alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
N THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. 01-014 YARBRO, LTD., a Nevada Corporation, d/b/a LAKE MEAD RADIOLOGISTS, Plaintiff and Appellant,

v. MISSOULA FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, a Montana Banking Corporation, DOE INDIVIDUALS I-X, and ROE CORPORATION I-X, Defendant and Respondent. 

### 1 ORDER 

### 1

RespondentMissoulaFederalCreditUnion has movedthis Court to strike attachments F, 

### H, and J from the appendix to Appellant's opening brief, along with all arguments based
on those attachments, on the basis that those attachments are not part of the'record created in the district court. Exhibits F and J are copies of one-page letters between counsel to this action. Exhibit H is a copy of a set of responses to discovery requests. On April 2, 

### 2001, Appellant filed a response objecting to the motion to strike. Appellant contends that attachments F, H, and 

### J, are included in the record. That contention is disproved, however, by an examination of the record. It appearing that Respondent's motion is well-founded, 

### IT IS ORDERED that the motion to strike is GRANTED and Attachments F, 

### H, and J shall be stricken and physically removed from the original and each copy of Appellant's opening brief, and IT 

### ISFURTHER ORDERED thatthe followingportions oftheoriginal and each copy of Appellant's opening brief shall be redacted: a. the last four lines ofpage 8,to the end of the parenthetical

### b. lines 

### 5 through 8 

### of page 11,to the end of the parenthetical c. beginning with the 

### words "In fact," lines 1-4ofpage 16 d. the second 

### fullparagraph ofpage 

### 22. The Clerk is directed to mail copies ofthis Order to all counsel of record. 

# \h DATED this bay of April, 2001.
Schweizerische Eidgenossenschaft 

Confederation su isse 

Confederazione Svizzera 

Confederaziun svizra 

FOCA, CH-3003 Bern 

Mr. Paul Gretch 

Director, Office for International Aviation 

Federal Department of the Environment, Transport, Energy and 

Communications DETEC 

Federal Office of Civil Aviation FOCA 

Aviation Policy and Strategy 

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Aviation and 

International Affairs 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

400 7th Street, S.W., Room 6402 

Washington, DC 20590 

USA 

Reference: 0/01/01-02.02.187 

Your reference: 

Our reference: ijl 

Contact person: Laurence Fontana Junge 

Tel. +41 31 323 04 10, Fax +41 31 325 92 12, laurence.fontana-jungo@bazl.admin.ch 

lttlgen, 31 August 2011 

Declaration of Reciprocity 

Dear Mr. Gretch 1 ~ ~ 

The Federal Office of Civil Aviation of Switzerland herewith declares, that it will consider applications 

by U.S. air carriers for approval to operate charters to and from Switzerland in accordance with the 

provisions of the Air Transport Agreement between the Swiss Confederation and the United States of 

America, dated 21 June 2010, and, for those charters not specified in the Annex to the Agreement, on 

the basis of comity and reciprocity. 

Yours sincerely 

f1~ .. ,/L 

Marcel Zuckschwerdt 

Director 

Head Aviation Policy and Strategy 

l . p ~ Laurence Fontana Jungo ( '(-

Chief Negotiator Air Services Agreements 

Federal Office of Civil Aviation 

MOhlestrasse 3, 3063 lttigen 

Postal address: CH-3003 Bern 

Tel. +41 31 325 80 39/40, Fax +41 31 325 80 32 

www.aviation.admin.ch
#### LEWIS v. STATE.

No. 20182.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 15, 1939.

Jack Acrey, of Dallas, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State. ;

CHRISTIAN, Judge.

The offense is burglary; the punishment, confinement in the penitentiary for twelve years.

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception. No question is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.
[No. 45546-0-I.

Division One.

November 6, 2000.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Michael A. Mayhew, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Skagit County, No. 99-1-00325-9, John M. Meyer, J., entered October 21, 1999. *Affirmed*by unpublished per curiam opinion.
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 199 (Tuesday, October 15, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 83059]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-23808]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of 
the Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the 
Securities and Exchange Commission Small Business Capital Formation 
Advisory Committee will hold a public meeting on Wednesday, November 
13, 2024, via videoconference.

