alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Recelved:19H339B119 To** **Fourth Courts** **of Appeals** **Page 2 of** **2015-08-06 07:12** **19 (GMT)** **Aus 2015** **02:21am P002** **19143398119 From** **Forth Courts** **Of 04-15-OCW'IO-** **-CV August 6,2015** **Joe JaniG** **Gomez VS** 

### Mr**Thomas Dashelll** 

### Emergency**Motion to** **Reconder Slay** **Of Writ** **Of Possession** **We ask** **For the** **Forth Courts** **of Appeals** **to reconsider** **Stay Writ** **Of Possession** **As our** 

### rent**has been** **paid to** **date MR** **Thomas Dashiell** **has refused** **to except** **rent payments** **And has** **refused to** **refund any monies** **for deposit** **and make** **any repairs** **to Apartment** **Mr Dashslell** **also failed** **to sever** **proper notice** **for eviction** **notice And** **Had full** **knowledge of rent** **being current** **And stale** **Judge Presslerwas** **aware rent** **was current** **At time** **court was** **held May** **21,2015 As** **pre Texas** **slate Law** **If rent** **is current** **Landlord must** **refile and** **server proper** **notice of evlclion** 

### Mr**Dasheill has** **made consensus** **for late payments** **for other** **tenants and** **has excepted** **late payment** **on several** **occasions from** **us But** **Mr Dashelll** **and Mr** **Eddie Voight** **have made** **it clear** **they do** **not want** **anyone of** **Mexican Origin** **Quote you** **all need** **to go** **back io** **Mexico You** **people are** **taking American** **jobs and** **are dirty** **As pre** **Judge Pressler** **QouteJanle Mr** **Dasheill is** **being prejudice** **again you** **nd your** **husband And** **advice you** **to file** **an Appeal.** **We pray** **that The** **Fouth Courts** **of Appeal** **will please** **reconsider. Emergency** **MoSion Of** **Writ Of** **Possession SIncerly** **Joe Janie** **Gomez CO** **Received:19143398H9 Aug** **2015 02:21** **an P001** **To: Fourth** **Courts of** **Appeals Page1of2** **2015-08-06 07:12:19** **(GMT) 19143398119** **From:**

## FAX**COVER SHEET** **TO COMPANY** **FAXNUMBER FROM** **DATE RE** 

### COVER**MESSAGE Fourth** **Courts of** **Appeals 12103352762** **2015-08-06 07:11:16** **GMT UNKNOWN** **att: Ross** **WWW EFAX.COM**
EXHIBIT  99.1

                Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
                    As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the
                          Sarbanes - Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of AFG Investment Trust D (the "Trust"),
on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange  Commission  on  the  date  hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, the
Principal  Executive  Officer  of the Trust's Managing Trustee, hereby certifies
pursuant  to  18  U.S.C.  1350  as  adopted  pursuant  to  Section  906  of  the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of  2002  that:
(1)     the Report of the Trust filed today 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 Trust.

                    /s/  Gary  D.  Engle
                    --------------------
                    Gary  D.  Engle
President  of  AFG  ASIT  Corporation,
 the  Managing  Trustee  of  the  Trust
(Principal  Executive  Officer)
                    November  19,  2002
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
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83




88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119

*Commercial/financial information may be entitled to confidential treatment*
120
121
122
123

*Product ingredient source information may be entitled to confidential treatment*
124
125




Pages 130-132 - Confidential Statements of Formula may be entitled to confidential treatment
# C_2019065EN.01002601.xml

| 18.2.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 65/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.2.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65/26

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta domstolen (Sweden) lodged on 30 November 2018 — Föreningen Svenska Tonsättares Internationella Musikbyrå u.p.a. (Stim), Svenska artisters och musikers intresseorganisation ek. för. (SAMI) v Fleetmanager Sweden AB, Nordisk Biluthyrning AB

(Case C-753/18)

(2019/C 65/34)

Language of the case: Swedish

Referring court

Högsta domstolen

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants: Föreningen Svenska Tonsättares Internationella Musikbyrå u.p.a. (Stim), Svenska artisters och musikers intresseorganisation ek. för. (SAMI)

Respondents: Fleetmanager Sweden AB, Nordisk Biluthyrning AB

Questions referred

| 1. | Does the hiring out of cars which are equipped as standard with radio receivers mean that the person who hires the cars out is a user who makes a communication to the public within the meaning of Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/29 (1) and within the meaning of Article 8(2) of Directive 2006/115? (2) |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does the hiring out of cars which are equipped as standard with radio receivers mean that the person who hires the cars out is a user who makes a communication to the public within the meaning of Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/29 (1) and within the meaning of Article 8(2) of Directive 2006/115? (2)

| 2. | What is the significance, if any, of the volume of the car hire activities and the duration of the hires? |
| --- | --- |

2.

