alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 99.1


                            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 ILX  Resorts  Incorporated  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q for the three months  ending  March 31, 2003,  as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I
(We), Joseph P. Martori, Chief Executive Officer, and Margaret M. Eardley, 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; and

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

/s/  Joseph P. Martori
-------------------------------
Joseph P. Martori
Chief Executive Officer
May 8, 2003


/s/  Margaret M. Eardley
-------------------------------
Margaret M. Eardley
Chief Financial Officer
May 8, 2003
# C_2023024EN.01002001.xml

| 23.1.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.1.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/20

---

Appeal brought on 25 August 2022 by Unite the Union against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 22 June 2022 in Case T-739/20, Unite the Union v EUIPO — WWRD Ireland (WATERFORD)

(Case C-571/22 P)

(2023/C 24/27)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Unite the Union (represented by: B. O'Connor, avocat, M. Hommé, avocat)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), WWRD Ireland IPCO LLC

By order of 05 December 2022, the Court of Justice (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) held that the appeal was not allowed to proceed and that Unite the Union should bear its own costs.

---
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CHRISTIAN SAMUEL LOPEZ, AKA 

Diego Araujo, 

Petitioner, 

 v. 

JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney 

General, 

Respondent.

No. 14-73842 

Agency No. A095-753-915 

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted December 18, 2017**

Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

Christian Samuel Lopez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review 

of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal from an 

immigration judge’s decision finding her ineligible for asylum and withholding of 

removal, and denying relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Our 

 

* 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

DEC 20 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 14-73842 

jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the 

agency’s particularly serious crime determination. Avendano-Hernandez v. Lynch, 

800 F.3d 1072, 1077 (9th Cir. 2015). We deny in part and dismiss in part the 

petition for review.

The agency did not abuse its discretion in determining that Lopez’s 

conviction for driving under the influence with blood alcohol of 0.08 percent or 

more and causing bodily injury to another person with two or more prior 

convictions pursuant to Cal. Vehicle Code § 23153(b), and hit and run causing 

death or injury in violation of Cal. Vehicle Code § 20001(a), was a particularly 

serious crime, where Lopez declined the opportunity to offer additional testimony 

or evidence regarding the circumstances of her conviction, and the agency weighed 

the correct factors. See id.; Anaya-Ortiz v. Holder, 594 F.3d 673, 678 (9th Cir. 

2010) (all reliable information may be considered in making a particularly serious 

crime determination).

Lopez waived any challenge to the agency’s CAT determination. See CorroBarragan v. Holder, 718 F.3d 1174, 1177 n.5 (9th Cir. 2013) (failure to contest 

issue in opening brief resulted in waiver).

We lack jurisdiction to consider Lopez’s unexhausted contentions that her 

prior counsel was ineffective and that she had insufficient opportunity to present 

evidence regarding her conviction. See Tijani v. Holder, 628 F.3d 1071, 1080 (9th 
3 14-73842 

Cir. 2010) (no jurisdiction to review legal claims not presented in an alien’s 

administrative proceedings before the BIA).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
Amendment No.1 to the Amended and Restated Investment Agreement



 Exhibit 4.2 
  

AMENDMENT NO. 1 
 TO THE AMENDED AND RESTATED
INVESTMENT AGREEMENT 
  
 THIS AMENDMENT NO. 1 to the Amended and
Restated Investment Agreement, dated as of September 4, 2001, is made as of October 31, 2002 between Kookmin Bank (the “Bank”) and Goldman Sachs Capital Koryo, L.P. (“Koryo”). 
  
 WHEREAS, the parties entered into an Amended and Restated Investment
Agreement, dated as of September 4, 2001 (the “Agreement”); and 
  
 WHEREAS, the Bank and Koryo desire to enter into this Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement (“Amendment No. 1”), pursuant to Section 7.06 of the Agreement in order to eliminate certain provisions therein;

  
 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and
agreements contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 
  
 1.    From and after the date hereof, Sections 2.01, 2.02, 3.01, 3.02, 4.01, 4.02, 4.03, 4.04, 4.05, 6.01, 6.04, 6.05, 7.02 and Exhibit A of the Agreement shall be deleted in their entirety and shall cease to apply.

  
 2.    This Amendment No. 1 shall be
governed by the laws of the State of New York and Article VII of the Agreement is incorporated herein mutatis mutandis. Except as expressly set forth in this Amendment No. 1, the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect and no rights
or remedies shall be deemed waived. 
  
 3.    This Amendment No. 1 may be executed in one or more counterparts, each such counterpart being deemed an original by the parties executing such counterpart, and all of which shall be considered one and the same
instrument. 
  
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment No. 1 has been
signed on behalf of each of the parties hereto as of the date first written above. 
  

	GOLDMAN SACHS CAPITAL KORYO, L.P.
		
	 By:
	 	Goldman Sachs Capital Koryo Gen Par,
	 	 	        L.L.C., its General Partner


  
  

	 
		
	 By:
	 	

	Name:	 	 Ji Hong Min

	Title:	 	 Attorney-in-Fact



  
  

	KOOKMIN BANK
		
	 By:
	 	

	Name:	 	Jong-Kyoo Yoon
	Title:	 	Executive Vice President
No. 12-5653.

