alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2020313EN.01000602.xml

| 21.9.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 313/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.9.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 313/6

---

Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 16 January 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Telecom Italia SpA, Wind Tre SpA, Vodafone Italia SpA, Lindam Srl v Roma Capitale, Regione Lazio, Vodafone Italia SpA, Telecom Italia SpA, Wind Tre SpA, Wind Telecomunicazioni SpA

(Case C-368/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Approximation of laws - Electronic communications networks and services - Restrictions on the installation of mobile phone base transceiver stations established by local authorities - Insufficient details concerning the reasons why an answer to the question referred is necessary for the outcome of the dispute in the main proceedings - Manifest inadmissibility)

(2020/C 313/08)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants: Telecom Italia SpA, Wind Tre SpA, Vodafone Italia SpA, Lindam Srl

Respondents: Roma Capitale, Regione Lazio, Vodafone Italia SpA, Telecom Italia SpA, Wind Tre SpA, Wind Telecomunicazioni SpA

Interveners: Regione Lazio, Wind Tre SpA, Telecom Italia SpA, Ente Suore Francescane Missionarie del Cuore Immacolato di Maria and Others, Agenzia Regionale Protezione Ambiente (ARPA), Congregazione delle Religiose di Gesù e Maria

Operative part of the order

The request for a preliminary ruling made by the Consiglio di Stato (Council of State, Italy), by decision of 2 February 2018, is manifestly inadmissible.

---

(1)  OJ C 312, 16.9.2019.

---
Exhibit
32.1




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 Reed’s, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form
10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2009 as filed with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Christopher Reed,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,
as adopted pursuant to § 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.








Dated:   May
      13, 2009/s/ Christopher ReedChristopher
      Reed

                Chief
      Executive Officer
                (Principal
      Executive Officer)






A signed
original of this certification 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.
December
28, 2015


 


Mr
Adam Levin


VC2
Partners, LLC


10951
Pico Boulevard


Suite
102


Los
Angeles, CA 90064


 


Dear
Mr Levin


 


NOTICE
OF DEFAULT -- Mimio, LLC


 


It
is with extreme disappointment and regret that, once again, we find it necessary to re-visit your failure to abide by the terms
of the Membership Interest Purchase Agreement entered into between us on September 28, 2015 (the “Agreement”),
as amended. You will recall that, due to previous failures, it was necessary to amend the Agreement on three separate occasions
to provide you with further accommodations and opportunities to meet your payment obligations. The latest amendment, Amendment
No 3, obligated you to make a final payment of the balance of the Note, plus accrued interest, on or before December 15, 2016.
You failed to do so.


 


Your
default, without explanation or excuse, has caused, and will continue to cause, Skyview considerable loss and damage, all of which
we will recover from you in full. To mitigate our losses, we hereby demand that you immediately make payment of the sums due under
the Note (i.e. $1,460,507.50, plus accrued interest). If payment is not received in our account by 5 pm (Pacific time) on December
30, 2016, we will begin to exercise our rights against the securities and guarantees available to us. Accordingly, we reserve
all of our rights.


Yours
sincerely,


 


SKYVIEW
CAPITAL, LLC


 


	 	 
	James
    F Hall	 
	Executive
    Vice President and General Counsel	 



 


	cc:	Stephen
    A. Weiss, Esq.	Michael
    Pope, Esq.
	 	CKR
    Law, LLP	Vert
    Capital, LLC
	 	35th
    Floor	VC2
    partners, LLC
	 	1330
    Avenue of the Americas	 
	 	New
    York, NY 10019	 
	 	 	 
	 	Adam
    Colley, Esq.	Mark
    Elliott, Esq.
	 	Crestmark
    Bank,	Boxlight
    Corporatoin
	 	5480
    Corporate Drive	 
	 	Suite
    350	 
	 	Troy,
    Michigan 48098	 




 


Suite
810-N, 2000 Avenue of the Stars, Los Angeles, CA 90067
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 117 (Thursday, August 2, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Page S5972]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                 TRIBUTE TO JUDGE HOWARD A. DAWSON, JR.

