alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2014093EN.01002502.xml

| 29.3.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 93/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 93/25

---

Action brought on 31 December 2013 — Ipatau v Council

(Case T-694/13)

2014/C 93/43

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Vadzim Ipatau (Minsk, Belarus) (represented by: M. Michalauskas, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

| — | annul Council Decision 2013/534/CFSP of 29 October 2013 amending Decision 2012/642/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Belarus, in so far as it concerns the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Council Decision 2013/534/CFSP of 29 October 2013 amending Decision 2012/642/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Belarus, in so far as it concerns the applicant;

| — | annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1054/2013 of 29 October 2013 implementing Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus, in so far as it concerns the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1054/2013 of 29 October 2013 implementing Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus, in so far as it concerns the applicant;

| — | order the Council to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Council to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law, which are, in essence, identical or similar to those relied on in the context of Case T-693/13 Mikhalchanka v Council.

Mikhalchanka

Council

---
No. 10-1390.

#### Peggy Reed, et vir, Petitioners v. Robert Gutierrez, et al.

565 U.S. 818, 132 S. Ct. 102,

181 L. Ed. 2d 30,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 7010.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of New Mexico denied.
DLM 4000.25, Volume 2, November 26, 2019

Change 13

AP3.56-1 APPENDIX 3.56

AP3.56. APPENDIX 3.56

ASSET STATUS REPORTING REQUEST

FIELD LEGEND

RECORD

POSITION(S) ENTRY AND INSTRUCTIONS

Document Identifier

Code

1-3 Enter DIC DZE.

Routing Identifier Code 

(TO)

4-6 Enter RIC of the activity to which the request 

is submitted (see chapter 8).

Reporting 7 Enter the appropriate code from appendix 

AP2.9.

Stock or Part Number 8-22 Enter the stock or part number of item to be 

reported.

Date 23-26 Enter the ordinal date when required by the 

reporting code in record position 7. Always 

reflect dates for commencing, or change of 

reporting, under codes C, D, H, and J, as the 

first day of a month. Always reflect the date 

for termination of reporting (code E) as the 

last day of a month. When the code entered 

in record position 7 is M or P, this field will be 

left blank. When the code entered in record 

position 7 is N or Z, enter the date by which 

the one-time asset status report is required.

Blank 27-66 Leave blank.

Routing Identifier Code 67-69 Enter the appropriate RIC of the activity to 

which the asset status reports are to be 

submitted.

Multiuse 70-80 For intra-Component use, enter data

prescribed by the Component. For interComponent use, leave blank.
Empecé a usar 

cigarrillos electrónicos, 

pero seguí fumando. 

Hasta que tuve un 

colapso pulmonar. 

Kristy, 35 años, Tennessee

#CDCConsejos

Kristy tuvo tos de fumadora y problemas 

graves para respirar. Trató de usar 

cigarrillos electrónicos para reducir 

la cantidad que fumaba. Pensó que esa 

reducción la haría sentir mejor, pero no fue así. 

Ella siguió fumando cigarrillos 

hasta que tuvo un colapso pulmonar. 

Fumar aunque sean unos pocos 

cigarrillos es peligroso. 

Usted puede dejar de fumar. 

LLAME AL 1-855-DÉJELO-YA.
**CH 2**

**DoD 4000.25-1-M**

*DoD 4000.25-1-M, January, 2006*

*Change 1*

*DLM 4000.25, Volume 2, November 26, 2019*

*Change 13*

**AP8.27. APPENDIX 8.27**

**MATERIEL OBLIGATION VALIDATION REQUEST CONTROL DOCUMENT**

AP3.27-1

466

APPENDIX 3.27

AP8.27-1

APPENDIX 8.27
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT UNITED STATES OF AM ERIC A, Plaintiff - Appe lle e , v. ESGAR VASQUEZ-LOPEZ, a .k.a . Esga r Va sque z , a .k.a . Esge r Va sque z , De fe nda

nt - Appe lla

nt. No. 13-10646

D.C . No. 4:13-c r-01139-C KJ M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Distric t of Ariz o na C indy K. Jorge nson, Distric t Judge , Pre s iding Subm itte d

