alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

February 19, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 134710(26) Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 134710 

 COA: 273736 

Calhoun CC: 00-023332-FC 

PATRICK GRAHAM MCNAMEE, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s November 

29, 2007 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order 

was entered erroneously. 

d0211 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

February 19, 2008 

 Clerk
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

T.S., a child

,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA
, Appellee

.

No. 4D 18

- 3702

[ August 1, 2019 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County ; Gregory M. Keyser , Judge; L.T. Case No.

502018CJ000552A

.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Patrick B. Burke, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

No appearance for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

W ARNER
, T AYLOR and M AY
, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
<PAGE>
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                               .

                                                                     EXHIBIT 8.1

                             KOREA THRUNET CO., LTD.

            LIST OF SIGNIFICANT SUBSIDIARIES AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2004

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                                    PERCENTAGE OF
                                                                                    OWNERSHIP AND
                                                         JURISDICTION OF         VOTING INTEREST HELD
          NAME                                           INCORPORATION                BY THRUNET
          ----                                           -------------           --------------------
<S>                                                      <C>                     <C>
Korea.com Communications Co., Ltd.                            Korea                    53.47%

Multiplus Limited(1)                                          Korea                    5.00%
</TABLE>

------------
(1)   The operation of Multiplus was included in our consolidated financial
      statements in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
      ("SFAS") No. 140, "Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial
      Assets and Extinguishments of Liabilities" due to the fact that each of
      the transactions with Multiplus, our special purpose entity, did not
      qualify as a true sale, thus the operation of the special purpose entity
      was consolidated under US GAAP.
# C_2007035DE.01005101.xml

| 17.2.2007 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | C 35/51 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.2.2007

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

C 35/51

---

Berichtigung der Information der Verwaltungskommission der Europäischen Gemeinschaften für die soziale Sicherheit der Wanderarbeitnehmer — Währungsumrechnungskurse zur Durchführung der Verordnung (EWG) Nr. 574/72 des Rates

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union C 31 vom 13. Februar 2007
  )

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union C 31 vom 13. Februar 2007

(2007/C 35/08)

Auf Seite 8 erhalten die drei Zeilen nach der Informationsnummer „(2007/C 31/03)“ folgende Fassung:

„Artikel 107 Absätze 1, 2 und 4 der Verordnung (EWG) Nr. 574/72

Bezugszeitraum: Januar 2007

Anwendungszeitraum: April, Mai und Juni 2007“.

---
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GLEN CALDWELL,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2693 RRB GGH PS

vs.

CHAN, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

On March 7, 2006, plaintiff filed a document entitled, “complaint filing on

December 13, 2005 that was disregarded, motion.” This civil rights action was closed on

December 13, 2005. Plaintiff’s filing does not appear to be one contemplated by the Federal

Rules of Civil or Appellate Procedure. Therefore, this document will be placed in the file and

disregarded.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: 3/15/06

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

_____________________________________

GREGORY HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GGH:076

Case 2:04-cv-02693-RRB -GGH Document 24 Filed 03/15/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

Caldwell2693.dsr

Case 2:04-cv-02693-RRB -GGH Document 24 Filed 03/15/06 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 31.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

I,  Thomas  E.  Mills,  certify  that:

1.     I  have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of AMP Productions,
Ltd.;

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

3.     Based  on  my  knowledge,  the  financial statements, and other financial
information  included  in  this  annual  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 annual report;

4.     I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures  (as  defined  in  Exchange  Act  Rules  13a-14  and  15d-14) for the
registrant  and  I  have:

a)     designed  such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is  made  known  to  me by others within those entities, particularly during the
period  in  which  this  annual  report  is  being  prepared;

b)     evaluated  the  effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures  as  of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this annual
report  (the  "Evaluation  Date");  and

c)     presented  in  this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of  the  disclosure  controls  and  procedures  based on my evaluation as of the
Evaluation  Date;

5.     I  have  disclosed,  based  on  our  most  recent  evaluation,  to  the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors
(or  persons  performing  the  equivalent  function):

a)     all  significant  deficiencies  in  the  design  or operation of internal
controls  which  could  adversely  affect  the  registrant's  ability to record,
process,  summarize  and  report  financial  data  and  have  identified for the
registrant's  auditors  any  material  weaknesses  in  internal  controls;  and

b)     any  fraud,  whether  or  not material, that involves management or other
employees  who  have  a  significant role in the registrant's internal controls.

6.     I  have indicated in this quarterly report whether there were significant
changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect
internal controls subsequent to the date of my most recent evaluation, including
any  corrective  actions  with  regard  to significant deficiencies and material
weaknesses.

