alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1  CERTIFICATIONS  Certification
of Principal Executive Officer  I, Steven Barnhart,
certify that:  1.I have
reviewed this report on Form 10-Q/A of Orbitz Worldwide, Inc. (the Registrant);  2.Based on my
knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;  3.Based on my
knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included
in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and
for, the periods presented in this report;  4.The
Registrants other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing
and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and have:  a)Designed
such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the Registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;  b)Evaluated
the effectiveness of the Registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; and  c)Disclosed in
this report any change in the Registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the Registrants most recent fiscal quarter that
has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
Registrants internal control over financial reporting; and  5.The
Registrants other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
Registrants auditors and the audit committee of the Registrants board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):  a)All
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the Registrants ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and  b)Any fraud,
whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a
significant role in the Registrants internal control over financial reporting.  August 27,
  2008
  /s/
  STEVEN BARNHARTSteven
  BarnhartPresident,
  Chief Executive Officer and Director
Exhibit 10.15 Extension Agreement


 

EXTENSION AGREEMENT

(Promissory Notes Maturing 10/01/2017)

 

THIS AGREEMENT is made effective as of October 1, 2017by and between, Sandor Capital Master Fund. (“Sandor”), John Lemak, and John Lemak (IRA rollover) (together “Lemak”) (each with an address at 2828 Routh St., Suite 500, Dallas, TX 752010 and Northsight Capital, Inc., with an address of 7580 East Gray Rd., Suite 103, Scottsdale, AZ 85264 (the “Borrower”).

 

RECITALS

 

WHEREAS, Each of Sandor and Lemak is the holder of certain promissory notes of Borrower (“Notes”), which, as extended, were scheduled to mature October 1, 2017 (See Schedule A for Note details);

 

WHEREAS, Borrower and Sandor have agreed to extend the Maturity date of the Notes until December 31, 2017; and

 

AGREEMENT

 

Now, therefore, the parties hereto, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, agree as follows:

 

1.Extension of Maturity date of Notes. The maturity date of the Notes is hereby extended until December 31, 2017 (“Maturity Date”). The Notes, except as modified hereby, remain in full force and effect. 

 

The Parties hereto have executed this Agreement as an instrument under seal as of the date written above.

 

Sandor Capital Master Fund

 

	/s/John Lemak 

	 

	/s/ John Lemak


	John Lemak, duly authorized

	 

	John Lemak, individually


	 

	 

	 


	 

	 

	 


	Borrower:

	 

	 


	Northsight Capital, Inc.

	 

	 


	 

	 

	 


	/s/ John Venners

	 

	/s/ John Lemak


	By: John Venners, EVP Operations

	 

	John Lemak (IRA Rollover)





SCHEDULE A

 

	Payee

	 

	Date of Note

	 

	Principal 

Amount

	 

	Current 

Maturity Date


	John Lemak IRA Rollover

	 

	08/01/17

	 

	$60,000

	 

	10/01/17


	John Lemak IRA Rollover

	 

	06/29/17

	 

	$140,000

	 

	10/01/17


	John Lemak

	 

	04/01/17

	 

	$102,465

	 

	10/01/17


	Sandor Capital Master Fund

	 

	04/01/17

	 

	$71,097

	 

	10/01/17


	Sandor Capital Master Fund

	 

	04/01/17

	 

	$42,374

	 

	10/01/17
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v.

SHAWN RODRIGUES,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 21

- 10312

D.C. No.

1:16

- cr

- 00529

- DKW

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Hawaii Derrick Kahala Watson, Chief District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 17, 2023 * *
Honolulu, Hawaii

Before: BEA, COLLINS, and LEE, Circuit Judges.

Appellant Shawn Rodrigues appeals the district court’s denial of his second

motion for compassionate release

. The parties are familiar with the facts and

procedural history, so we do not recite them here. We review for abuse of discretion,

United States v. Keller , 2 F.4th 1278, 1281 (9th Cir. 2021) (per curiam), and we

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

MAR 1 2023

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2

affirm.

Consistent with what we later held in United States v. Chen , 48 F.4th 1092

(9th Cir. 2022), the district court here assumed that non

- retroactive sentencing

changes could constitute, in an appropriate case, an “extraordinary and compelling

reason[]” justifying relief under § 3582(c)(1)(A). Specifically, the court recognized

that, if Rodrigues were sentenced today, he would now be eligible

— under the new

2018 sentencing provisions that are not retroactive

— for a sentence of imprisonment

below the previously applicable statutory mandatory minimum. But, again

consisten t with Chen , the district court concluded that this consideration did not give

rise, in the circumstances of Rodrigues’s case, to an extraordinary and compelling

reason warranting a lower sentence. See Chen , 48 F.4th at 1100 (holding that, to

warrant reli ef under § 3582(c)(1)(A), “the petitioning defendant still must

demonstrate that [the relevant] non

- retroactive changes rise to the level of

‘extraordinary and compelling’ in his individualized circumstances”).