What is the significance, if any, of the volume of the car hire activities and the duration of the hires?

---

(1)  Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (OJ 2001 L 167, p. 10).

(2)  Directive 2006/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on rental right and lending right and on certain rights related to copyright in the field of intellectual property (OJ 2006 L 376, p. 28).

---
01/2016 Establishment/Company Letterhead (preferred) 1

Establishment/Company Letterhead

Application cover letter should be printed on establishment/company 

letterhead.

Administrator John Q. Deals

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 123 Citrus Blvd

c/o AQI VMO Director, PPQ Field Operations Hilo, HI 12345

2150 Centre Ave., Bldg. B Phone: (123) 555-1212

Ft. Collins, CO 80526 Email: Best1@Hauler.com

Date: 1 January, 2016

Dear Sir/Ma’am:

The purpose of this correspondence is for our establishment, Haulers Inc., to 

make application to provide regulated garbage caterer/hauler services to 

support trade-related business at the commercial port of Hilo, Hawaii. Hilo has 

maritime and airport terminals that require handling of regulated garbage.

Please find attached our completed Application for APHIS Regulated Garbage 

Compliance Agreement Approval. Additionally we are prepared for any 

evaluation/visit from authorized government officials.

We look forward to working with you. Should you have any questions or wish 

to provide any additional guidance, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Kind regards,

(Signature, printed name, and title of authorized representative)

John Q. Deals

President
Exhibit 99.2

                        CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

I,  Richard  Zaremba,  Vice  President,  Chief  Financial Officer, Treasurer and
Secretary  of MISONIX, INC. (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of
the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of  2002,  18  U.S.C.  Section  1350,  that:

(1)  the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the three months ended
September  30,  2002  (the  "Report")  fully  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

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

Dated: November 13, 2002


                               /s/ Richard Zaremba
                               -----------------------------
                               Richard Zaremba
                               Vice President, Chief Financial Officer,
                               Treasurer and Secretary


                                       20
<PAGE>
Exhibit 32.1

            CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                 PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY  ACT OF 2002

     In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Financial
Federal Corporation (the "Company") for the year ended July 31,
2005, as filed with the Securities and Exhange Commission (the
"Report"), Paul R. Sinsheimer, Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, hereby certifies 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
     operations of the Company

     A signed original of this written statement required by section
906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.



October 11, 2005                  /s/ Paul R. Sinsheimer
---------------                  ---------------------------
Date                             Paul R. Sinsheimer
                                 Chief Executive Officer and President
#### In the Matter of Carolyn D.

Family Court, Westchester County,

December 7, 1970.

*753
      *John, J. S. Mead,, County Attorney (F. Sherwood Alexander*of counsel), for petitioner. *Dennis T. Barrett*for respondents.

Alvin R Buskin, J.

Respondents’ motion is granted to the extent that the petitioner is directed to make available to respondents’ attorney for examination and copying, within 24 hours of the service upon the County Attorney of a copy of the order to be entered herein, all records of a physical examination of the infant Carolyn D., and in order to effectuate the same to execute and deliver to respondents’ attorney an appropriate authorization for same referring to the order to be entered herein, addressed to Grasslands Hospital.

Provisions of the CPLR regarding disclosure can be used in appropriate cases in the Family Court *(Matter of Schwartz*v. *Schwartz,*23 A D 2d 204, 208; *Matter of Curtis B,*52 Misc 2d 400; Family Ct. Act, § 165).

