alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2007041EN.01000901.xml

| 24.2.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 41/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.2.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 41/9

---

Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1628 of 24 October 2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty to national regional investment aid

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 41/07)

| Aid No | XR 6/07 |
| --- | --- |
| Member State | Germany |
| Region | (Bundesländer Brandenburg, Mecklenburg–Vorpommern, Sachsen, Sachsen-Anhalt, Thüringen, Berlin (sole 87(3)c) |
| Title of aid scheme or the name of the undertaking receiving ad hoc aid supplement | Investitionszulagengesetz 2007 |
| Legal basis | Investitionszulagengesetz 2007 vom 15. Juli 2006 (BGBl I S. 1614) |
| Type of measure | Aid scheme |
| Annual budget | EUR 580 million |
| Maximum aid intensity | 30 % |
| In conformity with Article 4 of the Regulation |
| Date of implementation | 1.1.2007 |
| Duration | 31.12.2009 |
| Economic sectors | Limited to specific sectors: |
| NACE15-37; 55.1; 55.21; 55.22; 55.23.1; 72; 73; 74.13; 74.20.4; 74.20.5; 74.20.6; 74.3; 74.4; 74.81. |
| Name and address of the granting authority | omnia Finanzamt in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland |
| Internet address of the publication of the aid scheme | http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/invzulg_2007/index.html |
| Other information | — |

Aid No

XR 6/07

Member State

Germany

Region

(Bundesländer Brandenburg, Mecklenburg–Vorpommern, Sachsen, Sachsen-Anhalt, Thüringen, Berlin (sole 87(3)c)

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

Investitionszulagengesetz 2007

Legal basis

Investitionszulagengesetz 2007 vom 15. Juli 2006 (BGBl I S. 1614)

Type of measure

Aid scheme

Annual budget

EUR 580 million

Maximum aid intensity

30 %

In conformity with Article 4 of the Regulation

Date of implementation

1.1.2007

Duration

31.12.2009

Economic sectors

Limited to specific sectors:

NACE15-37; 55.1; 55.21; 55.22; 55.23.1; 72; 73; 74.13; 74.20.4; 74.20.5; 74.20.6; 74.3; 74.4; 74.81.

Name and address of the granting authority

omnia Finanzamt in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland

omnia

Internet address of the publication of the aid scheme

http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/invzulg_2007/index.html

Other information

—

---
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORT

(Section 906 Certification)

Thomas E. Vessey and Beth Sanders hereby certify as follows:

1. They are the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, respectively, of 1st Centennial Bancorp.

2. The Form 10-K of 1st Centennial Bancorp for the year ended December 31, 2005 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 the information contained in the report on Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of 1st Centennial Bancorp.



|                     |  |  |  |                                          
|-------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------------------------
|Date: March 22, 2006 |  |  |  | /s/    THOMAS E. VESSEY                  
|                     |  |  |  | Thomas E. Vessey, Chief Executive Officer
|                     |  | 
|Date: March 22, 2006 |  |  |  | /s/    BETH SANDERS                      
|                     |  |  |  | Beth Sanders, Chief Financial Officer
#### H. H. Filer, *et al.,*v. State, *ex rel.*Alfred H. Jackson.

167 So. 926.

Opinion Filed March 23, 1936.

*Peters & Kemp,*for Plaintiffs in Error;

*C. D. Blackwell,*for Defendant in Error.

*245Per Curiam.

The judgment herein awarding a peremptory writ of mandamus is affirmed on the authority of Board of Public Instruction v. State, *ex rel.*Tanger Investment Co., 121 Fla. 176, 163 So. 694; 121 Fla. 703, 164 So. 697.

Affirmed.

Whitfield, C. J., and Ellis, Terrell, Brown, Buford, and Davis, J. J., concur.
NUMBER 13-22-00515-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG 

 

ENRIQUE O. GUILLEN AND 

VICTORIA GUILLEN, Appellants,

 v.

CRISTIAN ANDRES GOMEZ, Appellee.

On Appeal from the 445th District Court

of Cameron County, Texas.

ORDER OF ABATEMENT

Before Justices Benavides, Tijerina, and Peña 

Order Per Curiam

This appeal is before the Court on appellants’ first amended motion to compel court 

reporter record and appellants’ dispute of the accuracy of the appellate record which is 

construed as a motion to abate. A conflict regarding the contents of the reporter’s record 

has arisen, and appellants request relief regarding inaccuracies in the reporter’s record. 
2

Pursuant to Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 34.6(e)(2) and (3), this appeal 

is abated, and the cause remanded to the trial court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 34.6(e)(2) and 

(3). Upon remand, the judge of the trial court shall immediately cause notice to be given 

and conduct a hearing to determine whether there are any inaccuracies in the reporter’s 

record. See Id. If inaccuracies exist, the trial court shall determine what steps are 

necessary to ensure the prompt preparation of a complete and 

accurate reporter’s record and shall enter any orders required to avoid further delay 

and to preserve the parties’ rights.

