alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 13.1**

 

**Certificationof the Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to18 U.S. C. Section 1350, As Adopted Pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

In connection with theAnnual Report of Euro Tech Holdings Company Limited (the “Company”) on Form 20-Ffor the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), T.C.Leung, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his knowledge, that:

 

(1)          The Report fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and

 

(2)          The information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Company.

 

June 28, 2010

 
| /s/ T.C.  Leung         |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
| T.C. Leung              |   |
| Chief Executive Officer |   |

 

----
Calendar No. 18

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 190

A BILL

To repeal the mandatory 20 percent income tax

which are not rolled over.withholding on eligible rollover distributions

MARCH 3, 1993

Read the second time and placed on the calendar
II

Calendar No. 18

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 190

To repeal the mandatory 20 percent income tax withholding on eligible rollover

distributions which are not rolled over.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 26 (legislative day, JANUARY 5), 1993

Mr. HELMS introduced the following bill; which was read the first time

MARCH 3, 1993

Read the second time and placed on the calendar

A BILL

To repeal the mandatory 20 percent income tax withholding

on eligible rollover distributions which are not rolled over.

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

3 SECTION 1. REPEAL OF MANDATORY 20 PERCENT INCOME

4 TAX WITHHOLDING ON ELIGIBLE IRA ROLL5 OVER DISTRIBUTIONS WHICH ARE NOT

6 ROLLED OVER.

7 (a) REPEAL OF WITHHOLDING REQUIREMENT.—

8 Subsection (b) of section 522 of the Unemployment Com-
2

•S 190 PCS

1 pensation Amendments of 1992 (relating to withholding

2 on eligible rollover distributions which are not rolled over),

3 and the amendments made by such subsection, are hereby

4 repealed, and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall be

5 applied and administered as if such subsection, and

6 amendments, had never been enacted.

7 (b) OFFSET.—The President is authorized to reduce

8 obligations and expenditures for programs, projects, and

9 activities authorized under the Foreign Assistance Act of

10 1961, except for allocation of funds for countries specified

11 in law, by such sums as are necessary to offset the loss

12 of revenues under subsection (a).
#### People v Etheridge

1st Dept: 149 AD3d 446

denied*
Exhibit 32.2

                            MICROPAC INDUSTRIES, INC.

                             CERTICATION 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 Micropac  Industries,  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period  ending  August 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Patrick Cefalu, CFO of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss. 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 results of operations of
         the Company.


 /s/ Patrick Cefalu
-----------------------------
Patrick Cefalu, CFO
(Principal Financial Officer)
2017-0417.

#### State ex rel. Lopez v. Summit Cty. Clerk of Courts.

In Mandamus. Reported at 149 Ohio St.3d 1466, 2017-Ohio-5723, 77 N.E.3d 989. On motion for reconsideration. Motion denied.

O’Neill, J., dissents.
#### People v Broadus

2d Dept: 142 AD3d 595

denied*

*

 Motion for poor person relief dismissed as academic or denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM UNITED
CAPITAL  CORP.'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER  ENDED JUNE 30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND NOTES, THERETO.

</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                                   1,000

<S>                                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                        DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                             JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                                        13,146
<SECURITIES>                                                  36,759
<RECEIVABLES>                                                 12,758
<ALLOWANCES>                                                     333
<INVENTORY>                                                    4,069
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                              66,753
<PP&E>                                                        11,587
<DEPRECIATION>                                                 6,823
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                               143,454
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                         25,779
<BONDS>                                                            0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                              0
<PREFERRED>                                                        0
<COMMON>                                                         473
<OTHER-SE>                                                    66,397
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                 143,454
<SALES>                                                        9,091
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                              16,070
<CGS>                                                          6,479
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                 12,346
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                              (2,482)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                               134
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                6,656
<INCOME-TAX>                                                   2,835
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                            3,821
<DISCONTINUED>                                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                    0
<CHANGES>                                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                                   3,821
<EPS-BASIC>                                                      .81
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                    .81


</TABLE>
#### Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Plaintiff, v Robin Construction Corporation, Defendant, and Ted Kan*396tor et al., Respondents. National Collectors & Liquidators, LP Nonparty Appellant.