In the district court’s view, to grant such r elief to Rodrigues would result in a

sentencing disparity with other similar pre

- 2018 defendants . Further, there were no

“aggravating circumstances” about the length of Rodrigues’s sentence that made it

“extraordinarily unjust” to leave it in place. This case

- specific judgment applied the

correct legal standards and reached a reasonable conclusion in light of the record in

this case. The district court therefore did not abuse its discretion in concluding that3

Rodrigues had failed to carry his burden to sh ow that a sentencing reduction under

§ 3582(c)(1)(A) was warranted.

AFFIRMED
Think foward.

Case Study: Produced Water, West Texas

An Economical Alternative for Produced Water Reuse

21 Drydock Avenue, 7th Floor

Boston, MA 02210, USA

info@oasyswater.com

The Permian Basin, TX

Water from hydraulic fracturing presents a complex 

water treatment challenge, as the resulting produced 

water often has an extremely high concentration of 

total dissolved solids (TDS). As increased production and 

looming water scarcity concerns continue, producers 

are now treating these waters for reuse or to decrease 

disposal costs. Treating such water has been 

prohibitively costly, until now.

The Solution

Oasys Water operated the Membrane Brine 

Concentrator (MBCTM) system to treat high salinity 

produced water from the Permian Basin in Midland, 

Texas. The initial focus was to demonstrate that a 

membrane-based solution could treat feed waters 

higher than 100,000 mg/L TDS to produce fresh 

water cost effectively. Oil and gas producers are 

required to meet water quality, cost, and maintenance 

metrics to adopt water treatment technology. The MBC 

system proved to be a better solution when evaluated in 

comparison to mechanical evaporators.

The average feed water to the MBC system averaged 

103,000 mg/L TDS with minimum and maximum 

concentrations ranging from 72,000 mg/L to 125,000 

mg/L TDS. Conventional pretreatment, including solids 

separation and pH adjustment, was used to treat the 

incoming feed. 

The Results 

During the operation, the MBC system easily removed 

over than 99% of contaminants without losing 

membrane performance. The permeate water quality 

exceeded local requirements achieving a TDS 

concentration of 700 mg/L. 

The Oasys system not only exceeded water quality 

targets, but also demonstrated low cost operation and 

high water recovery as seen in the figure above. 

Low cost 

A total cost (including pretreatment, installation, 

and energy usage) that was up to 60% lower than 

alternative brine management technologies.

High Recovery

A consistently high water recovery coupled with 

the production of a concentrated salt solution 

applicable to oil and gas operations as 10 lb. brine. 

Quality Water

A treated water quality that consistently met 

Texas Railroad Commission water standards, 

allowing for reuse and continued exploration.

Challenging Waters: The Oasys MBC system can treat the world’s most challenging waters.

Figure: Summary of the Oasys MBC system feed, brine, and product water TDS compared 

to study goals.
•••V::,^--JTOi - SERVE D MA Y12 , 201 1 "~ ^ OrE'AllCii S

l) S DEPARTMEN T O FTRANSPORTATIO N

OFFIC EO FHEARING S WASHINGTON , D C I NTH EMATTE RO F 

### WESTMAR K

INDUSTRIES , INC . FA ADOCKE T No . CP06NM000 8 (Civil Penalt

y Action) DMS FAA-2006-2633 8 ORDE R GRANTIN G MOTIO N T O TAK E JUDICIA L NOTIC E O n Apri l 25 , 2011 , th e Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n ("Complainant" ) file d a Motio n t o Tak e Judicia l Notic e ("Motion") . Tin e Motio n encompasse s th e Administrator' s sanctio n guideline s fo rhazardou s material s violations , publishe d a t 6 4 Fed.Reg . 19443-1945 0 (Apri l 21 , 1999) . Responden t Westmar k

Industries , Inc . ha s no t file d a n answe rt o date . Th e cour t ma ytak e Judicia l Notic e o fa fac t whic h i s no t subjec t t o reasonabl e disput e i n tha t i t i s eithe r(1 ) generall yknow n withi n th e t.erritoria l jurisdictio n o fth e tria l cour t o r(2 ) capabl e o faccurat e an d read y determinatio n b yresor t t o source s whos e accurac ycanno t reasonabl yb e questioned. ' Th e matte rfo rwhic h Complainan t seek s Judicia l Notic e constitute s publishe d guideline s an d interpretation s o fa federa l agency . Thi s matte ri s capabl e o faccurat e an d read ydeterminatio n b yresor t t o source s whos e accurac ycanno t reasonabl yb e questioned . I t als o i s a matte rwithi n th e publi cdomain . Federa l Rule s o f