The trial court shall prepare and file its findings and orders and cause them, 

along with any omitted items, to be included in a supplemental clerk’s record and 

supplemental reporter’s record which should be submitted to the Clerk of this Court 

within thirty days from the date of this order. Accordingly, appellants’ motion to abate 

is granted, and appellants’ motion compel is carried with the case.

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed on this the

15th day of February, 2023.
1

Filed 11/10/21 P. v. Dixon CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Tehama)

----

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

THOMAS MICHAEL DIXON,

Defendant and Appellant. C0 92203

(Super. Ct. No. NC R 98273)

Defendant Thomas Michael Dixon appeals from the trial court’s order on remand

denying his request that the court strike his firearm sentencing enhancement. In this

court’s unpublished opini on upholding a judgment entered after defendant’s guilty plea to

second degree murder , we remanded defendant’s case “ for the limited purpose of: (1)

determining whether defendant had an adequate opportunity to make a record of

information that will be relevant to the Board of Parole Hearings in fulfilling its statutory

obligations under Penal Code section 3051, and if not, to afford defendant and t he People

the opportunity to present evidence relevant to that eventual youthful offender parole2

hearing; and (2) allowing the trial court to exercise its sentencing discretion and

determine whether to strike defendant ’ s sentencing enhancement consistent w ith the new

authority granted by Penal Code section 12022.5, subdivision (c). ” ( People v. Dixon

(Jan

. 24 , 2019, C085151) [ non pub. opn.].)

However, as agreed to by the parties and confirmed by this court’s review of the

record, on remand

, the trial court only conducted the second inquiry. We agree with the

parties that another remand directing the trial court to complete the first inquiry is

required.

DISPOSITION

Th e matter is remanded and the trial court directed to determ ine whether defendant

had an adequate opportunity to make a record of information that will be relevant to the

Board of Parole Hearings in fulfilling its statutory obligati ons under Penal Code section

3051, and if not, to afford defendant and the People the opportunity to present evidence

relevant to that eventual youthful offender parole hearing

. The judgment is otherwise

affirmed.

/s/

HOCH

, J.

We concur:

/s/ MURRAY, Acting P. J.

/s/

KRAUSE , J.
DISMISS and Opinion Filed June 24, 2019 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-19-00626-CV WILLIAM BIRCHETT, Appellant V. CITY OF FORT WORTH, TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 162nd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-19-06941 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Whitehill, Partida-Kipness, and Pedersen, III Opinion by Justice Whitehill Appellant appeals from the trial court’s May 23, 2019 order den ying his emergency application for temporary restraining order to prevent spoliati on of evidence. The Court questioned its jurisdiction over this interlocutory appeal. We instructed appellant to file, by June 10, 2019, a letter brief addressing our concern and cautioned h im that failure to comply may result in dismissal of the appeal withou t further notice. As of today ’s date, appellant has not filed a
response. Generally, appellate courts have jurisdiction only over appeals from final judgments. See Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp. , 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Te x. 2001). The legislatu re has created narrow exceptions to this general rule, allowing appellate courts to r eview specific interlocutory orders when explicitly permitted by statute. See Stary v. DeBord , 967 S.W.2d 352, 352–53 (Tex. 1998)–2– (per curiam); e.g. , T EX
. C IV
. P RAC

. & R EM
. C ODE A NN . §§ 15.003(b), 27.008, 51.014(a), 51.016. There is no statutory exception allowing an appeal from an orde r denying an application for a temporary restraining order to p revent spoliation of evidence. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 42.3(a).

190626F.P05 /Bill Whitehill/ BILL WHITEHILL JUSTICE–3– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT
WILLIAM BIRCHETT, Appellant
No. 05-19-00626-CV V. CITY OF FORT WORTH, TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 162nd Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-19-06941. Opinion delivered by Justice Whitehill. Justices Partida-Kipness and Pedersen, III participating. In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appe al is DISMISSED

. It is ORDERED that appellee CITY OF FORT WOR TH, TEXAS recover its costs of t his appeal from appellant WILLIAM BIRCHETT.
Judgment entered June 24, 2019
No. 54640.

