alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Gasohol Blending OMB No. 1545-1420

(Rev. January 2003)

Schedule 3 Department of the Treasury—Internal Revenue Service

Name as shown on Form 8849

Claimant certifies that it bought gasoline taxed at the full rate and blended it with alcohol to make gasohol. The

gasohol was sold or used in claimant’s trade or business. For each batch of gasohol, claimant has the required

information relating to the purchase of the gasoline and alcohol used to make the gasohol and to support the amount

claimed.

Period of claim: Enter month, day, and year

in MMDDYYYY format.

10% gasohol

7.7% gasohol

(Form 8849)

Total refund (see instructions)

5.7% gasohol

1

2

3

For Privacy Act and Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see Form 8849 instructions. Cat. No. 27451F Schedule 3 (Form 8849) (Rev.1-2003)

 Attach to Form 8849. Do not file with any other schedule.

Gasoline

Alcohol

Gasoline

Alcohol

Gasoline

Alcohol

From  To 

(d)

CRN

357

(d)

CRN

363

(c)

Amount of refund

(b)

Rate

(a)

Gallons

(d)

CRN

356

Instructions

Amount of Refund

Claimant

Claim Requirements

1. The claim must be for gasohol sold or used during a

period that is at least 1 week.

2. The amount of the claim must be at least $200.

3. The claim must be filed by the last day of the first

quarter following the earliest quarter of the claimant’s income

tax year included in the claim. For example, a calendar-year

claimant’s claim for gasohol sold or used during June and

July must be filed by September 30.

Note: If requirements 1–3 above are not met, see Annual

Claims in the Form 8849 instructions.

How To File

(c)

Amount of refund

(b) 

Rate

(c)

Amount of refund

(b)

Rate

(a) 

Gallons

(a) 

Gallons

Purpose of Schedule

Total Refund

.03734

.02804

.02031

The person that produced the gasohol is the only person

eligible to make this claim.

Multiply the number of gallons of gasoline by the rate and

enter the result in the boxes for column (c).

Add all amounts in column (c) and enter the result in the

total refund box at the top of the schedule.

The following requirements must be met:

Attach Schedule 3 to Form 8849. On the envelope write

“Gasohol Claim” and mail to the IRS at the address under

Where To File in the Form 8849 instructions.

A gasohol blender uses Schedule 3 to make a claim for

refund for gasoline used to produce gasohol.

$

$

$

EIN or SSN

$

$

$

$
# C_2017277EN.01003901.xml

| 21.8.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 277/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.8.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 277/39

---

Judgment of the General Court of 4 July 2017 — Pirelli Tyre v EUIPO (A pair of curved strips positioned on the side of a tyre)

(Case T-81/16) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Application for an EU trade mark consisting of a pair of curved strips on the side of a tyre - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - No distinctive character acquired through use - Article 7(3) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 - Article 76 of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2017/C 277/57)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Pirelli Tyre SpA (Milan, Italy) (represented by: T.M. Müller and F. Togo, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: L. Rampini, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 December 2015 (Case R 1019/2015-1) concerning an application for registration of a sign consisting of a pair of curved strips on the side of a tyre as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The General Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Pirelli Tyre SpA to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Pirelli Tyre SpA to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 156, 2.5.2016.

1

---
No. 50331.

#### Protest 61446-K of R. U. Delapenha & Co., Inc. (Boston).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel the court found that the facts herein agreed upon were such as to bring the case within the holding in *John Barr*v. *United States*(11 Cust. Ct. 88, C. D. 801), which record was incorporated herein. (See *John Barr*v. *United States,*324 U. S. 83, decided February 5, 1945.) In accordance therewith it was held that the currency of the invoice should be converted at the buying rate in the New York market at noon on the day of exportation (the “free” rate of exchange for pounds sterling), as certified by the Federal Reserve bank and set forth by the collector on the entry. The protest was sustained to this extent.
Exhibit 32.2
 
 CERTIFICATIONS 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 Ardent Mines Limited on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Luis Feliu, Principal 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, to my knowledge that:
 
 (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
 
 (2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 Date: August 30, 2011


By:
Luis FeliuName:    Luis FeliuTitle:      Principal Financial Officer
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 23


             CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM




We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference into the Registration
Statement on Form S-8 for the Company's 1996 Stock Option Plan and 1996
Recognition and Retention Plan (Registration No. 333-83198) of our report dated
March 16, 2005 relating to the consolidated financial statements of Alpena
Bancshares, Inc. as of December 31, 2004 which appear in this December 31, 2004
Form 10-KSB of Alpena Bancshares, Inc.



/s/ Plante & Moran, PLLC


Auburn Hills, Michigan
March 30, 2005
##### 



Anadys Pharmaceuticals, Inc.  Executive Officer Bonus Plan
 Purpose of the Plan:
  a.
    
    Strengthen the connection between individual compensation and Company success,
enhancing our ability to achieve the Corporate Goals (as determined by our Board of
Directors) and enhance shareholder valueb.
    