Nove m b e r 18, 2014 ** B e fore : LEAVY, FISHER , a nd N.R . SM ITH, C irc uit Judge s. Esga r Va sque z -Lope za

ppe a ls from

the distric t c ourt’ s judgm e nt a n d c ha lle nge s the 24-m onth se nte n c e im pose d following his guilty -ple a c onvic tion for re e ntry a fte r de porta

tion, in viola

tion of 8 U.S.C . § 1326. Pursua nt to Ande rs v . 

# FIL ED DEC 1 2014 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S . CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se eFe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).C

alifornia , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Va sque z -Lope z ’ s c o unse l ha s file d a brie f stating that the re are no grounds for re lie f, a long with a m otion to withdra

wa s c ounse l of re c o rd. W e have p rovide d Va sque z -Lope zthe opportunity to filea pro se supple m e nta l brie f. No pro se supple m e nta l brie f or answe ring brie f ha s be e n file d . Our indepe nde nt re v i e w of the re c ord pursua nt to Pe nson v . Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), disc lose s no a rgua ble grounds for re lie f on dire c t a ppe a l. C ounse l’ s m otion to withdra w is G RANT E D. AFFIRM E D.

1 3 - 1 0 6 4 6 2
Smoking Cessation

A Report of the Surgeon General

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
In The Matter Of: 

SERVED: October 12, 2016 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORD£Pllftf:iENT OF 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS TRANSPORTATION 

WASHINGTON, DC •ft 0C 

"' u T 13 p 11: lJS 

DOCKET OPERATIONS 

Docket No. FAA-2013-1082 

Ridan lnves ents, Inc. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. 201280700133 

Respondent 

ORDER FINALIZING LITIGATION SCHEDULE 

On Augu t 16, 2016, the undersigned judge held a preheating conference in the above 

captioned c e. During the course of the conference, the parties developed a joint litigation 

schedule wi a timeline dependent upon the hearing date. 

On Augu t 17, 2016, the undersigned judge issued a Prehearing Conference Report, ordering 

the parties to adhere to the joint litigation schedule. 

On Octo er 12,2016, the undersigned judge issued a Notice of Hearing, setting the hearing 

in this case t begin on January 24, 2017. 

Pursuantto 14 C.F.R. §§ 13.205(a)(6) and 13.217(d), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 

1. Com lete witness and evidence lists shall be exchanged by the parties and submitted to 

the dersignedjudge no later than December 23,2016. 

2. Any subpoena requests must be submitted to the undersigned judge no later than 

3. Eac party shall provide the undersigned judge a CD containing digital copies of 

pre arked versions of all proposed exhibits no later than December 23, 2016. 

4. The parties may, during the course of the hearing, request the opportunity to submit 

earing briefs pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.23l(c). 

~:::.SALD Administrative Law Judge 

Attachme : Service List 
SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviati n Administration 

800 Independ ce Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, C 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wrigh Building-Suite 2WI0001 

ONE COPY 

Lawrence M. urek, Respondent's Counsel 

550 North Par center Drive, Suite 204 

Santa Ana, C 92705 

TEL: 714-56 -9033 

FAX: 714-56 -1685 

Glenn H. Bro , Complainant's Counsel 

Enforcement ivision, Western Team 

Federal Aviati n Administration 

222 W. 7th Av nue, Box 14 

Anchorage, 99513-7587 

TEL: 907-27 -5271 

FAX: 907-27 -2800 

The Honorabl Douglas M. Rawald, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hear ngs, M-20 

U.S. Departm nt of Transportation 

1200 New Jer ey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) 

Washington, C 20590 

TEL: 202-36 -5121 Staff Assistant 

FAX: 202-36 -7536 

Docket No. FAA-2013-1082 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Admini tration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000, Washington, 

DC 20591; Atten ion: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 B - 3

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13AVAQMD Rule 431.1 B - 5

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**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 thequarterly report of Janus Capital Group Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the quarter ended March 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Gregory A. Frost,Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)                       The report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 
| /s/ Gregory A. Frost                                  |   |
|-------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Gregory A. Frost                                      |   |
| Executive Vice  President and Chief Financial Officer |   |

 

Date: April 29, 2010

 

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to Janus Capital Group Inc. and will be retained by Janus CapitalGroup Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staffupon request.