#### L. Heller & Son, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 129136-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of synthetic stones the same in all material respects as those the subject of *S. Nathan & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(37 C. C. P. A. 99, C. A. D. 426), the claim at 10 percent under paragraph 1528 was sustained.
# C_2008162EN.01004002.xml

| 25.6.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 162/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.6.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 162/40

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on textile names (Recast)

COM(2007) 870 final — 2008/0005 (COD)

(2008/C 162/07)

On 8 February2008, the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 95 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on textile names (Recast)

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on textile names (Recast)

Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 442nd plenary session of 13 and 14 February 2008 (meeting of 13 February 2008), by 128 votes in favour, with 2 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 13 February 2008.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Dimitris DIMITRIADIS

---
No. 60886.

#### Morganite, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 288925-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of carbon powder similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Morganite, Inc.*v. *United States*(42 C. C. P. A. 207, C. A. D. 595), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,__________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A14A1709. LUSTER v. THE STATE.

The Appellant’s brief in this case was originally due to be filed on June 5,

2014. The Appellant, who is representing himself, requested and was given two

extensions of time to complete his brief. His brief was due on August 11. On August

14, this Court denied the Appellant’s third request for an extension of time to file his

brief. The Appellant belatedly filed his brief with this Court on August 19 along with

a motion to reconsider the August 14 denial of his motion for an extension of time to

file his brief. Finding no legitimate basis for granting the motion for reconsideration,

it is hereby DENIED. Consequently, the instant appeal is hereby DISMISSED for

failure to comply with the rules of this Court. See Court of Appeals Rules 15 (a) and

23 (a).

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,__________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

08/28/2014

August 28, 2014
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v John Santiago, Appellant.

[634 NYS2d 72]

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx (Vincent Vitale, J.), rendered March 18, 1992, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of manslaughter in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and assault in the second degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 8 to 24 years, 2 to 6 years and *21⁄3*to 7 years, respectively, and order, same court and Justice, entered December 2, 1994, which summarily denied his motion to vacate the judgment of conviction pursuant to CPL 440.10, unanimously affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the People and giving them the benefit of every reasonable inference *(People v Malizia,*62 NY2d 755, 757, *cert denied*469 US 932), the eyewitness testimony that the defendant, known to the eyewitnesses from the neighborhood, shot the victim multiple times in a courtyard below the witnesses’ window, amply established defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Minor inconsistencies in the testimony of the witnesses were properly placed before the jury for their consideration, and did not render the verdict against the weight of the evidence *(People v Aviles,*182 AD2d 577, *lv denied*81 NY2d 760).

The evidence was also sufficient to establish that one of the victims, whom defendant struck in the face with a gun, sustained "physical injury” within the meaning of Penal Law § 10.00 (9). In addition to the photographs of the victim’s injury shown to the jury, there was testimony that the victim *260developed "a big bruise on his face black and blue”, that the blow made him "a little bit blind,” and that even at the time of trial, 14 months later, the victim didn’t "see so well”. This evidence proved that the victim sustained an "impairment of physical condition”, and permitted the jury to infer that he suffered "substantial pain” (Penal Law § 10.00 [9]; *see, People v Mack,*210 AD2d 70, *lv denied*85 NY2d 911; *People v Goode,*179 AD2d 676, *Iv denied*79 NY2d 1001).

*People v Washington*(86 NY2d 189) is dispositive of the issue raised in defendant’s motion to vacate judgment.

We perceive no abuse of discretion in sentencing. Concur— Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Ross, Williams and Tom, JJ.
EX-10.21



 Exhibit 10.21 
  





 
 AMENDMENT TO NOTICE OF LOAN AWARD- RFA 10-05A- CIRM Disease Team Therapy Development Awards- Part II Research Award 
California Institute for Regenerative Medicine 
Amendment Number: 1 Amendment Date: 12/12/14

