alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NaturalNano, Inc.

15 Schoen Place

Pittsford, NY 14534


 


                                    Feburary 5 , 2014


 


Alpha Capital


C/o LH Financial 150 Central 

Park South

2nd Floor


New York, NY 10019


 


Ladies and Gentlemen:


 


This letter shall serve as the agreement
and promise of NaturalNano, Inc. (the "Company") to pay to the order of Alpha Capital. ("Alpha"), the sum of
$9000.00 plus interest at 8% per annum. The Company acknowledges that Alpha has advanced $9000.00 in funds at the Company's request,
and the Company's obligations hereunder shall be secured by all other collateral that secures the various senior secured promissory
notes that the Company has previously issued to Longview. In the event the Company fails to repay Alpha in accordance with the
terms of this letter, Alpha should be entitled to exercise all rights granted to it as a secured creditor pursuant to the Security
Agreements (as defined in the 8% Senior Secured Promissory Note issued to Longview by the Company on or about November 5, 2008).


 


All payments under or pursuant to this Note
shall be made in United States Dollars, in immediately available funds, to Longview at the address set forth above or at such other
place as Longview may designate from time to time in writing to the Company or by wire transfer of funds to Longview's account,
as requested by Longview. The outstanding principal balance of this Note, together with all accrued and unpaid interest, shall
be due and payable in full on June 30, 2014.


 


	 	Very truly yours,
	 	 
	 	Natural Nano, Inc.
	 	 
	 	/s/ James Wemett
	 	 
	 	Name: James Wemett
	 	Title: CEO
**Exhibit
21.2**
 
 **Puget
Sound Energy, Inc.**
 
 **SUBSIDIARIES**
 
 1.
    GP
      Acquisition Corp. c/o James
W. Eldredge
 10885
N.E. Fourth Street, Suite 1200
 Bellevue,
Washington 98004-5515
 
 2.
    Hydro
      Energy Development Corporation (HEDC) 10885
N.E. Fourth Street, Suite 1200
 Bellevue,
Washington 98004-5515
 
 3.
    LP
      Acquisition Corp. c/o James
W. Eldredge
 10885
N.E. Fourth Street, Suite 1200
 Bellevue,
Washington 98004-5515
 
 4.
    Puget
      Western, Inc. 19515
North Creek Parkway
 Suite
310
 Bothell,
Washington 98011
 
 5.
    WNG
      CAP I, Inc. c/o James
W. Eldredge
 10885
N.E. Fourth Street, Suite 1200
 Bellevue,
Washington 98004-5515
 
 6.
    Rainier
      Receivables, Inc. c/o James
W. Eldredge
 10885
N.E. Fourth Street, Suite 1200
 Bellevue,
Washington 98004-5515
# In the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

══════════ No. WR

- 94, 786

- 01

══════════

EX PARTE CHRISTOPHER DEWAYNE FLOWERS , Applicant

═══════════════════════════════════════ On Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Cause No. 1361743

- A in the 2 32nd District Court F rom Harris County

═══════════════════════════════════════ Y EARY , J., filed a concurring opinion

. App licant was convicted of delivery of less than a gram of cocaine,
a state

- jail felony, a nd sentenced pursuant to Section 12.44(a) of the Penal Code to confinement for ninety days

. T EX

. H EALTH & S AFETY C ODE § 481.112(b); T EX

. P ENAL C ODE § 12.44(a). Applicant now challenges his conviction in this Court through an application for writ of habeas corpus.
T EX

. C ODE C RIM

. P ROC

. art. 11.071. Applicant alleges that he was denied due process by the State’s use of false evidence against him, that his pleaFLOWERS

– 2

was involuntary, and that he is actually innocent. Without explicit l y saying so, the Court today rightly reject s Applicant’s claim that he is actual ly innocen t