 

----
No. 11-5057.

#### Brian Edward Preston, Petitioner v. Texas, et al.

565 U.S. 887, 132 S. Ct. 264,

181 L. Ed. 2d 154,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5410.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Exhibit 12

                                       FARMERS GROUP, INC.
                                        AND SUBSIDIARIES
                                    COMPUTATION OF THE RATIO
                                  OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                       Years Ended December 31,
                                   ------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      1997          1996          1995          1994          1993 
                                   ----------    ----------     ---------    ----------     ---------
                                                           ($ in thousands)                          
<S>                               <C>            <C>            <C>          <C>            <C>
Consolidated income before
 provision for taxes              $1,002,106     $ 863,143      $ 763,493    $ 716,199      $ 692,059

Add:
  Portion of rents
   representative of interest          7,120         6,707          7,315        7,368          7,452
  Interest                            45,031        52,883         29,836       18,276         18,440
                                  ----------     ---------      ---------    ---------      ---------
Income, as adjusted               $1,054,257     $ 922,733      $ 800,644    $ 741,843      $ 717,951
                                  ==========     =========      =========    =========      =========

Fixed Charges:
  Portion of rents
   representative of interest      $   7,120     $   6,707      $   7,315    $   7,368      $   7,452
  Interest                            45,031        52,883         29,836       18,276         18,440
                                   ---------     ---------      ---------    ---------      ---------
Total fixed charges                $  52,151     $  59,590      $  37,151    $  25,644      $  25,892
                                   =========     =========      =========    =========      =========

Ratio of earnings to fixed
 charges:                               20.2 x        15.5 x         21.5 x       28.9 x         27.7 x

</TABLE>
# C_2016222EN.01004703.xml

| 20.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 222/47 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222/47

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 4 May 2016 — Jimenez Krause v Commission

(Case F-93/13) (1)

(2016/C 222/68)

Language of the case: French

The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 336, 16/11/2013, p. 32.

---
No. 11-5131.

#### Michael Eugene Washington, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 891, 132 S. Ct. 272,

181 L. Ed. 2d 161,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5630.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
No. 10-11032.

#### Darrell McDowell, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 863, 132 S. Ct. 205,

181 L. Ed. 2d 110,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6492.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
#### *State, Respondent, v. Talaga, Petitioner,*

No. 92134-2.

Petition for review of a decision of the Court of Appeals, No. 71447-3-I, July 27, 2015, 189 Wn. App. 1004. *Denied*January 6, 2016.
## Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

MANDATE

TO THE CRIMINAL D ISTRICT COURT NO. 1 OF DALLAS COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before the Court of Appeals for the Fifth District of Texas, on the 29 th day of July , 201 5 , the

cause on appeal to affirm between

MICHAEL DEE CAVE , Appellant

No. 05

- 1 4

- 0 1613

- CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the Crim ina l District Court

No. 1 , Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F 14

- 59553

- H

. Opinion delivered by Justice Schenck

, Justices Bridges and Lang participating.

was determined; and this Court made its order in these words:

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED

.

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of the Court of Appeals

for the Fifth District of Texas, in this behalf, and have it duly obeyed and executed.

WITNESS the HON. CAROLYN WRIGHT, Chief Justice of the Court of Appeals, with

the Seal thereof affixed, at the City of Dallas, this 8 th day of October, 2015.

LISA MATZ, Clerk
No. 10-6963.

