alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                       SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

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

                                    FORM 8-K



                                 CURRENT REPORT
                     PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
                         SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934


                Date of report (Date of earliest event reported):

                         March 31, 2003 (March 31, 2003)

                          Mission Resources Corporation
               (Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Charter)

          Delaware                   000-09498                   76-0437769
(State or Other Jurisdiction        (Commission                 (IRS Employer
     of Incorporation)              File Number)             Identification No.)


                                   1331 Lamar
                                   Suite 1455
                            Houston, Texas 77010-3039
              (Address and Zip Code of Principal Executive Offices)

                                 (713) 495-3000
              (Registrant's telephone number, including area code)

<PAGE>


Item 7. Financial Statements, Pro Forma Financial Information and Exhibits.

     (a) Financial Statements of business acquired.

          None.

     (b) Pro Forma Financial Information.

          None.

     (c) Exhibits.

          99.1 Press Release

Item 9. Regulation FD Disclosure.

     On March 31, 2003, Mission Resources Corporation issued a press release
announcing its financial and operational results for the fourth quarter and full
year of 2002. A copy of the press release is attached as Exhibit 99.1.

Item 12. Results of Operations and Financial Condition.

     On March 31, 2003, Mission Resources Corporation issued a press release
announcing its financial and operational results for the fourth quarter and full
year of 2002. A copy of the press release is attached as Exhibit 99.1.

     In accordance with General Instruction B.2 and B.6 of Form 8-K, the
information in this report shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of Section
18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, nor shall it be deemed incorporated
by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, except as shall be expressly set forth by specific
reference in such a filing.

                            [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS]

<PAGE>

                                    SIGNATURE

     Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned hereunto duly authorized.

                                         MISSION RESOURCES CORPORATION

Date: March 31, 2003                     By:    /s/ RICHARD W. PIACENTI
                                         Name:  Richard W. Piacenti
                                         Title: Senior Vice President and Chief
                                         Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 31.2  RULE 13A-14(A)/15D-14(A) CERTIFICATION  I, David Fulton, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Caspian International Oil Corporation;  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 made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly 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 small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) 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)) and the internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) for the small business issuer 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 small business issuer, 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 small business issuer's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions after 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 small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and  5. The small business issuers other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):  a. All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer'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 small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.  May 21, 2007 /s/ David Fulton David Fulton Chief Financial Officer
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Terrance SMITH, a/k/a Ty, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-7190

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: March 13, 2018

Decided: March 15, 2018

Frances Hi Pratt, Assistant Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellant. Andrew Curtis Bosse, Gregory David Stefan, Assistant United States Attorneys, John Farrell Butler, Joseph Kosky, Norfolk, Virginia, Eric Matthew Hurt, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Newport News, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Terrance Smith seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). 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) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595,146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Smith has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED*
# District of Columbia

- Deputy Secretary Marten and Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Lhamon to Join U.S. Postal Service to Commemorate 50th Anniversary of Title IX with Release of Four New Forever Stamps This week, Deputy Secretary Cindy Marten and Assistant Secretary of the Office for Civil Rights Catherine E. Lhamon will kick off a season of commemorating the 50th Anniversary of Title IX by speaking Thursday at the U.S. Postal Service’s First Day of Issue event to unveil four new Title IX-inspired stamps.
- U.S. Department of Education Approves the District of Columbia's Plan for Use of American Rescue Plan Funds to Support K-12 Schools and Students, Distributes Remaining $128 Million On Wednesday, July 7, the U.S. Department of Education  (Department) announced the approval of the District of Columbia's American Rescue Plan Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ARP ESSER) plans  and distributed remaining ARP ESSER funds to them.
# C_2021062EN.01004701.xml

| 22.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 62/47 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 62/47

---

Action brought on 7 January 2021 — Advanced Organic Materials v EUIPO — Swiss Pharma International (ADVASTEROL)

(Case T-6/21)