#### Martinez *v.*Pennsylvania.

Super. Ct. Pa. Certiorari denied.
No. 11-10720.

#### Tomaselli et al. *v.*Coppola & Coppola et al.

C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed July 16, 2024

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-24-00247-CV

WAYNE TRAYWICK, Appellant

V.

HOUSTON FREIGHTLINER, INC., Appellee

On Appeal from the 333rd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2019-84554

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This appeal is from a judgment signed March 15, 2024. The clerk’s record 

was filed May 8, 2024. The court reporter informed this court that appellant has 

not requested nor paid for the reporter’s record. On May 6, 2024, we notified 

appellant that unless appellant paid or made arrangements for the reporter’s record 

within 15 days, this court would consider and decide those issues or points that do 

not require a reporter’s record. Appellant did not respond. 

On May 30, 2024, we issued an order stating that unless appellant filed a 
2

brief within 30 days, the appeal was subject to dismissal without further notice for 

want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b).

Appellant filed no brief or other response. We dismiss the appeal.

PER CURIAM 

Panel Consists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justices Spain and Poissant.
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 International Automated Systems, Inc.
(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2009 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
Neldon Johnson, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:
 
 (1) The
Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
 (2) The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
 
 /s/
Neldon Johnson
 Neldon
Johnson
 President,
Chief Executive Officer
 May 14,
2009
#### State v. Gaither

111,770

12/14/2015

Denied.

Unpublished
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

April 1, 2013

h0325

Order 

April 1, 2013

145982

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 145982

COA: 308836

Ingham CC: 92-064315-FH

CHRISTOPHER CARSON SMITH,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 24, 2012 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
##### 



1.
    
    The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2007, to
which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the Periodic Report) fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act, and2.
    
    The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
  By:
    
    /s/ Henry L. NordhoffHenry L. NordhoffChairman, President and Chief Executive
Officer
# C_2023179EN.01004902.xml

| 22.5.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 179/49 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.5.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 179/49

---

Order of the President of the General Court of 22 March 2023 — TP v Commission

(Case T-776/22 R)

(Interim relief - Public procurement - Financial Regulation - Exclusion from procurement procedures funded by the general budget of the European Union and by the EDF for a period of two years - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - Lack of any urgency)

(2023/C 179/73)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: TP (represented by: T. Faber, F. Bonke and I. Sauvagnac, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Moro, F. Behre and P. Rossi, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its application based on Articles 278 and 279 TFEU, the applicant seeks suspension of the operation of the decision of the European Commission of 1 October 2022, by which it was excluded from participating in award procedures governed by Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union, amending Regulations (EU) No 1296/2013, (EU) No 1301/2013, (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) No 1304/2013, (EU) No 1309/2013, (EU) No 1316/2013, (EU) No 223/2014, (EU) No 283/2014, and Decision No 541/2014/EU and repealing Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 (OJ 2018 L 193, p. 1), from being selected for implementing EU funds and from participating in award procedures governed by Council Regulation (EU) 2018/1877 of 26 November 2018 on the financial regulation applicable to the 11th European Development Fund, and repealing Regulation (EU) 2015/323 (OJ 2018 L 307, p. 1).

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The application for interim measures is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The application for interim measures is dismissed.

| 2. | The costs are reserved. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The costs are reserved.

---
# C_2018310EN.01000401.xml

| 3.9.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 310/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.9.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 310/4

---

Notice of the expiry of certain anti-dumping measures

(2018/C 310/06)

Further to the publication of a notice of impending expiry (1), the Commission gives notice that the anti-dumping measure mentioned below will expire.

This notice is published in accordance with Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Union (2).

| Product | Country(ies) of origin or exportation | Measures | Reference | Date of expiry (3) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (i.e. cells) | People's Republic of China | Anti-dumping duty | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/367 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (i.e. cells) originating in or consigned from the People's Republic of China, following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council and terminating the partial interim review investigation pursuant to Article 11(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 (OJ L 56, 3.3.2017, p. 131) | 3.9.2018 |

Product

Country(ies) of origin or exportation

Measures

Reference

Date of expiry (3)

Crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (i.e. cells)

People's Republic of China

Anti-dumping duty

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/367 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (i.e. cells) originating in or consigned from the People's Republic of China, following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council and terminating the partial interim review investigation pursuant to Article 11(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 (OJ L 56, 3.3.2017, p. 131)

3.9.2018

---

(1)  OJ C 95, 13.3.2018, p. 6

(2)  OJ L 176, 30.6.2016, p. 21.

(3)  The measure will expire at midnight of the day mentioned in this column.

---
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

NO. CAAP-20-0000604

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

MAUI ARTS & CULTURAL CENTER,

a Hawai#i nonprofit corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee, v.

