alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

RYAN WESLEY REESE, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D17-1202

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

)

Opinion filed October 10, 2018. 

Appeal from the Circuit Court for 

Hillsborough County; Samantha L. Ward, 

Judge.

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, 

and Ivy R. Ginsberg, Special Assistant 

Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, and Cerese Crawford Taylor, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for 

Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

CASANUEVA, BLACK, and BADALAMENTI, JJ., Concur.
----

Publication of decisions by Member States to grant or revoke operating licenses pursuant to Article 13(4) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2407/92 on licensing of air carriers (1) (2)

(2005/C 262/07)

(Text with EEA relevance)

SPAIN

Operating licences granted

Category B:   Operating licences including the restriction of Article 5(7)(a) of Regulation (EEC) No 2407/92

----

(1)OJ L 240, 24.8.1992, p. 1.

(2)  Communicated to the European Commission before 31.8.2005.

----
# United States Tax Court

**United States Tax Court***Hours of Operation:*

8:00 a.m. – 4:30 p.m., M – FClosed on Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays.

Visitor's entrance is on the E Street Plaza. 

400 Second Street, NWWashington, DC 20217

 

----

**WEBSITE**

----

**MAP**

----

 

The Revenue Act of 1924 established the Board of Tax Appeals to adjudicate disputes involving the federal income and profits tax law. Originally housed within the IRS headquarters building, design for a purpose-built courthouse began in 1965 due to overcrowding at the IRS. Despite enthusiastic support for the project, the Vietnam War triggered funding  cuts that delayed construction until 1972, when GSA secured a site and held a groundbreaking ceremony. The completed building was dedicated on November 22, 1974, the fiftieth anniversary of the Revenue Act that created the court.

A landmark work by master architect Victor Lundy, the building is a prominent example of the formalist modern style in Washington, DC and won a GSA Honor Award in the first-ever Design Awards Program held in 1972. Despite its relatively recent construction date, the U. S. Tax Court Building was added to the National Register of Historic Places in August 2008 for its exceptional architectural significance.

 

 

Print PageEmail Page

Top

-  United States Tax Court-  Overview 
-  What's Inside? 
-  What's Around? 
-  Image Galleries
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 (ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)

 

            In connection with the annual report of PCMall, Inc., a Delaware corporation, and its wholly owned subsidiaries(collectively, the "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I,Frank F. Khulusi, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify as ofthe date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 ofthe United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:

 

                   (1)  the Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, and 

 

                   (2)  the information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company at the dates and for the periodsindicated.  

 

             This Certification has not been, and shall notbe deemed, "filed" with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

 

Date:  March 30, 2004     

 

 

 /s/Frank F. Khulusi                             

FrankF. Khulusi

ChiefExecutive Officer
#### Steven M. TORREGIANTE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-889.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 29, 1973.

James A. Gardner, Public Defender, and Mary Jo M. Gallay, Asst. Public Defender, Bradenton, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Charles Corees, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was lawfully convicted of sale of marijuana and sentenced to five years in prison. This judgment and sentence are affirmed. As part of the same transaction, appellant was found guilty of possession of marijuana and the trial judge “deferred sentence from day to day and term to term on the first count of the information,” contrary to the mandate of Yost v. State, Fla.App.2d 1971, 243 So.2d 469. *See also,*Cone v. State, Fla.1973, Case No. 42760, opinion filed March 7, 1973, not yet reported; Davis v. State, Fla.App.2d 1973, 277 So.2d 300; Easton v. State, Fla.App.2d 1971, 250 So.2d 294. For the correction of this error the cause must be remanded for vacation of that portion of the judgment which purports to retain authority to sentence appellant on the possession count.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

MANN, C. J., and LILES and McNULTY, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.01



                 CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350
          OF CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE



In connection with the Quarterly Report of General Employment
Enterprises, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended
June 30, 2008 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
"Report"), each of the undersigned hereby certifies, in his capacity as
an officer of the Company, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
to his knowledge:

     (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
          the operations of the Company.



Date:  August 5, 2008               By:  /s/ Herbert F. Imhoff, Jr.
                                        Herbert F. Imhoff, Jr.
                                        Chairman of the Board, Chief
                                        Executive Officer and President
                                        (Chief executive officer)


Date:  August 5, 2008               By:  /s/ Kent M. Yauch
                                        Kent M. Yauch
                                        Vice President, Chief Financial
                                        Officer and Treasurer
                                        (Chief financial officer)
#### Dr. Lewis FAGAN, Appellant, v. Linda POWELL, Appellee.