#### Harry Maddox, III, Petitioner v. Mary McPhetres, et al.

562 U.S. 1143, 131 S. Ct. 911,

178 L. Ed. 2d 762,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 290.

January 10, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
RELIABILITY INCORPORATED
Exhibit 23.1
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-26659) pertaining to the Reliability Incorporated 1997 Stock Option Plan and in the related Prospectus of our report dated January 24, 2003, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Reliability Incorporated included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2002, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.



|                             | BY/s/ERNST & YOUNG LLP
|---------------------------- | ----------------------
|                             |                       
|                             |                       
|                             |                       
|Houston, Texas
March 3, 2003 |                       



33
No. 10-1365.

#### Constantin G. Ioannides, Petitioner v. University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, et al.

565 U.S. 818, 132 S. Ct. 100,

181 L. Ed. 2d 28,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6648.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 418 Fed. Appx. 269.
Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinionshould not * be publishe d and is not precedent except under the limited circu mstance s set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### INTHE UNITED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHEFIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 08- 51171 Su m m ar y Cal endar UN I TE D S TA TE S OF AM ERI CA P l ai n t i f f

- A pp el l ee v. AL EX I S MORGA NF I EL D D e fe nda nt - Appe l l ant

A pp ealf

rom t h e U n i t ed S t ates D i st ri ctC ou rt f or th e W est ernD i st ri ctof T exas U SD C N o. 5: 03- C R
- 10- 3 B ef ore W IE N E R , ST E W A R T , an d C L E M E N T , C i rcui tJu dg es. P E R C U R IA M: * T h e att orneyapp oi n t ed to represent A l exi s M organ f i el dha s m ovedf

or l e av e t o w i t hdr aw a nd has f i l e d ab r i e f

i n a c c o r da nc e w i t h A n d ers v . Ca lif o rn ia , 386 U . S . 738 ( 196 7) . M organ f i el dha s f

i l ed a respon se. O u r i n dep en den trevi ew o f t he r e c o r d, c o uns e l ’ s b r i e f, a nd M o r ganfi el d ’ s r e s po ns e di s c l o s e s no n o n fr iv o lo u s is s u e fo ra p p e a l. T h e r e c o r dd o e s r e v e a l a c le r ic a l e r r o rin th e ju d g m e n t. S ee F ED . R. C RIM . P . 36 . T h e r estit u ti on ord er sta tes th e a m ou n t of resti tu ti on as b oth United States Court of App eals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D June 8, 20 09 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I ClerkN o. 08- 51171

2 “ $38 7, 405 . 87” an d “$387 , 406 . 87. ” Th e ju dg m en tshou l d be am en dedt o ref l ect t h at th e a m ou n tof rest i t u t i on is $ 387 , 406 . 87, w h i ch i s t h e t ot alof t h e vi ct i m s’ in d iv id u a l re s tit u tio n a w a r d s. T h e j u d gm en t’s re fe r e n c e to “$ 3 8 7 ,4 0 5 .8 7 ” s h o u ld b e d e le te da n dre p la c e dw ith “$ 3 8 7 ,4 0 6 .8 7 .” A ccor di n gl y, cou n sel ’ s m ot i on forleave to w i t h draw is G R A N T E D , coun sel i s ex cu sed f

rom fu r th er re sp on sibi l i ti es h ere i n , an dthe A P P E A L IS D IS M IS S E D . S ee 5th C i r. R . 42. 2. Th i s m att er i s R E M A N D E D forcor rect i on of t h e cl eri cal error pu rsuan t t o F ED . R. C RIM . P . 3 6. M organ f i el d’ s pro s e m ot i on fo ra p p o in tm e n t o f c o u n s e l is D E N IE D .
No. 10-10974.

#### Robert Lee Brown, Petitioner v. Catherine Cortez Masto, Attorney General of Nevada, et al.

565 U.S. 860, 132 S. Ct. 197,

181 L. Ed. 2d 103,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6239.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Exhibit 32.2

                           CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                   18 U.S.C. ss.1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     Solely for the purposes of complying with, and the extent required by 18
U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, the undersigned certifies, in his capacity as the Chief Financial
Officer of Federal Mortgage Corporation of Puerto Rico, Inc., that, to his
knowledge, the Annual Report of the company on Form 10-KSB for the period
ended March 31, 2004, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
company's financial condition and results of operations.