. 1 Instead, relying on the recommendations of both the State and the convicting court, and this Court’s opinion in Ex parte Chabot , 300 S.W.3d 768, 772 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009), as well as on the U nited States Supreme Court’s opinion in Brady v. United States , 397 U.S. 742 (1970), the Court grants Applicant relief on the basis of : (1) his claim that he was denied due process by the use of false evidence against him ; and (2) his claim that his plea was inv oluntary. But I cannot join the Court’s conclusion that Applicant’s plea was involuntary. Unlike the Court, I see no need to determine whether Applicant’s plea was involuntary. As I have observed before, “[t]his Court has yet to definitively say, in a pub lished opinion, whether or not Brady [ v. Maryland , 373 U.S. 83 (1963)] applies to a guilty plea scenario” so as to render the plea involuntary. See Ex parte Yearling , 6 63 S.W.3d 695, 69 7 (Tex. Crim. App. 202 2 ) (Yeary, J., dissenting ) (citing Ex parte Palmberg , 491 S.W.3d 804, 814 n.18 (Tex. Crim. App. 2016))

. It still has not done so, though purporting (needlessly, and in an unpublished opinion) to grant relief on that basis today. However, I concur with the Court’s decision to grant relief on the grou nd that false evidence was used against him. I therefore concur , respectfully, but only in the Court’s judgment.
FILED: June 7, 2023 DO NOT PUBLISH

1 Both the State and the convicting c ourt reject the idea of granting relief to Applicant on the ground that he is actually innocent.
<PAGE> 1


Exhibit 21                                                  Page 1 of 1
----------

<TABLE>
                                 PGI INCORPORATED
                                   SUBSIDIARIES
<CAPTION>
                                       State of
                                       --------
                                       Incorporation  Relationship
                                       -------------  ------------
<S>                                    <C>            <C>
Sugarmill Woods, Inc.                  Florida        Wholly owned <F1>
Sugarmill Woods Management, Inc.       Florida        Wholly owned <F1>
Deep Creek Utilities, Inc.             Florida        Wholly owned <F1>
Southern Woods, Incorporated           Florida        Wholly owned by Sugarmill Woods, Inc.
Burnt Store Marina, Inc.               Florida        Wholly owned <F1>
Punta Gorda Isles Sales, Inc.          Florida        Wholly owned <F1>
Burnt Store Utilities, Inc.            Florida        Wholly owned <F1>
Gulf Coast Credit Corporation          Florida        Wholly owned <F1>
Sugarmill Woods Sales, Inc.            Florida        Wholly owned by Sugarmill Woods, Inc.
Sugarmill Construction, Inc.           Florida        Wholly owned by Sugarmill Woods, Inc.

<FN>
-----------------
<F1>   Included in the Company's consolidated financial statements.
</TABLE>


                                    - 57 -
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Gary Carson, Appellant

No. 06-15-00171-CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

Appeal from the 102nd District Court of 

Bowie County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 

14F0103-102). Memorandum Opinion 

delivered by Chief Justice Morriss, Justice 

Burgess and Justice Moseley* participating.

*Justice Moseley, Retired, Sitting by 

Assginment.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court 

below. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

We further order that the appellant, Gary Carson, pay all costs of this appeal.

RENDERED JANUARY 9, 2019

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 42 (Tuesday, March 4, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 9767]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-5286]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS EXAMINATION COUNCIL


Interagency Policy Statement Regarding Uniform Guideline on 
Internal Control for Foreign Exchange in Commercial Banks

AGENCIES: Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), Department 
of the Treasury; Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System 
(FRB); and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).

ACTION: Withdrawal of guideline.

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

SUMMARY: The OCC, FRB, and FDIC (``the Agencies'') are withdrawing 
their joint guideline entitled: ``Interagency Policy Statement 
Regarding Uniform Guideline on Internal Control for Foreign Exchange in 
Commercial Banks,'' dated May 22, 1980 (45 FR 42370, June 24, 1980) 
(``the Guideline'') because it is considered outdated and has been 
superseded by other pronouncements from each of the agencies.

