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

- A01012

- 20

NON

- PRECEDENTIAL DECISION

- SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

Appellant

v.

COLIN IRWIN :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

PENNSYLVANIA

No. 840 EDA 2019

Appeal from the Order Entered March 15, 2019 In the Court of Common Pleas of Pike County Criminal Division at No(s):

CP

- 52

- CR

- 0000168

- 2018

BEFORE: NICHOLS, J., MURRAY, J., and COLINS, J. *

DISSENTING MEMORANDUM BY COLINS, J.: FILED FEBRUARY 2 8 , 2020

I disagree and therefore m ust dissent from the scholarly, well

researched Memorandum of the majority.

Trial courts must be able to enforce their discovery orders and also to

control their calendars. If they cannot, t here will be anarchy in our

courtrooms.

It would appear that the state police were confused as to who the chief

law enforc ement officer is in Pike County ( o bviously

, the constitutionally

elected District Attorney), and presume d that they may pick and choo se which

orders of the court to comply with. Further, the District Attorney could have

served a subpoena d uces tecum upon the a ppropriate state police parties

_________________ __________ ______ ____ _______

* Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.J

- A01012

- 20

- 2

-

w hen the state police failed to comply with trial court’s order to disclose the

witness statemen ts.

I agree that the trial court’s preclusion of the material testimony of the

complainant and two eyewitness at trial is appropriate in light of the discovery

violation committed by the Commonwealth.
IV

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 280

Expressing the sense of the House that a schedule should be adopted to

require three consecutive 5-day work weeks per month.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 19, 1993

Mr. ROEMER (for himself, Ms. DUNN, Ms. SHEPHERD, Mr. ALLARD, and Mr.

FINGERHUT) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to

the Committee on Rules

RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the House that a schedule should

be adopted to require three consecutive 5-day work weeks

per month.

Whereas the profound uncertainty of the current scheduling

of legislative activity in the House of Representatives disrupts the legislative process and the efficient workings of

the House of Representatives in ways that make changes

imperative;

Whereas taxpayer dollars are not being utilized as effectively

as they could in the administration of the duties and

scheduling of the House of Representatives;

Whereas the current schedule makes it difficult to conduct

committee hearings and meetings while the House is in
2

•HRES 280 IH

session, disrupting the coordination of legislative activity

and the fulfillment of Congress’ oversight responsibilities;

Whereas the current schedule often provides inadequate time

for the thoughtful consideration of the Nation’s important business;

Whereas scheduling floor votes at the beginning and end of

the week, having recorded committee attendance and

votes, and using computer scheduling could improve committee attendance and reduce conflicts resulting from simultaneous committee meetings; and

Whereas a more predictable and organized schedule would

allow Members to use their time more effectively with

both their constituents and their families: Now, therefore,

be it

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep2 resentatives that a formal schedule should be adopted of

3 three consecutive 5-day work weeks for legislative business

4 in Washington, followed by a week in which Members may

5 attend to important matters in their districts.

Æ
<PAGE>

                                                                     EXHIBIT 23

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


The Board of Directors
Taitron Components Incorporated:


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on
Form S-8 (No. 33-94102) of Taitron Components Incorporated of our report dated
February 11, 1998, relating to the balance sheets of Taitron Components
Incorporated as of December 31, 1997 and 1996 and the related consolidated
statements of operations, cash flows and stockholders' equity for each of the
years in the three-year period ended December 31, 1997, which report appears
in the December 31, 1997, annual report on Form 10-K of Taitron Components
Incorporated.


                                       /s/ KPMG Peat Marwick LLP


Los Angeles, California
March 30, 1998
# C_2020129EN.01001102.xml

| 20.4.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 129/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.4.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 129/11

---

Action brought on 19 February 2020 — Ruhorimbere v Council

(Case T-105/20)

(2020/C 129/14)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Éric Ruhorimbere (Mbuji-Mayi, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/2109 of 9 December 2019, in so far as the applicant’s name is maintained at No 10 in Annex II to Decision 2010/788/CFSP; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/2109 of 9 December 2019, in so far as the applicant’s name is maintained at No 10 in Annex II to Decision 2010/788/CFSP;

| — | annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2101 of 9 December 2019, in so far as the applicant’s name is maintained at No 10 in Annex Ia to Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2101 of 9 December 2019, in so far as the applicant’s name is maintained at No 10 in Annex Ia to Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005;

| — | rule that the provisions of Article 3(2)(b) of Decision 2010/788/CFSP and Article 2b(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) [No 1183/2005] are unlawful; |
| --- | --- |

—

rule that the provisions of Article 3(2)(b) of Decision 2010/788/CFSP and Article 2b(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) [No 1183/2005] are unlawful;

| — | order the Council to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Council to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law which are, in essence, identical or similar to those raised in Case T-95/20, Kazembe Musonda v Council.