June 23, 2004


/s/ Michael Schumacher
Michael Schumacher, Chief Financial Officer
**J M** **K** IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 1 9 - 0 660 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. ALVIAN ERREVY MARQUEZ ,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 3 0 - day extension of time, and good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellee is gran ted a n extension of time to and including April 26 , 2021 , within which to prepare, serve, and file its response brief .

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

March 20 2021

03/22/2021

Case Number: DA 19-0660
No. 10-9358.

#### Paul Carrillo, Petitioner v. Matthew Cate, Secretary, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, et al.

565 U.S. 828, 132 S. Ct. 123,

181 L. Ed. 2d 46,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5696.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 404 Fed. Appx. 218.
88

Section C: Recommended Funding Levels, by State

Georgia

Program Intervention Budgets: 2014

Recommended Annual Investment $106.0 million

Deaths in State Caused by Smoking

Annual average smoking-attributable deaths 11,700

Youth aged 0-17 projected to die from smoking 204,000

Annual Costs Incurred in State from Smoking

Total medical $3,183 million

State Revenue from Tobacco Sales and Settlement

FY 2012 tobacco tax revenue $225.0 million

FY 2012 tobacco settlement payment $141.1 million

Total state revenue from tobacco sales and settlement $366.1 million

Percent Tobacco Revenue to Fund at Recommended Level 29%

Annual Total (Millions) Annual Per Capita

Minimum Recommended Minimum Recommended

I. State and Community Interventions 

Multiple social resources working together will 

have the greatest long-term population impact.

$28.0 $35.0 $2.82 $3.53

II. Mass-Reach Health Communication Interventions 

Media interventions work to prevent smoking initiation, 

promote cessation, and shape social norms.

$10.4 $14.9 $1.05 $1.50

III. Cessation Interventions 

Tobacco use treatment is effective and highly cost-effective. $26.3 $42.3 $2.65 $4.26

IV. Surveillance and Evaluation 

Publicly funded programs should be accountable and 

demonstrate effectiveness.

$6.5 $9.2 $0.65 $0.93

V. Infrastructure, Administration, and Management 

Complex, integrated programs require experienced 

staff to provide fiscal management, accountability, 

and coordination.

$3.2 $4.6 $0.33 $0.46

TOTAL $74.4 $106.0 $7.50 $10.68

Note: A justification for each program element and the rationale for the budget estimates are provided in Section A. The funding estimates presented are based on adjustments for changes in population and cost-of-living increases since Best Practices—2007 was published. The actual 

funding required for implementing programs will vary depending on state characteristics, such as prevalence of tobacco use, sociodemographic 

factors, and other factors. See Appendix E for data sources on deaths, costs, revenue, and state-specific factors. 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention • Office on Smoking and Health

www.cdc.gov/tobacco • tobaccoinfo@cdc.gov • 1 (800) CDC-INFO or 1 (800) 232-4636 

2014
ex-10.1

 PROMISSORY NOTE
 

 

  April 28, 2014
 

 FOR VALUE RECEIVED, Oaxaca Resources Corp., a Nevada Corporation, promises to pay Jose Othnoiel Gonzalez Montes, on or before December 31, 2018, the amount of Twenty Two Thousand Dollars ($22,000.00) in the currency of the United States, plus simple interest on the principal amount of this Promissory Note accrued at a rate of 6% per annum.
 

 Time shall be the essence of this Promissory Note.
 

 This Promissory Note shall be governed by and constituted in accordance with the laws of the State of Nevada.
 

 

 OAXACA RESOURCES CORP.
 

 

 Per /s/ Jose Othnoiel Gonzalez Montes
      Jose Othnoiel Gonzalez Montes, Pres., CEO, CFO