EFFECTIVE DATE: The removal of the Guideline is effective March 4, 
1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

FRB: Michael Martinson, Assistant Director, (202)/452-3640), or Joe 
Sciortino, Supervisory Financial Analyst, (202/452-2294), Board of 
Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 20th and C Streets, N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20551.
FDIC: Christie Sciacca, Assistant Director, (202/898-3638), Federal 
Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 
20429.
OCC: Leon Tarrant, Manager, (202/874-4730), Office of the Comptroller 
of the Currency, 250 E Street, S.W., Washington D.C. 20219.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The policy set forth in the Guideline was 
developed to provide uniformity among the Agencies in establishing 
minimum standards for documentation, accounting, and auditing for 
foreign exchange operations in U.S. commercial banks. The Guideline was 
not intended to be all encompassing as to policies and procedures 
expected to be found in the most active market participants. Rather, it 
called for each bank to develop a system of internal control 
commensurate with the risks to which it is exposed.
    The Guideline has become outdated in view of numerous changes that 
have subsequently taken place, including: the scope and depth of 
foreign exchange trading activities in banks, new product developments, 
significant improvements in automated trading systems, and the 
management of the business along product lines. These conditions 
prompted each agency to issue subsequent pronouncements and updated 
examination and/or policy procedures for U.S. banks as well as for 
foreign banks doing business in the United States.

The Agencies' Action

    The Agencies hereby withdraw the Guideline.

    Dated: February 27, 1997.
Joe M. Cleaver,
Executive Secretary, Federal Financial Institutions Examination 
Council.
[FR Doc. 97-5286 Filed 3-3-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
Docket No: FAA

- 2015

- 8137 Dir ID: 2014

- NM

- 104

- AD



## FA A M C A I A D W O R KSHEET ( C O N T I NU E D)

. C ontacts. W i th w h o m o u t si de t he F A A h a s th i s prop os al been d i s c u s s ed?

O rgan i z at i on P er s on C ont a c ted D ate R e s pon s e

N at i o n a l B u s ine s s Aircr af t A ss o ci at i on E li C ott i 5 / 19 / 1 4

Re g i o n a l Airline A ss o ci at i o n 5 / 19 / 1 4

Aircr af t O w ners & P il ot s A s s o ci at i o n R o bert Ha ck m a n 5 / 19 / 14

Airlines fo r A m erica R o bert I rel a nd 5 / 19 / 14D
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Charlie THOMPSON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-7384

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: March 8, 2018

Decided: March 14, 2018

Charlie Thompson, Appellant Pro Se. Kyle David Pousson, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee,

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Charlie Thompson seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. This court may exercise ju*289risdiction only over final orders, 28 "U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); *Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp.,*337 U.S. 541, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). Because the district court failed to address Thompson’s claim based on *Dean v. United States,*— U.S. -, 137 S.Ct. 1170, 197 L.Ed.2d 490 (2017), the order Thompson seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. *See Porter v. Zook,*803 F.3d 694, 696-97 (4th Cir. 2015). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and remand the case to the district court for consideration of Thompson’s *Dean*claim. We express no opinion on the merits of any of Thompson’s claims. Wé 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 AND REMANDED*
ex10-6.htm


Exhibit 10.6


 



 


PROMISSORY NOTE EXTENSION







         THIS PROMISSORY NOTE EXTENSION ("EXTENSION"), dated as of January 15, 2014, among Texas Jack Oil & Gas Corporation, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the "Company"), and Jimmy Yanez, the ("Holder").







         WHEREAS, on June 7, 2013 the Company issued a Demand Note due November 30, 2013, to the Holder in an aggregate principal amount of $40,000 (the "Note");







         WHEREAS, the Company has requested that the Holder extend the payment of the note both in principal and interest until June 1, 2014 as set forth herein;







         NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants and agreements of the parties hereinafter set forth, the parties hereto hereby agree as follows:







 


 


WHEREAS, the Lender has agreed to extend the Repayment Date under the promissory note to June 1, 2014.


 


1. REPAYMENT DATE. The Lender and the Borrowers agree that the new Repayment Date under the promissory note shall be June 1, 2014.