Evidence , Rul e 20 1 (2 8 U.S.C) .WHEREFORE , Complainant' s Motio n havin g bee n rea d an d considered ,

i t i s hereb yORDERE D tha t Judicia l Notic e b e an d i s hereb ytake n o f th e Administrator' s publishe d sanctio n guideline s fo rhazardou s material s violations , containe d i n 6 4 Fed.Reg . 19443-1945 0 (Apri l 21 , 1999) . (

_ _(J^CMJU.^< ^



# M Richar d 0 . Goodwi n U.S . Administrativ e La wJudg e Attachmen t - Servic e Lis t

>FA A Docke t No . CP06NM000 8 (Civi l Penalt y Action ) SERVIC ELIS T ORIGINA L& ON ECOP Y Federal Aviatio nAdministratio n 80 0 Itidependenc e Avenue , S.W . Washington , D C 2059 1 Attention : Hearin g Docke t Clerk , AGC-43 0 Wilbu r Wrigh t Building—Suit e 2W1000 ^ ON ECOP Y 

### i Michae l Offer , Owne r

| Westmar k Industries , Responden t

' 670 1 S.W . McEwanRoa dj Lake Oswego , O R97035-781 5 ] TEL ; 503-620-094 5 \ FAX : 503-639-674 9 Scot t R . Morris , Complainant' s Counse l ! Northwes t

Mountai nRegion , ANM- 7 1 Federal Aviatio nAdministratio n .160 1 Lin dAvenue , S.W . i Renton , W A98055-409 9 \ TEL : 425-227-141 7 \ FAX : 425-227-100 7 • Th e Honorabl e Richar dC . Goodwin , Administrativ e Law Judg e Offic e o f Hearings , M-2 0 U.S . Departmen t

o f Transportatio n 120 0 Ne w Jerse y Avenue , S.E . Eas t Buildin g Groun dFloor , Roo mEl2-32 0 Washington , D C 2059 0 TEL : 202-366-213 9 Attorney-Adviso r 202-366-512 1 Lega l Assistan t FAX : 202-366-753 6

' Servic e wa s b y U.S . Mail . Fo

r servic e i nperso no r b y expedite dcourier , us e th e followin g address : Federa l Aviatio nAdministration, 60

0 Independenc

e Avenue , S.W. , Wilbu

r Wri^fBuilding—Suit

e ?W1000, Washington, D

C 20591 ; Attention : Hearin

g Docke t Clerk , AGC-430.
[No. 44991-5-I.

Division One.

November 6, 2000.]

#### *In the Matter of the Marriage of*Dawn Marie Mazzi, *Appellant,*and Dante Moises Mazzi, *Respondent.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 96-3-08112-8, Patricia H. Clark, J., entered June 28,1999. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Grosse, J., concurred in by Coleman and Cox, JJ.
#### LOOMIS et al. v. FEDERAL LAND BANK et al.

No. 3249.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Beaumont.

Feb. 10, 1938.

Benefield & Glass, of Jefferson, and W. B. Chauncey, of Wichita Falls, for appellants.

A. D. Dyess, of Houston, for appellees.

WALKER, Chief Justice.

Neither party has filed briefs; appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. Haynes v. J. M. Radford Grocery Co., 118 Tex. 277, 14 S.W.2d 811.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) OR RULE 15d-14(b) OF THE SECURITIES

EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Yankee Holding Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended April 3, 2010,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Harlan M. Kent, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) or 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 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.



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ Harlan M. Kent     
|Harlan M. Kent         
|Chief Executive Officer

May 13, 2010



35
Exhibit
      32.2




CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF FINANCIAL 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 accompanying Quarterly Report On Form 10-QSB of Belarus
      Capital Corp. (the “Company”) for the quarter ending September 30, 2007, I, Neil
      Roth, Chief Financial Officer of the Company hereby certify pursuant to 18
      U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:





1.
      Such
      Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending September 30, 2007,
      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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter
      ending September 30, 2007, fairly presents, in all material respects, the
      financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated:
      November 14, 2007





Belarus
      Capital Corp.