August  15,  2005

By  /s/  Thomas  E.  Mills
    Thomas  E.  Mills
    President  &  Chief  Financial  Officer
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 07-730 

________________________________________________________________________ 

TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER 

Cooperation 

 Agreement Between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and the RUSSIAN FEDERATION 

Signed at Washington March 21, 2006 

 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
 RUSSIAN FEDERATION 

 Technology Transfer: Cooperation 

Agreement signed at Washington March 21, 2006; 

Entered into force July 30, 2007. 


NOTE: It is noted that the numbering for subsection 9 appears to be out of sequence on this page.

NOTE: It is noted that the numbering for subsection 2 appears to be out of sequence on this page.
NOTE: It is noted that the numbering for subsections 5 and 6 appear to be out of sequence on this page.














NOTE: It is noted that the numbering for subsection 9 appears to be out of sequence on this page and the follo


NOTE: It is noted that the numbering for subsection 2 appears to be out of sequence on this page.
NOTE: It is noted that the numbering for subsection 5 appears to be out of sequence on this page.
NOTE: It is noted that the numbering for subsection 6 appears to be out of sequence on this page.
_____________

No. 96-1284MN

_____________

John Louis Johnson, *

*

Appellant, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the District

v. * of Minnesota.

*

Frank W. Wood, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellee. *

_____________

Submitted: August 7, 1996

 Filed: August 12, 1996

_____________

Before McMILLIAN, FAGG, and BOWMAN, Circuit Judges.

_____________

PER CURIAM.

John Louis Johnson appeals the district court's order dismissing

Johnson's 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. After careful review of the record,

we affirm for the reasons stated in the district court's thorough opinion.

See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

Appointed counsel's motion to withdraw is granted.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
# C_2007301EN.01001101.xml

| 13.12.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 301/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.12.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 301/11

---

Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1628/2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to national regional investment aid

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 301/06)

| Aid No | XR 162/07 |
| --- | --- |
| Member State | Bulgaria |
| Region | Bulgaria |
| Title of aid scheme or the name of the undertaking receiving ad hoc aid supplement | Насърчаване на първоначални инвестиции [Nasarchavane na parvonachalni investicii] |
| Legal basis | Глава трета от Закона за насърчаване на инвестициите и Глава седма от Правилника за прилагане на Закон за насърчаване на инвестициите (ЗНИ) |
| Type of measure | Aid scheme |
| Annual budget | EUR 12 million |
| Overall budget | EUR 72 million; Paid over: 6 years |
| Maximum aid intensity | 50 % |
| In conformity with Article 4 of the Regulation |
| Date of implementation | 1.1.2008 |
| Duration | 31.12.2013 |
| Economic sectors | All sectors eligible for regional investment aid |
| NACE D |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Министерство на икономиката и енергетиката |
| България, |
| BG-София 1052 |

Aid No

XR 162/07

Member State

Bulgaria

Region

Bulgaria

Title of aid scheme or the name of the undertaking receiving ad hoc aid supplement

ad hoc

Насърчаване на първоначални инвестиции [Nasarchavane na parvonachalni investicii]

Legal basis

Глава трета от Закона за насърчаване на инвестициите и Глава седма от Правилника за прилагане на Закон за насърчаване на инвестициите (ЗНИ)

Type of measure

Aid scheme

Annual budget

EUR 12 million

Overall budget

EUR 72 million; Paid over: 6 years

Maximum aid intensity

50 %

In conformity with Article 4 of the Regulation

Date of implementation

1.1.2008

Duration

31.12.2013

Economic sectors

All sectors eligible for regional investment aid

NACE D

Name and address of the granting authority

Министерство на икономиката и енергетиката

България,

BG-София 1052

Internet address of the publication of the aid scheme

http://www.mee.government.bg/ind/doc_invest/PRAVILNIK_ZNI_DV76_21.09.07.pdf

http://www.mee.government.bg/ind/invest/docs.html?id=101135

Other information

—

---
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID WAYNE ELMORE,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2657 GEB PAN P

vs.

TOM L. CAREY, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff has requested the appointment of counsel. The United States Supreme

Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent

prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In

certain exceptional circumstances, the court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991);

Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). In the present case, the court

does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of

counsel will therefore be denied.

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:04-cv-02657-GEB-EFB Document 36 Filed 05/31/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s April 14, 2006 motion

for the appointment of counsel is denied.

DATED: May 31, 2006.

/mp

elmo2657.31

Case 2:04-cv-02657-GEB-EFB Document 36 Filed 05/31/06 Page 2 of 2
No. 57295.

protest 197343-K (New York).