 


2. REPAYMENT OF PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST. The Borrower hereby agrees and confirms that all principal and interest and any other amounts payable by the Borrower under the Promissory Note dated June 7, 2013, shall be repaid in full in cash (USD) on or prior to June 1, 2014, unless such amounts are repaid upon such other terms as the Holder may agree in its sole and absolute discretion.


 


3.   Holder agrees to make the payments as specified in Paragraph (2) hereof and understands and agrees that:







(a) All the rights and remedies, stipulations, and conditions contained in said Promissory Note relating to default in the making of payments under the Promissory Note shall also apply to default in the making of said extension of payments hereunder.


 


(b) All covenants, agreements, stipulations, and conditions in said Promissory Note dated June 7, 2013 shall be and remain in full force and effect, except as herein modified, and none of the Company’s obligations or liabilities under said Promissory Note shall be diminished or released by any provisions hereof, nor shall this Agreement in any way impair, diminish, or affect any of the Holder’s rights under or remedies on the Promissory Note, whether such rights or remedies arise thereunder or by operation of law.


 




  





  











  






 



	
Dated: January 15, 2014

	
Payee Accepted By: Jimmy Yanez


	  	
 


 


Jimmy Yanez


	  	  
	  	  
	  	  
	
 


 


 


Dated: January 15, 2014

	
 


 


 


Maker By:


	  	
Robert Schwarz as President of


	  	
Texas Jack Oil & Gas Corporation
11,163

0

5,592

16,755

BallotsCounted

115

317

0

432

BallotsRejected

MICHIGAN

Mail,Fax,Email

Election/Registrar's

Office

Internet

DM

V

Public

Assistance

Office

DisabilitiesAgency

Military

RecruitmentOffice

OtherState

Agency

RegistrationDrives

Registration:Other

1,767,560

126,760

397,411

152,931

15,564

1,3

4

4

277000

RegistrationFormSource

TotalRegisteredVoters

7,514,055

SectionA-VoterRegistration

RegistrationFormsReceived

2,461,847

ConfirmationNotificationsSent

203,389

Polling

Place

UOCAVA Absentee Provisional

Ballot

EarlyVote

Center

Voteby

Mail

Turnout:

Other

3,602,159

1,253,814

16,755 1,812 0 0 0

SectionF-TurnoutbyMethod

CountedFull Counted

Part

Rejected Provisional:

Other

1,553

338

0 0

SectionE-ProvisionalBallots

UniformedService

Non-militaryOverseas

Other

SectionB-UOCAVA

7,537

14,037

0

21,574

BallotsTransmitted

TOTAL TOTAL

ProvisionalBallotTotal:1,891 TurnoutTotal:4,874,619

Select: MICHIGAN

TOTAL

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                          

  

2016EAVSDataBrief 

U i
# C_2022408EN.01003301.xml

| 24.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 408/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 408/33

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Spetsialisiran nakazatelen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 13 July 2022 — Criminal proceedings against VB

(Case C-468/22)

(2022/C 408/43)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Spetsialisiran nakazatelen sad

Accused person

VB

Question referred

Is it compatible with Article 9 of Directive 2016/343 (1) and the principle of effectiveness for a national provision such as Article 423(3) of the NPK to oblige a person who makes a request for a new trial, because he or she had been absent from the first trial and neither of the cases in Article 8(2) [of that directive] applied, to appear before the court in person in order to have that request examined on the merits?

---

(1)  Directive (EU) 2016/343 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on the strengthening of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and of the right to be present at the trial in criminal proceedings (OJ 2016 L 65, p. 1).

---
No. D-2683.

#### In re Discipline of Smallenberg.

Robert H. Smallenberg, of Ashland, Va., is suspended from the practice of law in this Court, and a rule will issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                              32
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      369
<ALLOWANCES>                                         3
<INVENTORY>                                        269
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   716
<PP&E>                                           4,255
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,050
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   3,071
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              684
<BONDS>                                          1,177
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               80
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                         397
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     3,071
<SALES>                                          3,651
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 3,651
<CGS>                                            3,300
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,300
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   174
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  61
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    116
<INCOME-TAX>                                        42
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 74
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        74
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .92
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .92
        

</TABLE>
NaturalNano, Inc.