PLACE: The meeting will be conducted by remote means (videoconference) 
and/or at the Commission's headquarters, 100 F Street NE, Washington, 
DC 20549. Members of the public may watch the webcast of the meeting on 
the Commission's website at www.sec.gov.

STATUS: The meeting will begin at 9:00 a.m. (ET) and will be open to 
the public via webcast on the Commission's website at www.sec.gov. This 
Sunshine Act notice is being issued because a majority of the 
Commission may attend the meeting.

MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED:  The agenda for the meeting includes matters 
relating to rules and regulations affecting small and emerging 
businesses and their investors under the federal securities laws.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: For further information, please 
contact Vanessa A. Countryman from the Office of the Secretary at (202) 
551-5400.
    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552b.

    Dated: October 9, 2024.
Vanessa A. Countryman,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024-23808 Filed 10-10-24; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
# EUR-Lex - 32011M6219 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 32011M6219

**Commission Decision of 23/05/2011 declaring a concentration to be compatible with the common market (Case No COMP/M.6219 - ADVENT INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION / PROVIMI PET FOOD BUSINESS) according to Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (Only the English text is authentic) **

*

*

|EUROPEAN COMMISSION |

Brussels , 23.5.2011

PUBLIC VERSION C(2011) 3684 final

SIMPLIFIED MERGER PROCEDURE

|To the notifying party |

Dear Madam(s) and/or Sir(s),

Subject: Case No COMP/M.6219 - ADVENT INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION / PROVIMI PET FOOD BUSINESS Commission decision pursuant to Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [1]

1. On 15/04/2011, the European Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of the Merger Regulation by which certain funds controlled by Advent International Corporation ("Advent", USA), acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of parts of Provimi S.A. (France), namely Provimi Pet Food France S.A.S. (France) and Provimi Pet Food NL B.V. (Netherlands) together with its subsidiary companies Pet Hungaria Kft (Hungary), Provimi Pet Food Pr Ltd (Hungary), Provimi Pet Food CZ s.r.o. (Czech Republic), Provimi Pet Food SK s.r.o. (Slovakia) and Provimi Pet Food PL SP Z.o.o. (Poland) (altogether "Provimi") by way of purchase of shares.

2. The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

- Advent: international private equity group;

- Provimi: private label pet food producer providing dry and wet food and snacks for cats and dogs in Europe. [2]

3. After examination of the notification, the European Commission has concluded that the notified operation falls within the scope of the Merger Regulation and of paragraph 5(b) of the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [3] .

4. For the reasons set out in the Notice on a simplified procedure, the European Commission has decided not to oppose the notified operation and to declare it compatible with the internal market and with the EEA Agreement. This decision is adopted in application of Article 6(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation.

For the Commission

signed Alexander ITALIANER Director General

[1]OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 ("the Merger Regulation"). With effect from 1 December 2009, the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union ("TFEU") has introduced certain changes, such as the replacement of "Community" by "Union" and "common market" by "internal market". The terminology of the TFEU will be used throughout this decision.

[2] Publication in the Official Journal of the European Union No C131, 03/05/2011, p.11.

[3] OJ C 56, 5.3.2005, p. 32.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, December 27, 2023.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, December 27, 2023

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A24D0170. REBECCA W. MCLAWS v. MICHAEL SPENCER.

Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby DENIED.

LC NUMBERS:

18104259
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 Bedminster Capital Corp. (the “Company”)
on 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Paul Patrizio,
President, Chief Executive Officer and 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; and2.
            The
      information contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of
      Bedminster Capital Corp.




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.




BEDMINSTER
CAPITAL CORP.