No. 71-738.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Jan. 3, 1972.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
# C_2020215EN.01004301.xml

| 29.6.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 215/43 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.6.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 215/43

---

Action brought on 28 April 2020 — Rochem Group v EUIPO — Rochem Marine (R.T.S. ROCHEM Technical Services)

(Case T-233/20)

(2020/C 215/54)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant(s): Rochem Group AG (Zug, Switzerland) (represented by: K. Guridi Sedlak, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Rochem Marine Srl (Genova, Italy)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark R.T.S. ROCHEM Technical Services — European Union trade mark No 12 326 609

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 February 2020 in Case R 1544/2019-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to render a new decision refusing the declaration of invalidity filed against the EU trade mark No 12 326 609, also for classes 11 and 40; |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to render a new decision refusing the declaration of invalidity filed against the EU trade mark No 12 326 609, also for classes 11 and 40;

| — | order EUIPO to pay its own costs and bear the fees and costs of the applicant. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay its own costs and bear the fees and costs of the applicant.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 18 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 18 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Infringement Article 64(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement Article 64(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY  FINANCIAL INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM
THE  REGISTRANT'S  CONDENSED  CONSOLIDATED  BALANCE SHEET AS OF JUNE 30,
1999 AND THE RELATED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME AND CASH
FLOWS FOR THE SIX MONTHS  ENDED JUNE 30, 1999  AND IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          85,906
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  165,418
<ALLOWANCES>                                    47,198
<INVENTORY>                                     94,140
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               407,526
<PP&E>                                       4,821,964
<DEPRECIATION>                                 814,472
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,673,483
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          311,223
<BONDS>                                      2,085,174
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           940
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,061,294
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,673,483
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,155,882
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  715,069
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                96,189
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                11,808
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              57,673
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 78,206
<INCOME-TAX>                                    27,674
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             50,532
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                      (30,577)
<NET-INCOME>                                    19,955
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.10



</TABLE>
#### Gilbert WHITFIELD v. Earnest JONES and Lozena W. Jones.

No. 53165.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 1, 1973.

In re: Gilbert Whitfield applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of East Baton Rouge. 270 So.2d 153.

Writ refused. The result is correct.

BARHAM J.,

concurs but believes legislative attention should be drawn to the effect of R.S. 47:2183 as construed by this Court under the Civil Code requirements.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1651
YVETTE J. DAVIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GAIL MARGERUM, Dr., Mt. Vernon Emergency Room Physician; J. E. ALFRED, Officer, Mt. Vernon Department of Fairfax County, Badge #2683; MATTIE L. PALMORE, Magistrate of Fairfax County, Mt. Vernon Police Department; STEPHEN W. ARMSTRONG, Attorney; ROBERT B. MACHEN, Attorney; DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY SERVICES, for Children; LATIFA ZAMAN, Licensed Daycare Provider, Office for the Children, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (CA-01-1467-A) Submitted: October 21, 2002 Decided: November 7, 2002 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.2 Yvette J. Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Marvin Pierce Rucker, Todd David Anderson, SANDS, ANDERSON, MARKS & MILLER, Richmond, Virginia; James Edward Wilcox, Jr., Fairfax, Virginia; Sarah Leighton Kirby, SICILIANO, ELLIS, DYER & BOCCAROSSE, Fairfax, Virginia; Robert B. Machen, Annandale, Virginia; Latifa Zaman, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Yvette J. Davis appeals the district court’s orders dismissing her civil action against various defendants on jurisdictional and statute of limitations grounds. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s orders and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Davis v. Margerum , No. CA-01-1467-A (E.D. Va. filed Dec. 12, 2001 and entered Dec. 19, 2001; filed Jan. 15, 2002 and entered Jan. 16, 2002; June 4, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### Warren Theodore YOPP, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. N-473.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 11, 1971.

Virgil Q. Mayo, Public Defender, and Raymond L. Syfrett, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Wallace E. Allbritton, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The briefs and the record on appeal having been read and given full consideration, and appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the judgment of the lower court hereby appealed is affirmed.

CARROLL, DONALD K., Acting C. J., and WIGGINTON, and RAWLS, JJ., concur.
Order entered October 12, 2022

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-22-01010-CV

No. 05-22-01011-CV

No. 05-22-01012-CV

No. 05-22-01013-CV

No. 05-22-01014-CV

No. 05-22-01015-CV

No. 05-22-01016-CV

No. 05-22-01017-CV

IN RE ALEX PERRY NEAL, Relator

Original Proceedings from the 296th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 296-82970, No. 296-82971, No. 296-82972, No. 296-

82973, No. 296-82974, No. 296-82975, No. 296-082976, No. 296-82977

ORDER

Before Justices Molberg, Pedersen, III, and Garcia

Based on the Court’s opinion of today’s date, we DISMISS these proceedings 

for want of jurisdiction. 

