alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Summary
of Lease Agreement between Micromet AG and KFV

    Immobilienverwaltungs
GmbH, dated 11/4/2009

    


    Effective as of February 1, 2010,
Micromet AG (“Micromet”) has leased an area of 850 square meters, or
approximately 9,150 square feet, for a fixed term of 5 years, in a building next
to its R&D headquarters from KFV Immobilienverwaltungs GmbH
(“KFV”).  Under the lease agreement, Micromet has the option to extend
the term for an additional fixed period of 5 years.

    


    Currently, regular monthly payments are
equal to (i) EUR 9,817.50, or approximately $14,070.44, for rentable area
and parking places, and (ii) EUR 1,700.00, or approximately $2,436.44, for
ancillary expenses (similar to operating expenses reimbursed to commercial
lessors in the United States), plus Germany’s Value Added Tax (“VAT”), currently
at the rate of 19%.  The lease payments are subject to regular
increases based upon the German General Price Index (similar to the U.S.
Consumer Price Index) and the ancillary expenses are subject to increases based
on Micromet’s consumption.

         

    Micromet will pay to KFV the sum of EUR
100,000.00 (including VAT), or approximately $143,320.00 for structural
improvements to the leased space requested by Micromet.  Micromet has
the option to terminate the lease with 6 months prior written notice on January
31, 2013.  In the event Micromet elects to terminate the lease,
Micromet will reimburse KFV for the structural improvements in the amount of EUR
50,000, or approximately $71,660.00 (including VAT).  Micromet will
also deliver a security deposit equal to 3 months’ net rent, which will be
refunded to Micromet upon the expiration of the lease agreement less any amounts
are withheld to cover renovation costs of KFV.

    


    ***Euro/Dollar
conversion rate is 1.4332 as quoted by Oanda as of December 31,
2009***
## IN THE COURT O F CRIMINA L A PPEA LS OF TEXA S NO. WR-87,805-01
EX P ARTE RANDY V IRG IL ECHO LS, Ap plicant
ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. CR03450 IN THE 220 DISTRICT COURT T H F ROM COMA NCHE COUNTY
Per curiam . Ke asler and Yeary, JJ. dissent. O P I N I O N Pursuant to the provisions of Arti cl e 1 1
. 0 7 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedur e, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of indece ncy with
a child and sentenc ed to twenty year s’ imprisonment. The Eleventh Court of Appea ls aff irmed his conviction
. Echols v. State , No. 11-12-00149- CR (Tex. App.—Eastland Aug
. 22, 2013)(not desig nated f

or publication). Applicant contends, among other things, that his trial counsel rende red ineffe ctive assistance by failing to watch the fo rensic interview with the complainant and/or use the complainant’s2

statement to impeach her trial testimony and by introducing alleg ed extraneous prior bad acts which would not have be en admissible had c ounsel not opened the door to such testimony
. The trial court has deter

mined that trial counsel' s perf ormanc e was defic i en t and that such defic ient perf

ormanc e prejudice d Applicant. We agree . Relief is g rante d. The judgme nt in Cause No. CR03450 in the 220 District Court of Comanche County is set aside, and Ap p l i ca n t i s th
rema nded to the custody of the Sheriff of Comanche County to answe r the char g es as set out in the indictment. The trial court shall issue any nece ssary bench war rant within 10 day s afte r the mandate of this Court issues. Copies of this opinion shall be sent to the Texas Dep a r tm ent of Criminal J ustice-Corr ectional Institut ions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.

Deliver ed: Octobe r 10, 2018 Do not publish
**Exhibit 31.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, Barry Lamperd, President and a director of Lamperd Less Lethal Inc. (Principal Executive Officer), certify that:

1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Lamperd Less Lethal Inc.;

2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 

3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

4.  The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the company and have: 

(a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

(b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the company's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

(c)  Disclosed in this report any change in the company's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by this annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the company's internal control over financial reporting; and 

5.  The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the company's auditors and the audit committee of the company's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

(a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the company's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

(b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the company's internal control over financial reporting. 

Date:  August 14, 2006

 

/s/ Barry Lamperd                                                          

Barry Lamperd

President and Director

(Principal Executive Officer)
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 16-4281

___________________________

Jorge Estuardo Sanchez-Soto

lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner

v.

Jefferson B. Sessions, III, Attorney General of United States

lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent

____________

Petition for Review of an Order of the

 Board of Immigration Appeals

____________

 Submitted: August 31, 2017

Filed: October 11, 2017

[Unpublished]

____________

Before COLLOTON, BOWMAN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Guatemalan citizen Jorge Estuardo Sanchez-Soto petitions for review of an

order of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing his appeal from the decision

of an immigration judge (IJ), which denied him withholding of removal and relief
under the Convention Against Torture (CAT).1

 Having jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.

