: April 14, 2003



                                                           /s/ Steven A. Whitten
                                           -------------------------------------
                                                         Name: Steven A. Whitten
                                                  Title: Chief Executive Officer
# January 2023