By:
            /s/
      Paul PatrizioPAUL
      PATRIZIOPresident,
      Chief Executive Officer,
              Chief
      Financial Officer,




Date:
August 4, 2008
I

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2812

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 24, 2000

Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

AN ACT

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide

a waiver of the oath of renunciation and allegiance for

naturalization of aliens having certain disabilities.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

S 2812 RFH

1 SECTION 1. WAIVER OF OATH OF RENUNCIATION AND AL2 LEGIANCE FOR NATURALIZATION OF ALIENS

3 HAVING CERTAIN DISABILITIES.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—The last sentence of section

5 337(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.

6 1448(a)) is amended to read as follows: ‘‘The Attorney

7 General may waive the taking of the oath if in the opinion

8 of the Attorney General the applicant for naturalization

9 is an individual with a disability, or a child, who is unable

10 to understand or communicate an understanding of the

11 meaning of the oath. If the Attorney General waives the

12 oath for such an individual, the individual shall be consid13 ered to have met the requirements of section 316(a)(3)

14 as to attachment to the Constitution and well disposition

15 to the United States.’’.

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

17 subsection (a) shall apply to individuals who applied for

18 naturalization before, on, or after the date of enactment

19 of this Act.

Passed the Senate July 21, 2000.

Attest: GARY SISCO,

Secretary.
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 Adrenalina (the "Company") on Form 10-Q/A-2 for the period ended June 30,  2008  as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, 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 operation of the Company.





3.  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.





Date:  October 5, 2011By:
/s/ Ilia LekachIlia LekachChief Executive Officer
1 The Honorable Jean C. Hamilton, Chief Judge, United States District Court for

the Eastern District of Missouri.



## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 00-2379

___________ Carlos Whitby, * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the v. * Eastern District of Missouri. * Dave Dormire, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: February 12, 2001 Filed: February 16, 2001

___________ Before WOLLMAN, Chief Judge, BOWMAN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Carlos Whitby pled guilty to various charges in state court, including, among other things, kidnapping and conspiracy to commit murder, and was sentenced to prison for forty years. His convictions were sustainedby the state courts. He appeals from the denial by the District Court 1 of his federal habeas petition. We affirm.-2-

Whitby presented the District Court with a free-standing claim of actual innocence based on newly discovered evidence. The District Court correctly ruled that such a claim is not cognizable in a federal habeas proceeding. See Herrera v. Collins , 506 U.S. 390, 400 (1993); Meadows v. Delo , 99 F.3d 280, 283 (8th Cir. 1996). Though Whitby now argues that the District Court erred in analyzing his newly discoveredevidence under the Herrera standard instead of under Schlup v. Delo , 513 U.S. 298, 315 (1995) (holding that a claim of actual innocence is "a gateway through whicha habeas petitioner must pass to have his otherwise barred constitutional claim consideredon the merits" (quoting Herrera , 506 U.S. at 404)), the record reveals that Whitby never asserted a Schlup claim in the District Court. Nor could he successfully have raised a Schlup claim, inasmuch as none of his claims was procedurally barred andthe District Court dealt with all of them on their merits. Accordingly, any claim based on Schlup has been waived and, in any event, would have been inapposite.
We discern no error in the well-reasoned opinion of the District Court. Our disposition of the case makes it unnecessary for us to address the State's alternative argument that Whitby's proffered newly discovered evidence is not, in fact, "newly discovered." The decision of the District Court is affirmed. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
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 Your Digital Memories, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending February 29, 2008, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Aaron Bard, principal executive 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, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

(1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


                                  /s/ Aaron Bard
                                  ------------------------------------------
                                  Aaron Bard
                                  Principal Executive Officer
                                  April 11, 2008

This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to ss.906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by Registrant for the purposes of
ss.18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. This certification
shall not be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act
of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether
made before or after the date of this Report), irrespective of any general
incorporation language contained in such filing.