[767 NYS2d 866]—

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, National Collectors & Liquidators, LR the plaintiffs assignee, appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Gigante, J.), dated July 26, 2002, as denied those branches of its motion which were for leave to amend an amended judgment of foreclosure and sale of the same court dated November 14, 2001, to include a provision adjudicating deficiency liability against the defendants Ted Kantor and Isaac Kantor, and for leave to enter a deficiency judgment against those defendants.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The defendant Robin Construction Corporation (hereinafter Robin Construction) issued a mortgage and note to secure a construction loan from the Community National Bank and Trust Company of New York (hereinafter Community Bank). The defendants Ted Kantor and Issac Kantor each personally guaranteed the obligation to Community Bank. After Robin Construction defaulted on the loan, the plaintiff Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (hereinafter the FDIC), as receiver for Community Bank, commenced this foreclosure action. The FDIC also sought to hold Robin Construction and the Kantors liable for any deficiency that remained. Summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff was granted against Robin Construction and the Kantors. However, neither the judgment of foreclosure and sale, nor the amended judgment of foreclosure and sale, contained a provision granting the right to a deficiency judgment against the Kantors. Rather, it granted such a right only against Robin Construction. After the sale of the mortgaged property, the appellant, as assignee of the FDIC, moved for leave to amend the amended judgment to include a provision granting leave to enter a deficiency judgment against the Kantors *(see*CPLR 5019), and for the award of such a deficiency judgment *(see*RPAPL 1371). However, in opposition, the Kantors submitted affidavits in which they asserted that, in reliance on the amended judgment *397of foreclosure and sale, which did not impose liability on them for such a deficiency, they did not attend the foreclosure sale to protect their interests. They averred that had such liability been imposed in the amended judgment, they would have attended the sale and bid on the property. Accordingly, in light of the prejudicial affect that the proposed relief would have on the substantial rights of the Kantors, such relief was properly denied (see *Pines at Setauket v Retirement Mgt. Group,*246 AD2d 528 [1998]; *Security Pac. Mtge. & Real Estate Servs. v Herald Ctr. Ltd.,*731 F Supp 605, 608 [1990]; *see also*CPLR 5019 [a]; *Poughkeepsie Sav. Bank, FSB v Maplewood Land Dev. Co.,*210 AD2d 606 [1994]). Ritter, J.P., Florio, Smith and H. Miller, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 104 (Monday, June 1, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 29782]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-14316]


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

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES


Designation of Agent To Receive Child Support and Alimony Orders 
and Process Pursuant to Sec. 362 of Pub. L. 104-193

AGENCY: U.S. House of Representatives.

ACTION: Notice: Designation of agent.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity 
Reconciliation Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-193, Sec. 362), the United 
Stats House of Representatives designates the Office of General Counsel 
for the House to receive orders and accept service of process in 
matters relating to child support or alimony.

ADDRESSES: Such orders and process shall be directed to: Office of 
General Counsel, U.S. House of Representatives, 219 Cannon Building, 
Washington, DC 20515, (202) 225-9700.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 659, as amended by Sec. 362, Pub. L. 104-193, 
110 Stat. 2105)

    Dated: May 26, 1998.
Geraldine R. Gennet,
General Counsel, U.S. House of Representatives.
[FR Doc. 98-14316 Filed 5-29-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1100-00-M
|                                                                             
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                             
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                     
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                               
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                               
|View History:                                                                
|                                                                             
|Elba Island, GA Liquefied Natural Gas Imports from Qatar (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                             
|                                                                             
|Elba Island, GA Liquefied Natural Gas Imports from Qatar (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                             

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 27,653 | 33,823 | 7,320  | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Judd White, Appellant.

[48 NYS3d 597]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Bruce Allen, J.), rendered January 15, 2015, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of six years, unanimously affirmed.

The court providently exercised its discretion in denying, without a hearing, defendant’s CPL 330.30 (2) motion to set aside the verdict on the ground of improper jury conduct. The *531only support for the motion was a letter from, and counsel’s phone conversation with, one juror. Viewing the information supplied by this juror in a light most favorable to defendant, it only demonstrated that, during deliberations, two other jurors cited matters that were permissibly within the realm of personal life experiences, albeit ones not shared by all jurors *(see People v Arnold,*96 NY2d 358, 364-368 [2001]; *People v Brown,*48 NY2d 388, 393-394 [1979]), rather than the type of specialized training and expertise described in *People v Maragh*(94 NY2d 569, 574 [2000]). Furthermore, a “motion is no substitute for an investigation to be made by counsel . . . and a defendant is not entitled to a hearing based on expressions of hope that a hearing might reveal the essential facts” *(People v Brunson,*66 AD3d 594, 596 [1st Dept 2009], *lv denied*13 NY3d 937 [2010] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]).

Defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we find no basis for reversal.

Concur — Tom, J.P., Acosta, Kapnick, Kahn and Gesmer, JJ.
No. 12-8163.

#### Ervin *v.*Rapelje, Warden, et al.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
## THE STATE OF TEXAS
MANDATE

TO THE 354TH DISTRIC T COURT OF HUNT COUN TY, GREETINGS:
Before the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 8th
day of July, A.D. 2015, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your Judgment was determined;

and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

Joseph John Grubbs, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee No. 06

- 14

- 00116

- CR

Trial Court No. 29,417

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 note that the appellant, Joseph John Grubbs, has adequately indicated his inability to
pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court in this
behalf, and in all things to have it duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS, the Hon. Josh R. Morriss, III, Chief Justice of our said Cou rt of Appeals, with
the seal thereof annexed, at the City of Texarkana, this the 2nd day of September , A.D. 2015

.