    Encourage teamwork among all disciplines within the Companyc.
    
    Reinforce the Companys pay-for-performance philosophy by awarding higher bonuses to
higher performing employeesd.
    
    Help ensure that the Companys overall cash compensation for executive officers is
competitive
 Plan Governance:
  Eligibility:
 st st
 Bonus Awards:




---



##### 



Bonus Opportunity; Weighting Factors:
  100% Bonus
    
    Corporate
    
    IndividualOpportunity
    
    Performance
    
    Performance(as percentage of
    
    Weighting
    
    WeightingPosition
    
    base salary)
    
    Factor
    
    FactorPresident & CEO
    
    
    50
    %
    
    
    90
    %
    
    
    10
    %Sr. VP, Operations & CFO
and
CMO
    
    
    40
    %
    
    
    85
    %
    
    
    15
    %Other Executive Officers
    
    
    30
    %
    
    
    80
    %
    
    
    20
    %
 Performance-Based Multipliers:




---



##### 



Corporate Goal Rating and Individual Performance Category
    
    Multiplier4)
    
    Exceeded expectations performance
    
    100% - 125%
    
    The corporate goal was exceeded in view of
prevailing conditions
    
    Overall individual performance was exceptional
and consistently exceeded expectations3)
    
    Met expectations performance
    
    75%-100%
    
    The corporate goal was achieved in view of
prevailing conditions
    
    Overall individual performance met expectations2)
    
    Met some expectations performance
    
    40%-75%
    
    Some aspects of the corporate goal were achieved
but not all
    
    Overall individual performance met some
expectations but not all1)
    
    Unacceptable performance
    
    0%
    
    The corporate goal was not achieved in view of
prevailing conditions
    
    Overall individual performance was not
acceptable and did not meet expectations
 Calculation of Award:




---



##### 



Example Sample Cash Bonus Award Calculation
 Position
    
    OfficerBase Salary for Plan Year
    
    $
    200,000100% bonus opportunity percentage
    
    
    30
    %100% bonus opportunity amount
    
    $
    60,000
 (ARROW MARK)
    
    (ARROW MARK)
 Corporate Component
$48,000 (100% bonus opportunity * 80%)
    
    Individual Component
$12,000 (100% bonus opportunity * 20%)
 Corporate Performance Rating
    
    70% - as provided by the Compensation CommitteeIndividual Performance Category
    
    3 (multiplier of 90% - estimated)Actual Cash Bonus Award Calculation:Corporate Bonus Award
    
    $33,600 ($48,000 x 70%)Individual Bonus Award
    
    $10,800 ($12,000 x 90%)Total Actual Cash Bonus Award
    
    $44,400
 Absolute Discretion; Companys Absolute Right to Alter or Abolish the Plan:
   Employment Duration/Employment Relationship:
Exhibit 32.2
 WESTERN RESERVE BANCORP, INC.
FORM 10-Q
Quarter ended June 30, 2009
 SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION OF FINANCIAL RESULTS
  
    
    This Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and
 
    
    The information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial position and results of operations of Western Reserve Bancorp, Inc. as of
and for the periods presented.
 /s/
Cynthia A. MahlCynthia A. MahlExecutive Vice President/Chief Financial OfficerAugust 14, 2009
Supreme Court of Florida

____________

No. SC17-873

____________

ROBERT D. MORRIS,

Appellant,

vs.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

[January 26, 2018]

PER CURIAM.

We have for review Robert D. Morris’s appeal of the circuit court’s order 

denying Morris’s motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 

3.851. This Court has jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const. 

Morris’s motion sought relief pursuant to the United States Supreme Court’s 

decision in Hurst v. Florida, 136 S. Ct. 616 (2016), and our decision on remand in 

Hurst v. State (Hurst), 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016), cert. denied, 137 S. Ct. 2161 

(2017). This Court stayed Morris’s appeal pending the disposition of Hitchcock v. 

State, 226 So. 3d 216 (Fla. 2017), cert. denied, 138 S. Ct. 513 (2017). After this 
- 2 -

Court decided Hitchcock, Morris responded to this Court’s order to show cause 

arguing why Hitchcock should not be dispositive in this case.

After reviewing Morris’s response to the order to show cause, as well as the 

State’s arguments in reply, we conclude that Morris is not entitled to relief. Morris

was sentenced to death following a jury’s recommendation for death by a vote of 

eight to four, and his sentence of death became final in May 2002. Morris v. 

State, 811 So. 2d 661, 664 (Fla. 2002). Thus, Hurst does not apply retroactively to 

Morris’s sentence of death. See Hitchcock, 226 So. 3d at 217. Accordingly, we 

affirm the denial of Morris’s motion.

The Court having carefully considered all arguments raised by Morris, we 

caution that any rehearing motion containing reargument will be stricken. It is so 

ordered.

LABARGA, C.J., and QUINCE, POLSTON, and LAWSON, JJ., concur.

PARIENTE, J., concurs in result with an opinion.