By:
            /s/
              Neil Roth


Chief
      Financial Officer
# Official Journal C 287/18 N

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 287 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 4818 November 2005 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 287

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 4818 November 2005

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Information |
| | Commission |
| 2005/C 287/1 | Euro exchange rates | 1 |
| 2005/C 287/2 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.4035 — Telefónica/O2) (1) | 2 |
| 2005/C 287/3 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.3996 — Industri Kapital/Kwintet) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (1) | 3 |
| 2005/C 287/4 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.3982 — Technip/Subsea 7/Asia Pacific JV) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (1) | 4 |
| 2005/C 287/5 | Initiation of proceedings (Case COMP/M.3916 — T-Mobile Austria/Tele.ring) (1) | 5 |
| 2005/C 287/6 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.3932 — ThyssenKrupp/Hellenic Shipyards) (1) | 5 |
| | European Ombudsman |
| 2005/C 287/7 | Annual Report 2004 | 6 |

Notice No

Contents

page

I   Information

Commission

2005/C 287/1

Euro exchange rates

1

2005/C 287/2

Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.4035 — Telefónica/O2) (1)

2

2005/C 287/3

Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.3996 — Industri Kapital/Kwintet) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (1)

3

2005/C 287/4

Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.3982 — Technip/Subsea 7/Asia Pacific JV) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (1)

4

2005/C 287/5

Initiation of proceedings (Case COMP/M.3916 — T-Mobile Austria/Tele.ring) (1)

5

2005/C 287/6

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.3932 — ThyssenKrupp/Hellenic Shipyards) (1)

5

European Ombudsman

2005/C 287/7

Annual Report 2004

6

---

| | III   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | Commission |
| 2005/C 287/8 | UK-Stornoway: operation of scheduled air services — Invitation to tender issued by the United Kingdom under Article 4(1)(d) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 in respect of the operation of scheduled air services between Stornoway-Benbecula and Benbecula-Barra (Scotland) (1) | 7 |

III   Notices

Commission

2005/C 287/8

UK-Stornoway: operation of scheduled air services — Invitation to tender issued by the United Kingdom under Article 4(1)(d) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 in respect of the operation of scheduled air services between Stornoway-Benbecula and Benbecula-Barra (Scotland) (1)

7

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
# C_2022426EN.01003601.xml

| 9.11.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 426/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.11.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 426/36

---

Notice for the attention of the persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/1894 as amended by Decision (CFSP) 2022/2186, and in Council Regulation (EU) 2019/1890

(2022/C 426/03)

The following information is brought to the attention of the persons that appear in the Annex to Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/1894 (1), as amended by Decision (CFSP) 2022/2186 (2) , and in Annex I to Regulation (EU) 2019/1890, concerning restrictive measures in view of Turkey's unauthorised drilling activities in the Eastern Mediterranean.

The Council of the European Union, after having reviewed the list of persons and entities designated in the above-mentioned Annexes, has determined that the restrictive measures provided for in Decision (CFSP) 2019/1894 and in Regulation (EU) 2019/1890 should continue to apply to those persons and entities.

The attention of the persons concerned is drawn to the possibility of making an application to the competent authorities of the relevant Member State(s) as indicated on the websites in Annex II of Regulation (EU) 2019/1890 concerning restrictive measures in view of Turkey's unauthorised drilling activities in the Eastern Mediterranean, in order to obtain an authorisation to use frozen funds for basic needs or specific payments (cf. Article 9 of the Regulation).

The persons concerned may submit a request to the Council, together with supporting documentation, that the decision to include them on the above-mentioned lists should be reconsidered, before 15 July 2023, to the following address:

| Council of the European Union |
| --- |
| General Secretariat |
| RELEX.1 |
| Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175 |
| 1048 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

Council of the European Union

General Secretariat

RELEX.1

Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175

1048 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

Email: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu

Any observations received will be taken into account for the purpose of the Council's periodic review, in accordance with Article 8 of Decision (CFSP) 2019/1894 and Article 12(4) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1890.

The attention of the persons concerned is also drawn to the possibility of challenging the Council's decision before the General Court of the European Union, in accordance with the conditions laid down in Article 275, second paragraph, and Article 263, fourth and sixth paragraphs, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

---

(1)  OJ L 291, 12.11.2019, p. 47.

(2)  OJ L 288, 9.11.2022, p. 81.

---
DEONJANAE SHANTWANIQ 

TILLMAN,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Respondent.

___________________________/

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D15-5907

Opinion filed March 21, 2016.

Petition for Belated Appeal -- Original Jurisdiction.

Ryan Cardoso of Cardoso Law Offices, Pensacola, for Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Quentin Humphrey, Assistant Attorney 

General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for belated appeal is granted. Petitioner shall be allowed a belated 

appeal from the July 28, 2015, judgment and sentence in Santa Rosa County Circuit 

Court case number 12001532CFMXAX. Upon issuance of mandate in this cause, a 
2

copy of this opinion shall be provided to the clerk of the circuit court for treatment as 

the notice of appeal. Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(c)(6)(D). If petitioner qualifies for 

appointed counsel, the trial court shall appoint counsel to represent petitioner on 

appeal.

LEWIS, SWANSON, and WINOKUR, JJ., CONCUR.