---
Exhibit 99.2

                   Certification of Chief Financial Officer
               of GeoResources, Inc. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350


     I, J. P. Vickers, certify that:

     In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of GeoResources,
Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended June 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
J. P. Vickers, Chief 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, 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.



                                       /S/  J. P. Vickers
                                       ------------------------------------
                                       J. P. Vickers
                                       Chief Executive Officer
                                       August 14, 2002
#### BARKLEY TOWNSEND *vs.*ROBERT HOUSTON.

Plaintiff having left the state after suit brought, ordered to give security for costs.

In this case a motion was made that the plaintiff give security for costs, founded on an affidavit stating that the plaintiff, since action brought, had left the state, and it was not known where he was, or who was conducting the suit for him.

*158*Frame*and *BrincJdoe,*for the motion.

*Ctdlen,*against it.

*The Court,*

considering the case as falling within the equity of the *thirty-eighth*rule of court, (post, p. 164.) though not within its terms, granted the motion, though objected to; and *ordered*that plaintiff *give*security for costs by the second rule day in vacation, or judgment of non pros, (a.)

(a.)

).The same was the rule and practice of the old courts; and also of Chancery.

*Buckmaster*vs. *Buckmaster et ux. ex'x.*Chancery, Kent; Aug. Term 1814.

On the affidavit of Joseph Buckmaster, one of the defendants, being filed ; stating that the complainant removed out of the state soon after filing his bill; and that he had for a year and upwards, resided in the State of Ohio ; the *Chancellor*granted a rule that the complainant give security for the payment of the costs by the first day of next term; Or that the bill be dismissed. *2*Stranee. 697.
# all_lease07012018
# C_2022451EN.01000602.xml

| 28.11.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 451/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.11.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 451/6

---

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 6 October 2022 — KN v European Economic and Social Committee (EESC)

(Case C-673/21 P) (1)

(Appeal - Institutional law - European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) - Code of Conduct - Allegations of psychological harassment against a member of the EESC - Investigation by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) - Decision to relieve the member of his supervisory and personnel management functions - Action for annulment and compensation)

(2022/C 451/08)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: KN (represented by: M. Aboudi and M. Casado García-Hirschfeld, avocats)

Other party to the proceedings: European Economic and Social Committee) (represented by: X. Chamodraka, M. Pascua Mateo, L. Camarena Januzec and A Carvajal García-Valdecasas, acting as agents, and by A. Duron, avocate)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders KN to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders KN to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC).

---

(1)  OJ C 11, 10.1.2022.

---
EXHIBIT 15.1




                       ACCOUNTANTS' AWARENESS LETTER



Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20549


Re:   Global Marine Inc. Registration Statements

We are aware that our report dated August 5, 1998, on our review of the
condensed consolidated interim financial information of Global Marine Inc.
and subsidiaries for the three and six months ended June 30, 1998, and
included in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q is incorporated by reference
in (i) the prospectus constituting part of the Company's Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (Registration Nos. 33-32088, 33-40961, and 33-63326),
respectively, for the Global Marine Inc. 1989 Stock Option and Incentive
Plan, (ii) the prospectus constituting part of the Company's Registration
Statement on Form S-8 (Registration No. 33-40266) for the Global Marine
Savings Incentive Plan, (iii) the prospectus constituting part of the
Company's Registration Statement on Form S-8 (Registration No. 33-40961)
for the Global Marine Inc. 1990 Non-Employee Director Stock Option Plan,
(iv) the prospectus constituting part of the Company's  Registration
Statement on Form S-8 (Registration No. 33-57691) for the Global Marine Inc.
1994 Non-Employee Stock Option and Incentive Plan and (v) the combined
prospectus constituting part of the Company's Registration Statements on
Form S-3 (Registration Nos. 33-58577 and 333-49807) for the proposed offering
of up to $500,000,000 of debt securities, preferred stock and/or common stock.
Pursuant to Rule 436(c) under the Securities Act of 1933, this report should
not be considered a part of any of said registration statements prepared or
certified by us within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.