 Mr. BOOZMAN. Mr. President, today I wish to honor the longest 
serving judge in the history of the U.S. Tax Court--Judge Howard A. 
Dawson, Jr.--who will mark his 50th year as a Federal judge on August 
21, 2012.
  Judge Dawson, a native of Okolona, AR, comes from a family of 
Arkansas educators. Because of his groundbreaking work to unify many 
rural schools in Arkansas, Judge Dawson's father was dubbed ``Dr. Rural 
Education.'' That reputation earned Judge Dawson's father a position 
within the Department of Interior and the family relocated to 
Washington, DC.
  Judge Dawson started his Federal service right here at the U.S. 
Capitol complex. A fellow Arkansan, Hattie Caraway--the first woman to 
win election to the U.S. Senate--helped Judge Dawson get a job as an 
elevator operator in what is now the Russell Senate Office Building
  During World War II, Judge Dawson served as a captain in the U.S. 
Army, where he was stationed in France and Germany. After the war, he 
earned his law degree at George Washington University School of Law. 
Judge Dawson eventually joined the Internal Revenue Service Office as 
chief of counsel after a brief time working in private practice. In 
1962, Judge Dawson was appointed to the Tax Court bench by President 
John F. Kennedy.
  Well respected among his peers, Judge Dawson was chosen to be chief 
judge three times during his five-decade tenure. He has authored over 
1,200 opinions, but he is also known for contributions that extend 
beyond his legal writings.
  As a judge, Dawson worked with fellow Arkansan, Wilbur Mills, to help 
shape the legislation that created today's U.S. Tax Court as an 
independent judicial body under article I of the Constitution.
  In order to help self-represented taxpayers, Judge Dawson worked to 
establish the small tax case procedure to simplify and allow tax 
litigation to be more accessible. He became the first judge in charge 
of the small tax case division.
  I would like to recognize Judge Howard A. Dawson, Jr., for his 
commendable service as a Federal judge. I am proud of his contribution 
to our Nation and to the Natural State.