The court deems this to be an appropriate case for disclosure pursuant to CPLR 3120. The respondents are entitled to rehut any evidence the petitioner may introduce regarding the physical condition of the child. To assist them in preparing for trial they should be permitted to investigate relevant medical evidence in the possession or under the control of petitioner who has custody of the respondents ’-daughter— Discovery proceedings are not uncommon in this court. They have been permitted in paternity, neglect and custody cases as well as where the financial ability of a parent was involved.

Petitioner, in opposing this motion, argues that he has no control over the requested records. He is an official of the Department of Social Services, which is under the jurisdiction of the County of Westchester, as is Grasslands Hospital which examined the child at petitioner’s request. Thus the petitioner’s contention that the records are not in his control appears to the court to be unfounded. If respondents’ signatures are also required by the hospital in order to release the records, that should not pose any problem, since they are the applicants herein.
# C_2019025EN.01001802.xml

| 21.1.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 25/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.1.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 25/18

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil de Gerona (Spain) lodged on 15 October 2018 — OD v Ryanair D.A.C.

(Case C-646/18)

(2019/C 25/22)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de lo Mercantil de Gerona

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: OD

Defendant: Ryanair D.A.C.

Questions referred

| 1. | Does the concept of implied prorogation of jurisdiction laid down in and governed by Article 26 of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 (1) require there to be any objective connection between the subject matter of the dispute or the domicile of the applicant and the court with which the claim is lodged? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does the concept of implied prorogation of jurisdiction laid down in and governed by Article 26 of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 (1) require there to be any objective connection between the subject matter of the dispute or the domicile of the applicant and the court with which the claim is lodged?

| 2. | Does the concept of implied prorogation of jurisdiction laid down in and governed by Article 26(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 require, in all respects, an autonomous interpretation common to all the Member States? Is it therefore unable to be made subject to limitations laid down in Member States’ rules on domestic jurisdiction, such as a provision that such jurisdiction is not valid in proceedings which, because of the small sum involved, are required by the Spanish Law on Civil Procedure to be heard under the simplified procedure? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Does the concept of implied prorogation of jurisdiction laid down in and governed by Article 26(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 require, in all respects, an autonomous interpretation common to all the Member States? Is it therefore unable to be made subject to limitations laid down in Member States’ rules on domestic jurisdiction, such as a provision that such jurisdiction is not valid in proceedings which, because of the small sum involved, are required by the Spanish Law on Civil Procedure to be heard under the simplified procedure?

---

(1)  Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ 2012 L 351, p. 1).

---
November 8, 1996

16155

#### Rhodes v. Hawaiian Elec. Co., Inc.

Order No. 96-23

Affirmed
EXHIBIT 10.1

[GENAERA LETTERHEAD]

May 27, 2008

John L. Armstrong, Jr.

c/o Genaera Corporation

5110 Campus Drive

Plymouth Meeting, PA

19462

Dear Jack:

In conjunction with Genaeras
decision to implement initiatives designed to conserve cash into mid-2009, we have discussed and you have agreed, intending to be legally bound, to the following:



| |  |  | A voluntary 10% reduction in base compensation. As such, effective June 1, 2008, your base salary will be $34,500.00 per month ($414,000/year); and
| | - |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | A voluntary forfeiture of cash incentives, including salary increases and discretionary bonus awards, for 2008.
| | - |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please indicate your agreement with these changes by signing in the space provided below.



|          |  |                            |  |  |  |       |  |                             
|--------- |  | -------------------------- |  |  |  | ----- |  | ----------------------------
|          |  |                            |  |  |  |       |  | Sincerely,                  
|          |  |                            |  | 
|          |  |                            |  |  |  |       |  | /s/ R. Frank Ecock          
|          |  |                            |  |  |  |       |  | R. Frank Ecock              
|          |  |                            |  |  |  |       |  | Compensation Committee Chair
|RFE/jlb   |  |                            |  |  |  |       |  |                             
|          |  |                            |  | 
|Accepted: |  | /s/ John L. Armstrong, Jr. |  |  |  | Date: |  | May 28, 2008
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 32


    CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


     In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Insurance Auto
Auctions, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended June 27, 2004 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Thomas C. O'Brien, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, 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; and

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


Date:  August 10, 2004


                                     /s/ Thomas C. O'Brien
                                     -------------------------------------------
                                     Thomas C. O'Brien, Chief Executive Officer