Loan Number: DR2A-05416 Total Award Amount: $19,309,403 
Loan Recipient Name:
Stem Cells, Inc. Grantee ID: PR-Y0026A-SF 
Principal Investigator: Alexandra Capela Project Period Start Date: 07/01/2013 
Project Period End Date: 12/12/2014 
Project Title: Restoration of memory in Alzheimer’s
disease: a new paradigm using neural stem cell 
therapy 
Authorized
Organization Official and Address: Ann Tsukamoto Executive Vice President, R&D StemCells, Inc. 7707 Gateway Blvd. Newark, CA 94560 
Official and Address to
Receive Payments: Dr. Alexandra Capela CNS Program 7707 Gateway Blvd. Suite 140 Newark, CA 94560 
This award is terminated, effective 12/12/2014, pursuant to
Paragraph (F) of the Notice of Loan Award and Section 8.1(f) of the Loan Agreement based on the occurrence of a No Go Milestone. Expenses incurred after December 12, 2014, shall be limited to the histological and biochemical assays described in the
DR2A-05416 Application for the tissues and samples that were collected in the preclinical Study to support Milestone 3, as defined in the NGA, as necessary to complete the Y2Q2 Progress Report (due 1/1/15). No expenses may be incurred after January
11, 2015, and all unexpended funds shall be returned to CIRM by February 10, 2015. The Loan Balance is forgiven pursuant to Section 4.10 of the Loan Agreement and Article VII, Section I of the Loan Administration Policy, subject to reinstatement
pursuant to those provisions. Final reporting requirements are as follows: 
Report Type Period Due Date Progress Report Year 2 Q2: 7/1/14 - 12/12/14 1/1/15
Financial Report Year 2 Q2: 7/1/14 - 12/12/14 2/1/15 
By signing below and continuing to accept and use CIRM funds provided under this award, Grantee and Principal
Investigator accept the modified terms reflected in this Amendment. 
C. Randal Mills, Ph.D. President and Chief Executive Officer, CIRM 
Alexandra Capela, Ph.D. Senior Scientist, Stem Cells, Inc. 
Ann Tsukamoto, Ph.D. Executive Vice
President, R&D, Stem Cells, Inc. 
The Great Seal of the State of California
Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERPURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350) In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September30, 2020 (the “Report”) of Oxford Square Capital Corp. (the “Registrant”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Bruce L. Rubin, the Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of 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 Registrant. /s/ Bruce L. RubinName: Bruce L. RubinDate: October28, 2020
Exhibit (13) b.



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,



AS ENACTED BY



SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the annual report on Form 20-F of Komatsu, Ltd. (the Company) for the period ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Kenji Kinoshita, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (s) 1350, that:



(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Date: July 27, 2005



By:

/s/ Kenji KinoshitaKenji KinoshitaSenior Executive OfficerChief Financial Officer




27
EXHIBIT 32.1
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Form 10-KSB of MEDIANET GROUP TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2005, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Martin Berns, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that, 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/ Martin Berns
Martin Berns
Chief Executive Officer


March 29, 2006
output_FacilityList

FacilityID met_stationrural_urbanmax_dist model_dist radials circles overlap_dist acutehours elev 01033NEI8522 3000 30N Y 01033NEI8522b 3000 30N Y 01115NEIALT$4622 3000 30N Y 05059NEIART$10783 3000 30N Y 05115NEI3AR05115JW 3000 30N Y 13077NEI8066 3000 30N Y 13133NEI8093 3000 30N Y 17031NEI3IL17031Ale 3000 30N Y 18003NEIIN00286 3000 30N Y 18089NEI3IN18089Jup 3000 30N Y 18093NEI3IN18093Rec 3000 30N Y 18113NEIIN567 3000 30N Y 18169NEI3IN18169Ale 3000 30N Y 18173NEI32661 3500 30N Y 19163NEI12240 3000 30N Y 19163NEI2IA01-089 3000 30N Y 21009NEIKY0090065 3000 30N Y 21031NEIKY2103100 3000 30N Y 21091NEI11360 3000 30N Y 21091NEI11362 3000 30N Y 21101NEI11365 3000 30N Y 21141NEIKY2114100 3000 30N Y 21151NEI3KY21151Nov 3000 30N Y 21227NEIKY22700135 3000 30N Y 26023NEI3MI26023Ale 3000 30N Y 26023NEIMIN5957 3000 30N Y 29009NEI18317 3000 30N Y 29143NEI34464 5000 30N Y 29510NEI3MO29510JW 3000 30N Y 34007NEI3NJ34007Alu 3000 30N Y 36075NEI3NY36075Nov 3000 30N Y 36089NEI39458 3000 30N Y 36103NEI3AL01123Cre 3000 30N Y 39157NEI3OH39157Ale 3000 30N Y 39157NEIOHT$6308 3000 30N Y 42071NEI3PA42071Alu 3000 30N Y 42107NEIPA23-2083 3000 30N Y 45015NEI3SC45015JW 3000 30N Y 45015NEI41217 3000 30N Y 46135NEI790 3000 30N Y 47009NEI10933 3000 30N Y 47009NEI10933b 3000 30N Y 47159NEI3TN47159Wil 3000 30N Y 48029NEI7212 3000 30N Y 48037NEI3TX48067Alu 3000 30N Y 48331NEI6464 6000 30N Y 53007NEI42328 3000 30N Y 53073NEIWA19906 3000 30N Y 54035NEIWV0043 3000 30N Y 55039NEI43018 3000 30N Y 55117NEI3WI55001JL 3000 30N Y

Page 1output_FacilityList

55117NEIWI4600412 3000 30N Y

Page 2output_FacilityList

multiplier ring1 dep

depl phase pdep pdepl vdep vdepl All_rcpts user_rcptbldg_dw urban_popfastall Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 750 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 500 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 800 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Page 3output_FacilityList

Y

Page 4