(2021/C 62/59)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Advanced Organic Materials, SA (Pilar, Argentina) (represented by: J.L. Rivas Zurdo, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Swiss Pharma International AG (Zurich, Switzerland)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Defendant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union word mark ADVASTEROL — Application for registration No 14 525 521

Proceedings before the EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 October 2020 in Case R 781/2019-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision in so far as, by dismissing the appeal of Advanced Organic Materials, SA, it upholds the decision of the Opposition Division, which partially upheld opposition B 2 624 370, refusing some of the goods covered by European Union trade mark No 14 525 521 ADVASTEROL (word mark); |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision in so far as, by dismissing the appeal of Advanced Organic Materials, SA, it upholds the decision of the Opposition Division, which partially upheld opposition B 2 624 370, refusing some of the goods covered by European Union trade mark No 14 525 521 ADVASTEROL (word mark);

| — | order the opposing party or parties to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the opposing party or parties to pay the costs.

Plea in law

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
# DTRA’s Biological Threat Reduction Program and the Tripartite Health Organizations conduct workshop on Zoonotic Workforce Development.

/ Published March 6, 2024
**ALMATY, Kazakhstan**www.dtra.mil
##### 



Exhibit 31.2
 Certification of Principal Financial Officer
Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002/SEC Rule 13a-14(a)
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Orchestra Therapeutics, Inc.;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 respect 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 officer 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 we 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 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; andc.
    
    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 officer 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 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; andb.
    
    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.
  /s/ Michael K. GreenMichael K. GreenChief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer
# C_2023205EN.01001202.xml

| 12.6.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 205/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.6.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 205/12

---

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 20 April 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht — Austria) — BF v Versicherungsanstalt öffentlich Bediensteter, Eisenbahnen und Bergbau (BVAEB)

(Case C-52/22, (1) BVAEB (Adjustment of retirement pensions))

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Social policy - Equal treatment in employment and occupation - Directive 2000/78/EC - Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of age - Article 2(1) and (2)(a) - Article 6(1) - Retirement pension - National legislation providing for a gradual alignment of the pension scheme for civil servants with the general pension scheme - First adjustment of the amount of the pension being made more quickly for one category of civil servants than for another - Justification)

(2023/C 205/14)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesverwaltungsgericht

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: BF

Defendant: Versicherungsanstalt öffentlich Bediensteter, Eisenbahnen und Bergbau (BVAEB)

Operative part of the judgment

Article 2(1) and (2)(a) and (b) and Article 6(1) of Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation

must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation which, with a view to gradually aligning the pension scheme for civil servants with the general pension scheme, provides that the first adjustment of the amount of the retirement pension of one category of civil servants is to be made as from the second calendar year following the commencement of entitlement to a pension, whereas, for another category of civil servants, that adjustment is to be made from the first calendar year following the commencement of that entitlement.

---

(1)  OJ C 158, 11.4.2022.

---
UNITED STATES


SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Washington, D.C. 20549





FORM 8-K





CURRENT REPORT





Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of


the Securities Exchange Act of 1934





Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): January 21, 2003





KINDER MORGAN ENERGY PARTNERS, L.P.


(Exact name
of registrant as specified in its charter)





Delaware

1-11234

76-0380342(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation)

(Commission File
Number)

(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)





500 Dallas Street, Suite 1000


Houston, Texas 77002


(Address of principal executive offices, including zip code)





713-369-9000


(Registrants telephone number, including area code)







---




Item 9. Regulation FD Disclosure





In accordance with General Instruction B.2. of Form 8-K, the following information shall not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, nor shall it be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.





Representatives of Kinder Morgan, Inc. (KMI), Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L.P. (KMP) and Kinder Morgan Management, LLC (KMR) intend to make presentations on
January 22, 2003 at the Kinder Morgan 2003 Analyst Conference to address the fiscal year 2002 results, the fiscal year 2003 outlook, and other business information about KMI, KMP and KMR. Prior to the meetings, interested parties will be able to
view the materials presented at the meetings by visiting KMIs web site at: http://www.kindermorgan.com/investor/presentations. Interested parties may also access the presentations by audio webcast, both live and on-demand. The live
presentations can be accessed at http://www.videonewswire.com/event.asp?id=10577 by choosing the webcast link and completing the registration page. The live presentations are scheduled to begin at 9:30 a.m. E.S.T. An on-demand webcast
(replay) for the presentations will be available within 24 hours of the actual presentation, will remain available for 45 days, and can also be accessed at http://www.videonewswire.com/event.asp?id=10577.