A signed original of this written statement required by ss.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.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7795

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus WINFREE BONNER, JR., a/k/a Stinka, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief District Judge. (CR-01-120; CA-04-619-3) Submitted: February 24, 2005 Decided: March 8, 2005 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Winfree Bonner, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Wiley Miller, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).PER CURIAM: Winfree Bonner, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(l) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. SeeMiller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Bonner has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and di smiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
United States 

Office of 

Personnel Management 

The Federal Government’s Human Resources Agency

Benefits Administration Letter 

Number: 13-801 Date: January 31, 2013

Subject: The Federal Flexible Spending Account Program (FSAFEDS): 

 2013 Administrative Fees

Purpose 

To notify agencies that the Federal Flexible Spending Account Program (FSAFEDS) reserve 

account fee and administrative fees will change for the 2013 benefit period.

Background 

Administrative Fees 

Agencies pay administrative fees to ADP Benefit Services KY, Inc. (formerly known as SHPS, 

Inc. - the third party administrator under contract with the Office of Personnel Management) on 

behalf of their employees enrolled in FSAFEDS. 

Dependent-Care Flexible Spending Account (DCFSA) Administrative Fee 

The current DCFSA administrative fee will be reduced from $3.25 per DCFSA per month 

to $1.25 per DCFSA per month. 

Health-Care Flexible Spending Account (HCFSA) Administrative Fee 

The current HCFSA administrative fee will be reduced from $4.35 per HCFSA per month 

to $1.35 per HCFSA per month. 

Reserve Account Fee 

Agencies pay the reserve account fee to OPM on behalf of their employees enrolled in 

FSAFEDS. For 2013, the monthly reserve fee will be reduced from $1.00 to $.25 per HCFSA 

per month. 

ADP Benefit Services KY, Inc. will send out the first of two annual invoice packages in February 

2013, reflecting the above fees. Thank you in advance for your prompt payment. 

Sincerely, 

John O’Brien

Director 

Health and Insurance
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 04-3930

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Nebraska.

Jerome Marshall, also known as *

Raymond Mollo, also known as *

Ronald Mooney, also known as * [UNPUBLISHED]

Amos Smalls, also known as *

Howie Harband, also known as *

James A. Marshall, also known as *

J. Marshall, also known as James *

R. Marshall, also known as *

Raymond Mocco, also known as *

Ronald Money, also known as *

Dennis Moore, also known as *

Jerome Williams, also known as *

James Alexander Marshall, also *

known as Jermon C. Marshall, *

also known as Jerome C. Marshall, *

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: December 7, 2005

Filed: December 9, 2005

___________

Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________
1

The Honorable Laurie Smith Camp, United States District Judge for the

District of Nebraska.

-2-

PER CURIAM.

Jerome Marshall pled guilty to conspiring to distribute and possess with intent

to distribute cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. The district court1 sentenced

him to 100 months in prison and 5 years of supervised release. On appeal, his counsel

has moved to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738

(1967), and Marshall has filed a pro se supplemental brief.

Marshall and his counsel both argue that the district court erred by determining

that two of his prior convictions--for receiving stolen property and for credit card

fraud--were not related. We conclude that the court did not err because the

presentence report contained facts, to which Marshall did not object, which showed

that the offenses were separated by an intervening arrest. See U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2,

comment. (n.3); United States v. Newsome, 409 F.3d 996, 999 (8th Cir.), cert. denied,

126 S. Ct. 463 (2005).

Having reviewed the record independently pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488

U.S. 75 (1988), we conclude that there are no nonfrivolous issues for appeal.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court, and we grant counsel’s

motion to withdraw. 

______________________________
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

February 8, 2017

No. 04

- 16

- 00754

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF BABY V.

,

From the 408th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2016

- PA

- 00239 Honorable Antonia Arteaga, J udge Presiding



### O R D E R

This is an appeal from an order terminating appellant’s parental rights. Appellant

filed his brief on January 5, 2017. Therefore, appellee ’s brief was due January 25, 2017. No appellee’s brief, however, has been filed. This appeal will be set “at issue” in ten days. If appellee’s brief and a written response stating a reasonable explanation for failing to timely file the brief is not filed within ten days, t his appeal will be set for submission without an appellee’s brief.

_________________________________ Karen Angelini, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed th e seal of the said

court on this 8th day of February, 2017

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court