LEWIS and CANADY, JJ., concur in result.

PARIENTE, J., concurring in result.

I concur in result because I recognize that this Court’s opinion in Hitchcock 

v. State, 226 So. 3d 216 (Fla. 2017), cert. denied, 138 S. Ct. 513 (2017), is now 

final. However, I continue to adhere to the views expressed in my dissenting 

opinion in Hitchcock.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court in and for Polk County, 

Donald G. Jacobsen, Judge - Case No. 531994CF003961A1XXXX
- 3 -

James Viggiano, Jr., Capital Collateral Regional Counsel, Ann Marie Mirialakis,

and Ali Andrew Shakoor, Assistant Capital Collateral Regional Counsel, Middle 

Region, Temple Terrace, Florida,

for Appellant

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Scott A. Browne, Assistant Attorney 

General, Tampa, Florida,

for Appellee
# C_2017112EN.01001302.xml

| 10.4.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 112/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.4.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 112/13

---

Appeal brought on 7 March 2016 by Juozas Edvardas Petraitis against the order of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 18 December 2015 in Case T-460/15, Petraitis v Commission

Petraitis

Commission

(Case C-137/16 P)

(2017/C 112/19)

Language of the case: Lithuanian

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Juozas Edvardas Petraitis, represented by T. Veščiūnas, advocatas

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Other party to the proceedings:

By order of 24 November 2016, the Court of Justice (Tenth Chamber) dismissed the appeal and ordered Mr Juozas Edvardas Petraitis to bear his own costs.

---
Exhibit 31.2

        Rule 13a-14(a) Certification of the Principal Accounting Officer

I, Robert E. Dolan, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Sunshine PCS
Corporation;

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 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 registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer 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)) for the registrant 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 registrant, 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 registrant'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 registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most
recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant'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 registrant'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 registrant's internal control
over financial reporting.

Date:  March 30, 2007


/s/ Robert E. Dolan
-------------------
Robert E. Dolan
Principal Accounting Officer
Case No. 8,370.

#### LINGAN v. BAYLEY.

[1 Cranch, C. C. 112.] 1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

Dec. Term, 1802.

Bankruptcy — Imprisonment op Bankrupt during Examination.

The court will not commit a bankrupt for want of bail, who has surrendered to the commissioners, and whose examination is not closed, although the forty-two days have expired.

The bail surrendered the defendant, and the plaintiff prayed that he might be committed.

The defendant was declared bankrupt, on the 21$t of August, 1802, .and on the 2d of September he surrendered himself to the commissioners. The examination is not yet closed, although the forty-two days have expired. Bayley has appealed from the decision of the commissioners.

THE COURT

refused to commit the defendant.

Cooper’s Bankr. Law, pp. 175, 343, was cited.
# C_2017300EN.01000901.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-663/16 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 300/11)

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

---
To: 	Kansas City Financial Center  

From: 	_______________________(Approving Official)

Subject: PIR Agency Location Code (ALC) Approvers  

This is to advise that _____________________________________________ has designated the following 

(Non Treasury Disbursed Office name)

individuals to be ALC approvers:  

Having approver status gives the individual the ability to grant other agency user’s access to the agencies ALCs within the PIR application to review payment data related to that ALC. Please note that PIR is secured in accordance with Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002 (FISMA) and other federal laws and regulations for IT systems security that apply.  Access to PIR data is constrained by the Agency Location Code. The ALC is a unique identifier assigned to every agency for reporting receipts and disbursements.

 A PIR user must request and be granted access to view ALC data by an ALC approver. ALC approvers are assigned to each agency and have the responsibility of ensuring that PIR users have a business justification and “need to know” for accessing ALC data. 

Please complete:

Name: ____________________________________________________________

Title: _____________________________________________________________

Signature:____________________________________ Date: ________________

Address: __________________________________________________________

Phone:  ___________________________________________________________

Email Address: _____________________________________________________

Send the completed form to:	Department of the Treasury

	Bureau of the Fiscal Service

Kansas City Financial Center

4241 NE 34th Street

Kansas City, MO  64117

# image1.jpeg
---

CERTIFICATION OFCHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICERPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002

I, Paul G. Daly, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer of Infitech Ventures Inc. (the Company), hereby 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:

| | (i)  | the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company, for the
      fiscal year ended July 31, 2011, and to which this certification is
      attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the Report) fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
      1934, as amended; and
| | ---- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |      |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  
| | (ii) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.                                                                                                                                                 



| | By:    | /s/
      Paul G. Daly     
| | ------ | ---------------------------
| |        |                            
| | Name:  | PAUL G. DALY               
| |        |                            
| | Title: | Chief Executive Officer and
| |        | Chief Financial Officer    
| |        |                            
| | Date:  | October 28, 2011           



A signed original of this written statement required by
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 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.

This certification accompanies the Form 10-K to which it
relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is
not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the
Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made
before or after the date of the Form 10-K), irrespective of any general
incorporation language contained in such filing.

---