JOSEPH S. TORRES, JR., Defendant-Appellant, and

JOHN DOES 1-50; JANE DOES 1-50; DOE CORPORATIONS 1-50;

DOE PARTNERSHIPS 1-50; DOE ENTITIES 1-50, and

DOE GOVERNMENTAL UNITS 1-50, Defendants

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT

(CASE NO. 2CC191000093(1))

ORDER APPROVING STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL OF APPEAL

(By: Ginoza, Chief Judge, Nakasone and Fujise, JJ.)

Upon consideration of the Stipulation for Dismissal of

Appeal with Prejudice, filed September 15, 2021, by PlaintiffAppellee Maui Arts & Cultural Center, the papers in support, and

the record, it appears that (1) the appeal has been docketed;

(2) the parties stipulate to dismiss the appeal with prejudice

and bear their own attorneys' fees and costs; (3) the stipulation

is dated and signed by counsel for all parties appearing in the

Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-20-0000604

17-SEP-2021

08:08 AM

Dkt. 33 OAWST
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

appeal; and (4) dismissal is authorized by Hawai#i Rules of

Appellate Procedure Rule 42(b).

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the stipulation is

approved and the appeal is dismissed with prejudice. The parties

shall bear their own attorneys' fees and costs on appeal.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, September 17, 2021.

/s/ Lisa M. Ginoza

Chief Judge

/s/ Karen T. Nakasone

Associate Judge

/s/ Alexa D.M. Fujise

Associate Judge

2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          17,979
<SECURITIES>                                       990
<RECEIVABLES>                                   31,808
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (537)
<INVENTORY>                                     15,112
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                82,646
<PP&E>                                          28,402
<DEPRECIATION>                                  11,914
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 135,625
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           20,526
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            12
<OTHER-SE>                                     112,407
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   135,625
<SALES>                                         36,445
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                36,445
<CGS>                                           17,758
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   32,053
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   510
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (37)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,056
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,925
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,131
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,131
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.26
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.23


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 63 (Wednesday, April 2, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 15726]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-8338]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
[UT-930-1990-00-24 1A]


Mining Claims Under the General Mining Laws; Surface Management: 
Forms of Legal Financial Guarantees Allowable Under Utah State Law

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Public Notice of Legal Financial Guarantees Allowable Under 
Utah State Law.

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

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) amended the surface 
management regulations at 43 CFR subpart 3809 on February 28, 1997 (62 
FR 9093). The amendment requires each BLM State Director to consult 
with the appropriate State authorities to determine which financial 
instruments in section 43 CFR 3809.1-9(k) are allowable under State 
law. Utah State law allows surety bonds, cash, irrevocable letters of 
credit, and certificates of deposit as forms of financial guarantees 
related to reclamation requirements.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This list is effective April 2, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Inquiries should be sent to the Bureau of Land Management, 
Utah State Office, Division of Natural Resources, Solid Mineral 
Resources Group, P.O. Box 45155, Salt Lake City, Utah 84145-0155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Terry McParland, (801) 539-4026.

ALLOWABLE FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS: The Bureau of Land Management has 
consulted with appropriate Utah State authorities to determine which of 
the financial instruments in section 3809.1-9(k) are allowable under 
Utah State law to satisfy the financial assurance requirements related 
to mining reclamation requirements. The State of Utah, Division of Oil, 
Gas, and Mining 2 has determined the following forms of financial 
guarantee are allowable under Utah State law: surety bonds, cash, 
irrevocable letters of credit, and certificates of deposit.

    Dated: March 27, 1997.
Ted Stephenson,
Acting State Director.
[FR Doc. 97-8338 Filed 4-1-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-DQ-P
# m94_28
No. 12-5589.

#### Dominguez *v.*United States.

C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 8 (Monday, January 13, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 1701]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-700]


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


DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
26 CFR Part 1

[REG-209729-94]
RIN 1545-AS94


Self-Employment Tax Treatment of Members of Certain Limited 
Liability Companies

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION: Withdrawal of notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: This document withdraws the notice of proposed rulemaking 
relating to the self-employment tax treatment of members of certain 
limited liability companies that was published in the Federal Register 
on Thursday, December 29, 1994. The proposed regulations sought to 
provide guidance concerning the applicability of certain self-
employment tax rules to certain members of limited liability companies. 
The IRS and Treasury have issued new proposed regulations that will 
provide guidance on this issue.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Honigman, (202) 622-3050
    (not a toll-free number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On Thursday, December 29, 1994, the IRS issued proposed regulations 
(EE-45-94) relating to the self-employment tax treatment of members of 
certain limited liability companies (59 FR 67253). Upon consideration 
of the written comments received and the oral comments made at the 
public hearing held on June 23,1995, the IRS has decided to withdraw 
those proposed regulations.

List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 1

    Income taxes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Withdrawal of Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    Accordingly, under the authority of 26 U.S.C. 7805, the notice of 
proposed rulemaking that was published in the Federal Register on 
Thursday, December 29, 1994, at 59 FR 67253, is withdrawn.
Margaret Milner Richardson,
Commissioner of Internal Revenue.
[FR Doc. 97-700 Filed 1-10-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-U