/s/ BILL PEDERSEN, III 

JUSTICE
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**PCMALL, INC.**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

**(ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)**

 

In connection with the Annual Report of PC Mall, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31,2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I,Brandon H. LaVerne, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify asof the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:

 

(1)  theReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and

 

(2)  theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of thedates and for the periods indicated.

 

This Certification has not been, and shall not bedeemed, “filed” with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

 

March 16, 2010

 
| /s/ Brandon H. LaVerne  |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
| Brandon H. LaVerne      |   |
| Chief Financial Officer |   |

 

----
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-78,370-03
IN RE ALEXIS RENE OBREAGON, Re lator
ON AP P LICATION FOR AWRIT OF M ANDAM US CAUSE NO. 1130245-B IN THE 178T H DISTRICT COURT

F ROM HARRIS COUNTY
Per curiam . O R D E R Relator has filed a motion for leave to file an a pplication for a

writ of mandamus pursuant to the orig inal jurisdiction of this Court. In it, Relator contends that he filed an application for a writ of habea s corpus in the 178th District Court of Har ris C o unty , the District Court enter ed a timely order desig nating issues on Fe bruar y 25, 2015, more than 180 day s have passed since the date the State rec eived the application, and the appli ca t i o n h as not been timely forwa rded to this Court as mandated by

Texas Rule of Appellate Proc edure 73.4(b)( 5). Respondent, the District Clerk of Har ris County , is order ed to file a response , which may be made b y submitt ing the rec ord on such habeas corpus application, subm itting proof of t he date of
rec eipt by the State showing 180 day s has n ot y et elapse d, or stating that Relator has not filed an2

application for a writ of habea s corpus in Har ris County
. This application for leave to file a writ of mandamus shall be held in abeyance until Respondent has submitt ed the appropr iate response . Such response shall be submitted within 30 day s of the date of this order.
Filed: June 1, 2016 Do not publish
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                           6,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  377,500
<ALLOWANCES>                                    28,000
<INVENTORY>                                     17,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               391,100
<PP&E>                                       5,740,400
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,533,300
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,790,500
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          581,400
<BONDS>                                        942,800
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      7,600
<COMMON>                                       650,000
<OTHER-SE>                                     241,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,790,500
<SALES>                                      1,345,300
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,345,300
<CGS>                                          507,400
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,012,800
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   200
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              59,100
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                276,600
<INCOME-TAX>                                    95,600
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            181,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    500
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   180,500
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### Garlin Craig SIGNAIGO, Petitioner, v. Elwood HENNINGS, Respondent.

No. 41389.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Oct. 28, 1971.

Certiorari denied.

ROBERTS, C. J., and ERVIN, CARLTON, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
NUMBER 13-15-00305-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

JOHN RODRIGUEZ, APPELLANT,

v.

STEPHANIE HAEHN, GEORGE HAEHN, 

AND MAKIN WAVES WATERCRAFT RENTALS LLC, APPELLEES. 

____________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 261st District Court

of Travis County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Longoria

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, John Rodriguez, appeals a judgment rendered against him in trial court 

cause number D-1-GN-14-000377 in the 261st District Court of Travis County, Texas.1 

 

1 This appeal was transferred to this Court from the Third Court of Appeals by order of the Texas 

Supreme Court. See TEX. GOV'T CODE ANN. § 22.220(a) (West, Westlaw through Ch. 46 2015 R.S.). 
2

Currently before the Court is “Appellant’s Agreed Motion for Dismissal.” According to the 

motion, the parties have settled and compromised this matter. Thus, appellant no longer 

desires to prosecute this appeal and requests that we dismiss it with prejudice.

The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant’s agreed motion 

to dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 42.1(a). Accordingly, the appeal is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice. Absent 

agreement of the parties, costs are taxed against appellant. See id. R. 42.1(d). Having 

dismissed the appeal at the parties’ request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained, 

and our mandate will issue forthwith. 

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed 

1st day of September, 2015.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         306,126
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                6,662,517
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (818,654)
<INVENTORY>                                 15,237,394
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            21,676,880
<PP&E>                                       1,867,267
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              39,499,315
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       12,659,709
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                 23,805,805
<COMMON>                                         2,384
<OTHER-SE>                                 (7,641,453)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                39,499,315
<SALES>                                     38,429,533
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            38,429,533
<CGS>                                       21,278,786
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               21,278,786
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            14,056,855
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,523,596
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,557,650
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,557,650
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,557,650
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>