                          ____________________
```
My name is Elizabeth Killough and I live in Glenside, Pennsylvania. 

I fully support the EPA's proposed standard. It should be implemented promptly and without being 

weakened in any way. 

By setting reasonable carbon pollution standards for power plants, the EPA will cut the primary driver of 

climate change, improve air quality, reduce the risk for superstorms and give the United States 

credibility in seeking carbon emissions reductions from other countries. 

I come to this issue from a unique perspective. I maintain an exclusively vegan diet. This means I eat 

absolutely no animals or animal products; no eggs, butter, milk or anything produced by an animal. 

At first glance, my diet would appear to have nothing to do with the growing problem of carbon dioxide 

in our atmosphere. However, the processing, transporting, and storing of animal meat and products is 

extremely energy-intensive. It takes eleven times the energy to produce a calorie of animal protein as it 

does to produce a calorie of plant protein. The University of Chicago researched diet's effect on carbon 

emissions and found that a vegan is responsible for the release of approximately 1.5 fewer tons of 

carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year than a meat-eater. 

Cutting meat and dairy to shrink the carbon footprint of my diet is great. However, while I have the 

power to reduce my carbon footprint by eating plants, am powerless to reduce the carbon footprint 

from power plants I rely on. That is why the EPA needs to act. 

I live very happily without meat and dairy. I cannot live happily without electricity. My family has 

voluntarily purchased 100% clean electricity for our household for many years. But we can't do it alone. 

It's time for the government to act. 

The democratically elected Congress gave the democratically elected President the authority to regulate 

emissions from power plants. The EPA must use this authority to implement the proposed emissions 

standard as soon as possible without watering it down. Thank you. 

Elizabeth Killough 

454 Monroe Ave. 

Glenside PA 19038
#### Joseph P. Williams, Respondent, v William Forbes et al., Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs-Appellants, et al., Defendant. David Rowe et al., Third-Party Defendants.

— In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants William Forbes and William Forbes Construction Corp. appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Morrison, J.), dated July 12, 1989, as denied that branch of their motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The plaintiff was hired by third-party defendant David Rowe to work on a construction project on which the defendant William Forbes was the general contractor. While working on the project, the plaintiff sustained extensive injuries when he fell from a ladder supplied by Forbes. The plaintiff recovered workers’ compensation benefits from Rowe’s insurance carrier, and brought this action against Forbes alleging that the ladder from which he fell was defective. Forbes moved for summary judgment, arguing that the plaintiff’s sole remedy was the recovery of workers’ compensation benefits because Forbes and Rowe were involved in a joint venture on the construction project.

*126We agree with the court that issues of fact exist concerning whether Forbes and Rowe were involved in a joint venture. A joint venture is " 'an association of two or more persons to carry out a single business enterprise for profit, for which purpose they combine their property, money, effects, skill and knowledge’ ” *(Fallone v Misericordia Hosp.,*23 AD2d 222, 225, *affd*17 NY2d 648, quoting from *Forman v Lumm,*214 App Div 579, 583). Indispensable to the creation of a joint venture is a sharing in the profits and losses of the business *(see, Matter of Steinbeck v Gerosa,*4 NY2d 302, 317; *Poppenberg v Reliable Maintenance Corp.,*89 AD2d 791, 792). The defendant has the burden of establishing the defense of workers’ compensation by a preponderance of the credible evidence *(see, Buchner v Pines Hotel,*87 AD2d 691, *affd*58 NY2d 1019). Although Forbes presented evidence tending to show that a joint venture existed, there were also facts which conflicted with this conclusion. For example, the plaintiff was paid by Rowe out of Rowe’s business account. Forbes and Rowe also maintained separate workers’ compensation policies and financial records, and all payments by the homeowner were made to Forbes individually. Additionally, Forbes was named on the building permit, and was, in fact, the only licensed contractor of the two. Thus, Forbes has failed to establish, as a matter of law, that a joint venture existed between him and Rowe. This is an issue of fact for the triers of fact to determine. Similarly, the issue of whether a special employment relationship existed between the plaintiff and Forbes is a factual one to be determined by the triers of fact *(see, Matter of Abramson v Long Beach Mem. Hosp.,*103 AD2d 866; *Brown v Micheletti,*97 AD2d 529). Mangano, P. J., Kooper, Rosenblatt and O’Brien, JJ., concur.
10

Record of Discussion

Docket No. FAA- Directorate Identifier: -AD

With whom outside the FAA has this AD action been discussed (i.e., Design Approval Holder, 

manufacturer, ATA, NBAA, RAA, AOPA, ALPA, GAMA, etc)? 

ORGANIZATION PERSON CONTACTED DATE TOPICS DISCUSSED

DAH Chris Makarov Nov 13, 2012 Other. List below.

thru Feb 22, 2013 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other/Additional Information: Details about previous ADs and SBs that are related to this one.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Carol A. Smith, Appellant.

— Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Sullivan County (Hanofee, J.), rendered October 26, 1988, convicting defendant upon her plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.

Defendant’s only contention on appeal is that, due to her age and background, her sentence of 3 to 9 years’ imprisonment is excessive. At the time she committed this crime, defendant was serving a five-year term of probation, having been convicted of the same crime only six months prior to committing this offense. In addition, although there was no agreement as to sentencing, defendant was advised that she could receive a prison term of *8Vs*to 25 years. Given defen*952dant’s criminal history, as well as the presentence report which indicated that defendant made absolutely no effort to abide by the conditions of her probation, County Court properly exercised its discretion in imposing sentence *(see, People v Dean,*155 AD2d 774, *lv denied*75 NY2d 812; *People v McManus,*124 AD2d 305).

Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Mikoll, Levine and Crew III, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 115 (Tuesday, July 31, 2012)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1363]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

           TRIBUTE TO THE ALABAMA SCHOOL OF MATH AND SCIENCE

                                 ______
                                 

                             HON. JO BONNER

                               of alabama

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, July 31, 2012

  Mr. BONNER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the Alabama School of Math 
and Science, which was recently named one of the best public high 
schools in the state of Alabama.
   In May, Newsweek magazine scored the Alabama School of Math and 
Science, located in Mobile, 182nd among the nation's 1,000 high schools 
that are the most effective in turning out college-ready graduates. The 
school scored third in the state of Alabama.
   The 220 students at the ASMS take college level courses, including 
Advanced Placement classes in chemistry, biology and art. The Alabama 
School of Math and Science will soon expand their curriculum to also 
include Advanced Placement American History and English 11.
   Typically, 100 percent of the graduates of Alabama School of Math 
and Science go on to college with 92 percent of those graduates 
receiving scholarships. This is an amazing accomplishment which speaks 
well of both the dedication of the students, as well as the 
determination of the school's faculty to provide excellence in the 
classroom.
   In 1989, the Alabama State Legislature established the Alabama 
School of Math and Science. Mrs. Ann Bedsole, then a Republican State 
Senator from Mobile, was the chief sponsor of the legislation. The idea 
for the school came from Senator Bedsole and other Mobile citizens who 
felt the community needed to create a school that could give back to 
the state. Each year, over 260 students enroll in the school. These 
students come from all 67 counties in the state of Alabama.
   On behalf of the people of South Alabama, I wish to extend my 
congratulations to school president Dr. Larry V. Turner, principal Ann 
Hilderbrandl, the teachers and other administrators and especially the 
students of the Alabama School of Math and Science. Their academic 
achievement is proof positive that Alabama schools and students are 
among the best.

                          ____________________
```
**EXHIBIT32.1**