/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Houston, Texas
August 7, 1998
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 892

To amend part A of title IV of the Social Security Act to ensure the

identification of the biological parents of each child who receives aid

to families with dependent children.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 16, 1993

Mr. FRANKS of Connecticut introduced the following bill; which was referred

to the Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend part A of title IV of the Social Security Act

to ensure the identification of the biological parents of

each child who receives aid to families with dependent

children.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Parental Responsibility

5 Act’’.
2

•HR 892 IH

1 SEC. 2. REDUCTION IN PAYMENTS TO STATES FOR AID TO

2 FAMILIES WITH DEPENDENT CHILDREN.

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 403 of the Social Security

4 Act (42 U.S.C. 603) is amended by adding at the end the

5 following:

6 ‘‘(o)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this

7 part, the Secretary shall reduce the amounts payable to

8 any State under this part for any calendar quarter by—

9 ‘‘(A) 5 percent, if the parental identity percent10 age of the State for the calendar quarter is less than

11 70 percent but not less than 60 percent;

12 ‘‘(B) 7 percent, if the parental identity percent13 age of the State for the calendar quarter is less than

14 60 percent but not less than 50 percent;

15 ‘‘(C) 10 percent, if the parental identity per16 centage of the State for the calendar quarter is less

17 than 50 percent but not less than 40 percent;

18 ‘‘(D) 15 percent, if the parental identity per19 centage of the State for the calendar quarter is less

20 than 40 percent but not less than 22 percent; or

21 ‘‘(E) 20 percent, if the parental identity per22 centage of the State for the calendar quarter is less

23 than 22 percent.

24 ‘‘(2) As used in paragraph (1), the term ‘parental

25 identity percentage of a State for a calendar quarter’

26 means the percentage of dependent children who received
3

•HR 892 IH

1 aid during the calendar quarter under the State plan ap2 proved under this part whose biological parents have not

3 been identified to the State agency referred to in section

4 402(a)(3).’’.

5 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

6 subsection (a) shall apply to payments for calendar quar7 ters ending at least 1 year after the date of the enactment

8 of this Act.

Æ
Exhibit 4.2



Adagene Inc.   INCORPORATED IN THE CAYMAN ISLANDS UNDER THE COMPANIES LAW (AS AMENDED OR   REVISED FROM TIME TO TIME) Certificate Number Number of Shares THE AUTHORISED   CAPITAL OF THE COMPANY IS USD 80,000.00 DIVIDED INTO 800,000,000 ORDINARY   SHARES OF PAR VALUE USD 0.0001 EACH THIS CERTIFIES THAT OF IS THE OWNER OF   fully paid Ordinary shares of par value USD 0.0001 each IN THE COMPANY   Adagene Inc. (the "Company") transferable on the books of the   Company by the holder hereof in person or by a duly authorised attorney upon   surrender of this certificate to the Company. This certificate and the shares   represented are issued and shall be held subject to the provisions of the   Memorandum and Articles of Association of the Company. EXECUTED on behalf of   the Company this day of Director 9764755.1G3359.H19501 Exhibit 4.2
```

[Federal Register: June 8, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 109)]
[Notices]               
[Page 32360]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr08jn10-47]                         

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

THE BROADCASTING BOARD OF GOVERNORS

 
Notice of Membership of SES Performance Review Board

AGENCY: Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG).

ACTION: Notice of Membership of SES Performance Review Board.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Title 5 United States Code, Section 4314, requires that notice 
of the appointment of an individual to serve as a member of a 
performance review board (PRB) shall be published in the Federal 
Register. The following individuals have been appointed to serve as PRB 
members for BBG: Barbara J. Barger, Acting Deputy Director, Force 
Development, Manpower, Personnel and Services, U.S. Department of the 
Air Force; Angelique Crumbly, Director, Office of Management Policy, 
Budget and Performance, U.S. Agency for International Development; and 
Randy T. Streufert, Director, Office of Security, U.S. Agency for 
International Development.

ADDRESSES: Broadcasting Board of Governors, 330 Independence Ave., SW., 
Washington, DC 20237.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donna S. Grace, Director, Office of 
Human Resources, 202-382-7500.

Jeffrey N. Trimble,
Executive Director, Broadcasting Board of Governors.
[FR Doc. 2010-13645 Filed 6-7-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8610-01-P
```
#### Keeler et al. vs. Harding.

A misunderstanding having arisen between a lessor and lessee, where the lease was by indenture, the matters of difference were submitted to arbitrators, who made their award, stating, among other things, that the lessee should pay the same amount of rent and in the same manner ns provided for in the original lease: *Held,*that an action on the covenant in the lease for the rent reserved was well brought.

*Appeal from, Jefferson Cvrcuit Court.*

lion. JonN C. Murray, Circuit Judge.