DEBRA K. AUTREY , Clerk
#### Mellow v. Silverblatt

10/07/2015

396 MAL (2015)

Denied

Pa.Super., 122 A.3d 435
No. 12-582.

#### Kerr *v.*Johns Hopkins University.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
|                                                                                            
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                            
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                    
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                              
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                              
|View History:                                                                               
|                                                                                            
|Cameron (Calcasieu Pass), LA Liquefied Natural Gas Exports to Argentina (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                            
|                                                                                            
|Cameron (Calcasieu Pass), LA Liquefied Natural Gas Exports to Argentina (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                            

|Year                                                                                                                              | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr   | May    | Jun    | Jul   | Aug   | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- | --- | --- | ----- | ------ | ------ | ----- | ----- | --- | --- | --- | ---
|2022                                                                                                                              |     |     |     | 2,219 |        | 11,313 | 6,568 | 2,202 |     |     |     |    
|2023                                                                                                                              |     |     |     | 4,488 | 15,725 | 13,508 |       |       |     |     |     |    
|2024                                                                                                                              |     |     |     | 2,223 | 2,226  |        |       |       |     |     |     |    
|                                                                                                                                 
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
Consent of Ernst & Young



 Exhibit 10.1 
  
 CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM 
  
 We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Forms S-8 Nos. 333-11598 and 333-72320) pertaining to the 1990
Share Option Scheme, the 1997 Share Option Scheme, as amended, the 1998 Directors and Consultants Option Scheme, as amended, the Exceptis Technologies Limited Share Option Scheme, the 1999 Employee Share Purchase Plan, as amended and the 1999 U.S.
Employee Share Purchase Plan, as amended, of Trintech Group PLC (the “Company”) and the Registration Statement (Form F-3 No. 333-116087) pertaining to the disposition of 300,000 outstanding ordinary shares, represented by 150,000 American
Depositary Shares, of the Company, of our report dated April 26, 2006, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Trintech Group PLC included in the Annual Report (Form 20-F) for the year ended January 31, 2006.

  
 /s/ Ernst & Young 
  
 Dublin, Ireland 
 May 12, 2006
#### People v Uphael

2d Dept: 140 AD3d 1143

denied*
# L_2010045EN.01001501.xml

| 20.2.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 45/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.2.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 45/15

---

COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION

of 16 February 2010

concerning the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Fund (eighth EDF) for the financial year 2008

(2010/102/EU)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to the fourth ACP-EEC Convention, signed at Lomé on 15 December 1989 (1) and amended by the Agreement signed in Mauritius on 4 November 1995 (2),

Having regard to the Internal Agreement between the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, on the financing and administration of the Community aid under the Second Financial Protocol to the fourth ACP-EC Convention (3), hereinafter referred to as the ‘Internal Agreement’, setting up, amongst others, the eighth European Development Fund (eighth EDF), and in particular Article 33(3) thereof,

Having regard to the Financial Regulation of 16 June 1998 applicable to development finance cooperation under the fourth ACP-EC Convention (4), and in particular Articles 66 to 74 thereof,

Having examined the revenue and expenditure account and the balance sheet relating to the operations of the eighth EDF as at 31 December 2008, and the Court of Auditors report concerning the financial year 2008 together with the Commission’s replies (5),

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to Article 33(3) of the Internal Agreement, the discharge for the financial management of the eighth EDF is to be given to the Commission by the European Parliament on the recommendation of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to Article 33(3) of the Internal Agreement, the discharge for the financial management of the eighth EDF is to be given to the Commission by the European Parliament on the recommendation of the Council.

| (2) | The overall implementation by the Commission of the operations of the eighth EDF during the financial year 2008 has been satisfactory, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The overall implementation by the Commission of the operations of the eighth EDF during the financial year 2008 has been satisfactory,

HEREBY RECOMMENDS that the European Parliament give the Commission a discharge in respect of the implementation of the operations of the eighth EDF for the financial year 2008.

Done at Brussels, 16 February 2010.

For the Council

The President

E. SALGADO

---

(1)  
  OJ L 229, 17.8.1991, p. 3.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 156, 29.5.1998, p. 3.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 156, 29.5.1998, p. 108.

3

(4)  
  OJ L 191, 7.7.1998, p. 53.

4

(5)  
  OJ C 269, 10.11.2009, p. 257.

5

---
No. 12-8263.

#### Bonanno *v.*United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.