 

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

**AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO**

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

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Advanced Cell Technology, Inc. (the“Company”) for the period ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, William M. Caldwell,IV, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that:

 

(1)          The Report fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and

 

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

 
| Dated: August 15, 2005 |   |   | /s/ William M. Caldwell, IV |
|------------------------|--------|--------|-----------------------------|
|                   |   |   | William M. Caldwell, IV     |
|                   |   |   | Chief Executive Officer     |

 

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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND RELATED NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF ANTEC CORPORATION AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND RELATED NOTES IN ANTEC CORPORATION'S
FORM 10-K FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          27,398
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  106,602
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,539
<INVENTORY>                                    138,785
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               282,491
<PP&E>                                          35,947
<DEPRECIATION>                                  33,060
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 510,249
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           97,203
<BONDS>                                        102,658
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           384
<OTHER-SE>                                     310,004
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   510,249
<SALES>                                        690,877
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               690,877
<CGS>                                          511,646
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  511,646
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               133,087
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,536
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 42,443
<INCOME-TAX>                                    16,083
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             26,360
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    26,360
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .69
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .67
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 99.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,  AS ADOPTED PURSUANTTO  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Annual Report of Covalent Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31,2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Kenneth M. Borow, M.D., President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuantto § 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. |
|                                                             |   |
|                                                             |   |
| /s/ KENNETH M. BOROW, M.D.                                       |   |
|                                                                  |   |
| **Kenneth M. Borow, M.D. President and Chief Executive Officer** |   |
|                                                             |   |
| **March 31, 2003**                                               |   |
|                                                                  |        |                                                                                                                                                      |  |

NOTE: A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Covalent Group, Inc. and will be retained by Covalent Group, Inc.and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
## MEMORANDUM

**DATE:** 11/24/14 **FROM:** Ken Mitchell/EPA Region 4 **TO:** Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket Id: OAR – 2013
- 0602 **SUBJECT:** Discussion of the Clean Power Plan at the Fall Meeting of the EPA Region 4 State and

Local Air Directors
**SUMMARY :**  

### EPA Region 4 p rovided information on the Clean Power Plan to participants at the Fall Meeting of the EPA Region 4 State and Local Air Directors 

### in Chattanooga, TN, on October 29 , 2014 . The Clea n Power Plan for Existing Power Plants was p roposed on June 2, 2014. **ATTENDEES :**  **EPA** Jeaneanne Gettle/EPA Region 4 Ken Mitchell/EPA Region 4 Other Region 4 staff **External Stakeholders** John Myers/TVA Jenah Zweig/SEEA Jeremy Tarr/Duke Nicholas Institute John Hornback/Metro4

- SESARM EPA Region 4 State and Local Air Directors , including VA (see attached list) **ATTACHMENT**
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 113 (Thursday, July 26, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Page S5419]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                              S E N A T E

Vol. 158

WASHINGTON, THURSDAY, JULY 26, 2012

No. 113
```