#### Louis Goldey *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

From an examination of the papers in the case the court was unable to find anything to overcome the presumption of correctness of' the collector’s classification. The protest was therefore overruled.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUL-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 AUG-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   APR-30-1999
<CASH>                                         876,719
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  2,711,124
<ALLOWANCES>                                   63,000
<INVENTORY>                                    7,903,080
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               11,912,942
<PP&E>                                         3,721,388
<DEPRECIATION>                                 625,223
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 15,034,843
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          2,911,662
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       37,000
<OTHER-SE>                                     10,356,281
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   15,034,843
<SALES>                                        20,200,399
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               20,200,399
<CGS>                                          13,753,733
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  6,005,177
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (41,819)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (83,333)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                390,274
<INCOME-TAX>                                   132,693
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            257,581
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   257,581
<EPS-BASIC>                                  0.07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.07



</TABLE>
**Exhibit      32**

**PURSUANT      TO **

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

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO **

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

|                                  |                                                                             |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      |
|---------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                  | **NATHANIEL              ENERGY CORPORATION**                                    |
|                             |                                                                        |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 |
| Date: April              2, 2007 | By:                                                                    | /s/ Brad              E.              Bailey                                     |
|                                  | Brad E. Bailey                                                                   |
|                                  | Chief              Executive Officer(Principal                financial officer) |
Exhibit
32.1




CERTIFICATIONS
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT
TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




I, Lloyd
H. Malchow, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual
Report of SenoRx, Inc. on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2008 fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that
information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents in
all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of
SenoRx, Inc.






Date:
      March 16, 2009
            
            By:
            /s/
      Lloyd H. MalchowName:
            Lloyd
      H. MalchowTitle:
            President,
      Chief Executive Officer and Director
              (Principal
      Executive Officer)




I, Kevin
J. Cousins, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual
Report of SenoRx, Inc. on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2008 fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that
information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents in
all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of
SenoRx, Inc.






Date:
      March 16, 2009
            
            By:
            /s/
      Kevin J. CousinsName:
            Kevin
      J. CousinsTitle:
            Chief
      Financial Officer
              (Principal
      Accounting and Financial Officer)
No. 65526.

#### Leading Forwarders, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 60/9825 (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

From a review of the record in this case, the court found nothing tending in any way to overcome the presumption of correctness attaching to the classification by the collector. The protest was, therefore, overruled.
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER DISMISSING ENTIRE ACTION WITH PREJUDICE 

Case No. CIV-S-04-1912 LKK GGH

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART 

OLIVER & HEDGES, LLP 

 Scott G. Lawson (Bar No. 174671) 

 Carlos A. Trujillo (Bar No. 224033) 

50 California Street, 22nd Floor 

San Francisco, California 94105 

Telephone: (415) 875-6600 

Facsimile: (415) 875-6700 

Attorneys for Defendant 

International Business Machines Corporation 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SACRAMENTO DIVISION 

PAUL ORTEGA, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES 

CORPORATION, a New York corporation; 

DOES 1-50, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. CIV S-04-1912 LKK GGH 

STIPULATION AND ORDER 

DISMISSING ENTIRE ACTION WITH 

PREJUDICE 

Case 2:04-cv-01912-LKK -GGH Document 20 Filed 05/10/05 Page 1 of 3
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

2 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER DISMISSING ENTIRE ACTION WITH PREJUDICE 

Case No. CIV-S-04-1912 LKK GGH

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1) and in accordance with the terms of 

a confidential settlement agreement between the parties, plaintiff Paul Ortega and defendant 

International Business Machines Corporation hereby stipulate to the dismissal with prejudice of 

the entire action and each and every claim therein. Each party further agrees that he or it shall 

bear his or its own attorneys' fees and costs. 

Dated: April ___, 2005 LAW OFFICES OF JEFFERY L. ARAN 

By /signature on original

Jeffery L. Aran 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Paul Ortega 

Dated: April ___, 2005 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART OLIVER & 

HEDGES, LLP 

By /signature on original

Scott G. Lawson 

Attorneys for Defendants 

International Business Machines Corporation 

Case 2:04-cv-01912-LKK -GGH Document 20 Filed 05/10/05 Page 2 of 3
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

3 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER DISMISSING ENTIRE ACTION WITH PREJUDICE 

Case No. CIV-S-04-1912 LKK GGH

ORDER

Pursuant to the foregoing stipulation of all parties, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the entire 

action and each and every claim therein, is DISMISSED with prejudice. Each party shall bear his 

or its own attorneys' fees and costs. 

Dated: May 9, 2005 /s/Lawrence K. Karlton

Lawrence K. Karlton 

United States District Judge 

Case 2:04-cv-01912-LKK -GGH Document 20 Filed 05/10/05 Page 3 of 3
Before the Third Division,

December 20, 1955

No. 59603.

protest 257007-K (New York).

#### Albert Dickinson Company *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of bird’s-foot trefoil seed similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Transcontinental Seed, Inc. (Alltransport, Incorporated)*v. *United States*(29 Cust. Ct. 163, C. D. 1462), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.

Donlon, J.,

dissented, holding: “I do not concur in the decision in *Transcontinental Seed, Inc.*v. *United States,*29 Cust. Ct. 163, C. D. 1462, the record of which has been incorporated in the record of this case. In my opinion, the protest should be overruled.”