15 Schoen Place

Pittsford, NY 14534


 


                                               October 24, 2013


 


Alpha Capital


C/o LH Financial 150 Central 

Park South

2nd Floor


New York, NY 10019


 


Ladies and Gentlemen:


 


This letter shall serve as the agreement
and promise of NaturalNano, Inc. (the "Company") to pay to the order of Alpha Capital. ("Alpha"), the sum of
$3900.00 plus interest at 8% per annum. The Company acknowledges that Alpha has advanced $3900.00 in funds at the Company's request,
and the Company's obligations hereunder shall be secured by all other collateral that secures the various senior secured promissory
notes that the Company has previously issued to Longview. In the event the Company fails to repay Alpha in accordance with the
terms of this letter, Alpha should be entitled to exercise all rights granted to it as a secured creditor pursuant to the Security
Agreements (as defined in the 8% Senior Secured Promissory Note issued to Longview by the Company on or about November 5, 2008).


 


All payments under or pursuant to this Note
shall be made in United States Dollars, in immediately available funds, to Longview at the address set forth above or at such other
place as Longview may designate from time to time in writing to the Company or by wire transfer of funds to Longview's account,
as requested by Longview. The outstanding principal balance of this Note, together with all accrued and unpaid interest, shall
be due and payable in full on January 30, 2013.


 


	 	Very truly yours,
	 	 
	 	Natural Nano, Inc.
	 	 
	 	/s/ James Wemett
	 	 
	 	Name: James Wemett
	 	Title: CEO
Submitted February 16,

affirmed March 29,

petition for review denied July 20, 2017 (361 Or 671)

#### In the Matter of A. J., a Child. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, *Petitioner-Respondent, v.*R. J. J., *Appellant.*In the Matter of J. J., a Child. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, *Petitioner-Respondent, v.*R. J. J., *Appellant.*In the Matter of A. J., a Child. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, *Petitioner-Respondent, v.*R. J. J., *Appellant.*
      *616In the Matter of J. J., a Child. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, *Petitioner-Respondent, v.*R. J. J., *Appellant.*

*615Clackamas County Circuit Court

141162J; Petition Number 141162J01; A163080 (Control)

Clackamas County Circuit Court

141163J; Petition Number 141163J01; A163081

Clackamas County Circuit Court

141162J; Petition Number 141162J02; A163082

*616Clackamas County Circuit Court

141163J; Petition Number 141163J02; A163083

391 P3d 998

G. Aron Perez-Selsky filed the brief for appellant.

Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Cecil A. Reniche-Smith, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.

Before Ortega, Presiding Judge, and Egan, Judge, and Lagesen, Judge.

*617PER CURIAM

Father appeals a judgment terminating his parental rights to his son and daughter, challenging the juvenile court’s determination that it was in the best interests of the children to terminate father’s parental rights. *See*ORS 419B.500 (termination of parental rights must be in the best interest of the ward). He contends that the juvenile court erred in determining that terminating his parental rights was in the children’s best interests because the children’s adoptive parents will likely sever contact between the children and their paternal grandmother, which would be detrimental to the children’s well-being.

A discussion of the facts in this case would not benefit the bench, the bar, or the public. On *de novo*review, ORS 19.415 (3) (a), we conclude that the juvenile court properly terminated father’s parental rights and termination is in the best interests of the children.

Affirmed.
# Email Protection

## You are unable to access this email address eda.gov

The website from which you got to this page is protected by Cloudflare. Email addresses on that page have been hidden in order to keep them from being accessed by malicious bots. **You must enable Javascript in your browser in order to decode the e-mail address**.

If you have a website and are interested in protecting it in a similar way, you can sign up for Cloudflare.

                  - How does Cloudflare protect email addresses on website from spammers?
                  - Can I sign up for Cloudflare?

Cloudflare Ray ID: **873b7502cde3873b**•      Your IP:      Click to reveal68.60.74.180•Performance & security byCloudflare