2




---




SIGNATURE





Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned
hereunto duly authorized.





KINDER MORGAN ENERGY PARTNERS, L.P.By:

KINDER MORGAN G.P., INC. its general
partnerBy :

KINDER MORGAN MANAGEMENT, LLC, its delegateDated: January 21, 2003





By:

/s/ Joseph ListengartJoseph ListengartVice President and General Counsel




3
#### Masum AHMED, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS, III, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 16-60830 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed February 21, 2018

Khagendra Gharti Chhetry, Esq., Counsel, Chhetry *&*Associates, P.C., New York, NY, for Petitioner

John Frederick Stanton, Office of Immigration Litigation, U.S, Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, for Respondent

Before JOLLY, JONES, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Masum Ahmed, a native and citizen of Bangladesh, has filed a petition for review of the denial of his motion to reopen by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). He asserts that the BIA retained jurisdiction to consider his motion to reopen and that the BIA was obligated to consider his motion on the merits and issue a decision. Ahmed seeks to reopen the proceeding based on evidence of changed country conditions that could not have been presented at the previous hearing, including new incidents of escalating violence in Bangladesh and renewed threats of harm against his family.

This court reviews the denial of a motion to reopen under a highly deferential abuse of discretion standard. *Zhao v. Gonzales,*404 F.3d 296, 303 (5th Cir. 2005). This court will affirm the BIA’s decision if the decision was not capricious, racially invidious, without evidentiary foundation, or arbitrary. *Id.*at 304.

The BIA determined that Ahmed was required to file his motion to reopen with the Immigration Judge (IJ), rather than the BIA. *See In re Lopez,*22 I. & N. Dec. 16, 17 (BIA 1998); *In re Mladineo,*14 I. *&**309N. Dec. 591, 592 (BIA 1974); 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2). Ahmed does not identify any error in the BIA’s determination based on *In re Lopez*and *In re Mladineo.*Accordingly, any such challenge is deemed abandoned. *See Soadjede v. Ashcroft,*324 F.3d 830, 833 (5th Cir. 2003).

Ahmed also argues that even though the BIA dismissed his appeal of the IJ’s decision as untimely, the “BIA could not have divested itself of the jurisdiction for future motions” to reopen. Ahmed cites generally to cases in which other circuit courts have held that the 30-day period for filing a notice of appeal to the BIA and the 30-day period for filing a motion for reconsideration to the BIA are mandatory but are not jurisdictional.1 The cases on which Ahmed relies do not address the issue of the BIA’s jurisdiction over motions to reopen or the BIA’s regulations concerning the proper place to file motions to reopen. Ahmed did not present any legal authority that supports his argument. Ahmed has not shown that the BIA abused its discretion when it denied his motion to reopen. *See Zhao,*404 F.3d at 303.

PETITION DENIED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 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. R. 47.5,4,

1

. *See,*e.g., *Irigoyen-Briones v. Holder,*644 F.3d 943, 946-49 (9th Cir. 2011) (concerning 30-day period for filing motion for reconsideration).
<PAGE>

In view of the possible materiality of the financial condition of Torch Energy
Advisors Incorporated ("Torch") financial condition to the Minimum Price
commitment, which relates to the Purchase Contract between the Trust and Torch,
Torch's financial statements are provided as an exhibit to the Trust's annual
report on Form 10-K. Upon the termination of the Minimum Price commitment, such
financial statements will not be included in this annual filing.
#### COM. v. PATEL, K.

2625 EDA 2016

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

09/25/2017

CP-23-CR-0006450-2015 (Delaware)

Affirmed