     In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Insurance Auto
Auctions, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended June 27, 2004 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Scott P. Pettit, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
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; and

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



Date:  August 10, 2004
                                     /s/ Scott P. Pettit
                                     -------------------------------------------
                                     Scott P. Pettit, Chief Financial Officer


     This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

     A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Reaction Scheme

Sanitized
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

No. 21

- 60104 Summary Calendar

**Heidy Carolina Morales**

**- Sanchez,** 

Petitioner **,**

versus
**Merrick Garland,** U.S. Attorney General **,** Respondent

**.**

Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A206 723 054

Before **Wiener, Dennis,** and **Haynes,** Circuit Judges

. **Per Curiam :**  *
Petitioner Heidy Carolina Morales

- Sanchez is a native and citizen of Honduras . She seeks review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismiss ing her appeal of t he immigration judge’s (IJ) order denying her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under

* Pursuant to **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED July 5, 2022 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 21-60104 Document: 00516381194 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/05/2022No. 21

- 60104

2 the Convention Against Torture (CAT). We review only the BIA’s decision except to the extent that the IJ’s ruling influences the BIA. Singh v. Sessions , 880 F.3d 220, 224 (5th Ci r. 2018).

Morales

- Sanchez incorrectly asserts that “it is undisputed” that she is “a member of a group recognized by the Los Olanchanos gang, i.e. , persons with information concerning crimes that the Los Olanchanos gang committed, who pass that informati on on.” W hether Morales

- Sanchez identified a cognizable particular social group (PSG) was very much disputed and was the basis for the IJ’s conclusion that Morales

- Sanchez was not entitled to asylum or withholding of removal. See Orellana

- Monson v. Holder , 685 F.3d 511, 519 (5th Cir. 2012). Her failure to challenge the adverse PSG determination abandons any challenge to it. See Soadjede v. Ashcroft , 324 F.3d 830, 833 (5th Cir. 2003)

. We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Morales

Sanchez’s newly raised claim that she is entitled to asylum based on her “anti

- gang political opinion .” Omari v. Holder , 562 F.3d 314, 321 (5th Cir. 2009). S ubstantial evidence thus supports the BIA’s conclusion that Morales

- Sanchez failed to establish past persecution or a well

- foun ded fear ,
or more

- likely

- than

- not probability , of future prosecution on account of a protected ground. See Zhang v. Gonzales , 432 F.3d 339, 344 (5th Cir. 2005). Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s conclusion that Morales

Sanchez was not entitled to relief under the CAT. See id

. She fails to cite any evidence that compels a conclusion contrary to that of the IJ that she failed to establish the state acti on required to obtain relief under the CAT. See Tabora Gutierrez v. Garland , 12 F.4th 496, 502

- 03 (5th Cir. 2021) ; T amara

Gomez v. Gonzales , 447 F.3d 343, 351 (5th Cir. 2006).

Morales

- Sanchez’s petition is **D ENIED**  **IN PART** and **DISMISSED IN PART**  for lack of jurisdiction. Case: 21-60104 Document: 00516381194 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/05/2022
United States Department of Agriculture 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 

WS Directive 2.460 06/11/03

LURE CROPS

1. PURPOSE

To provide guidelines on the use of lure crops for managing 

wildlife damage. 

2. REPLACEMENT HIGHLIGHTS 

This directive replaces ADC Directive 2.460 dated 9/17/96.

3. BACKGROUND 

Lure crops provide a source of food to divert wildlife from 

damaging agricultural resources; and as such, they can be an 

effective, long-term solution to some wildlife problems. Lure 

crops should be considered in areas that historically receive 

crop damage and where conventional scare tactics are ineffective. 

Lure crops should also be considered where it is desirable to 

move nuisance wildlife from sensitive to less sensitive areas. 

4. POLICY 

WS may provide technical assistance by coordinating with 

appropriate Federal and/or State agencies, the acquisition of 

seed, planting, and other arrangements pertaining to a lure crop 

program. 

5. REFERENCES 

50 CFR Part 20.21 - Illegal Hunting Methods. 

50 CFR Part 90 - Feeding Depredating Migratory Waterfowl. 

Deputy Administrator