Bell & Carlton, for appellants.

*698Watkins, for the appellee.

Mr. Justice Fairchild

delivered the opinion of the court. ■

• Harding conveyed to Keeler and Woodall certain lands for a term of years. The object of the lease, on the part of the lessees, was to have the use of a saw and grist mill on the premises ; the lands not seeming to be important only as yielding timber for the consumption of the saw-mill. ■ The original lease was by indenture, and simply described by their numbers the lands that were the subject.of the lease, the duration of the term, the amount and mode of payment of the rent reserved. This suhffwas an action of covenant upon the lease, and complained that Keeler and Woodall had not paid the stipulated rent.

The term of the lease began upon the 1st of January, 1857, and about the 1st of June, 1857, the mill was burned, when a misunderstanding occurred between the parties, and to settle the matters of difference they submitted to arbitrators. They awarded that Keeler and Woodall should pay the same amount of rent, and in the manner provided for in the original lease, and that if they should rebuild the mill, under other provisions in the award, they should, for the same rent, have the lease extendedtwo years beyond the duration of the original 'term. Keeler and Woodall rebuilt the mill.

Judgment was rendered against the defendants in the Circuit Court, and, having appealed, the defendants below ask a reversal of the'judgment, on the ground that the action should have been brought on the award, and not on the original conveyance.

If the action, had beeen founded on any thing that was newly stated in the award, as for the use of fire-wood during the two years that were added to the original term, it must have been brought upon the bond submitting to the award, on the principle that an award, being an adjustment and merger of the matters submitted to arbitration, is itself the foundation of any actions intended to enforce its provisions. But in this case, the *699award does not differ from the lease, but- expressly confirms its stipulations of the payment of rent, both in amount and time of payment. It cannot then be held that the contract for payment of rent contained in the lease is in ..any way affected by the award, and when the former is in full life, we cannot see the force of the argument that would forbid it to be the ground of an action.

This being the' only matter presented by the appellants for our consideration, the judgment is affirmed.
# C_2020329EN.01002601.xml

| 5.10.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 329/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.10.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 329/26

---

Action brought on 21 August 2020 — Interfloat and GMB v Commission

(Case T-530/20)

(2020/C 329/46)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicants: Interfloat Corp. (Ruggell, Lichtenstein) and GMB Glasmanufaktur Brandenburg GmbH (Tschernitz, Germany) (represented by: U. Karpenstein and R. Sangi, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:

| — | annul Commission Decision C(2020) 3287 final of 26 May 2020 on the measures SA.39990 (2016/C) (ex 2016/NN) (ex/2014/FC) (ex 2014/CP) — implemented by Belgium for Ducatt NV; and |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Commission Decision C(2020) 3287 final of 26 May 2020 on the measures SA.39990 (2016/C) (ex 2016/NN) (ex/2014/FC) (ex 2014/CP) — implemented by Belgium for Ducatt NV; and

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants rely on a single plea in law.

The applicants submit that the Commission was not permitted to close the formal investigation procedure that was opened following a complaint made by the applicants. Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 (1) (‘the regulation on State aid procedure’) provides for a specific and exhaustive procedure for the closure of the formal investigation procedure. It requires, in particular, that the formal investigation procedure be concluded by means of one of the four decisions exhaustively set out in Article 9. Closure of a formal investigation procedure is envisaged only if the Member State concerned withdraws its notification (Article 10). In the contested decision the Commission disregarded the wording, scheme and purpose of Article 108(2) TFEU and of the regulation on State aid procedure and thus the applicants’ procedural rights in the formal investigation procedure. There is in fact no sufficient justification for the closure of the procedure.

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 of 13 July 2015 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (OJ 2015 L 248, p. 9).

---
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATION
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








Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of
section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), I, Howard S. Modlin,
Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer, and I, William G.
Henry, Vice President, Finance and Administration and Chief Financial Officer,
each of General DataComm Industries, Inc. (the “Company”), do each hereby
certify, to the best of my knowledge that:





(1) The
Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended  December
31, 2007 being filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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.





This
Certification accompanies this Form 10-Q as an exhibit, but shall not be deemed
as having been filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 or as a separate disclosure document of the Company or the certifying
officer.











/s/ Howard S.
      ModlinDate:
      February 14, 2008
            Howard
      S. Modlin,Chairman
      of the Board, President andChief
      Executive Officer/s/ William G.
      HenryWilliam
      G. HenryVice
      President, Finance and Administrationand
      Chief Financial Officer