§ 1252, this court denies the petition.

Sanchez-Soto sought immigration relief based on his membership in two

particular social groups: (1) Guatemalans whose families have been targeted for

attacks by gangs and continue to receive threats, and (2) returnees from the United

States who are perceived to be wealthy. In concluding that he was ineligible for

withholding of removal, the IJ found that he failed to demonstrate past or future

persecution based on his membership in a cognizable social group. Sanchez-Soto

offered no evidence showing his proposed groups were viewed as socially distinct

within Guatemalan society, and failed to distinguish them from groups previously

held not cognizable. See Ngugi v. Lynch, 826 F.3d 1132, 1137-39 (8th Cir. 2016)

(whether group is particular social group is question of law reviewed de novo); De

Castro-Gutierrez v. Holder, 713 F.3d 375, 380 (8th Cir. 2013) (social group must not

be defined just by fact its members have been targeted for persecution); MatulHernandez v. Holder, 685 F.3d 707, 711-13 (8th Cir. 2012) (Guatemalans returning

from United States and perceived as wealthy is not particular social group).

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s factual determinations, and there was no

error of law. See Davila-Mejia v. Mukasey, 531 F.3d 624, 627, 629 (8th Cir. 2008)

(standard of review and withholding requirements).

As to Sanchez-Soto’s CAT claim, his evidence did not show it is more likely

than not that he would be tortured if removed to his home country. See De CastroGutierrez, 713 F.3d at 381-82 (standard for CAT relief). 

The petition is denied. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

1The IJ’s denial of asylum is not before the panel. See Chay-Velasquez v.

Ashcroft, 367 F.3d 751, 756 (8th Cir. 2004).

-2-
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5087 

To amend title 5, United States Code, to increase the maximum age up 

to which an individual may be afforded health coverage under chapter 

89 of such title as a dependent child. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 4, 2006 

Mr. PALLONE (for himself and Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California) introduced 

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Government Reform 

A BILL 

To amend title 5, United States Code, to increase the maximum age up to which an individual may be afforded 

health coverage under chapter 89 of such title as a 

dependent child. 

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

3 SECTION 1. INCREASING THE MAXIMUM AGE FOR HEALTH 

4 COVERAGE ELIGIBILITY AS A DEPENDENT 

5 CHILD. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Sections 8901(5) and 

7 8905(c)(2)(B) of title 5, United States Code, are amended 

8 by striking ‘‘22’’ each place it appears and inserting ‘‘30’’. 


rfake on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
2 

•HR 5087 IH 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

2 subsection (a)— 

3 (1) shall take effect as of the first day of the 

4 first contract year beginning at least 12 months 

5 after the date of the enactment of this Act, except 

6 as provided in paragraph (2); and 

7 (2) shall be implemented by the Office of Per8 sonnel Management in a manner so as to provide for 

9 a period of notice and open enrollment (before the 

10 start of the first contract year referred to in para11 graph (1)) for individuals affected by this section. 

12 (c) SAVINGS PROVISION.— 

13 (1) IN GENERAL.—Nothing in this section shall, 

14 in the case of any individual who (if this section had 

15 not been enacted) would or might otherwise have 

16 been eligible for continued coverage under section 

17 8905a of title 5, United States Code, based on a 

18 qualifying event preceding the start of the first con19 tract year referred to in subsection (b)(1), be consid20 ered to require the discontinuation of any such cov21 erage (or the disqualification of such individual for 

22 any such coverage) if such coverage is (or would be) 

23 based, in whole or in part, on such event. 

24 (2) QUALIFYING EVENT DEFINED.—For pur25 poses of this subsection, the term ‘‘qualifying event’’ 


rfake on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
3 

•HR 5087 IH 

1 means, with respect to an individual, any event the 

2 occurrence of which would make such individual eli3 gible for continued coverage under section 8905a of 

4 title 5, United States Code (as last in effect before 

5 the start of the first contract year referred to in 

6 subsection (b)(1)) by virtue of satisfying the condi7 tion described in subsection (b)(2)(A) of such section 

8 (as then in effect). 

Æ 


rfake on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
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 the Quarterly Report of Salomon Smith Barney Fairfield Futures Fund L.P. (the ‘‘Partnership’’) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the ‘‘Report’’), I, Jennifer Magro, Chief Financial Officer and Director of Citigroup Managed Futures LLC, 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 results of operations of the Partnership.

/s/ Jennifer Magro
Jennifer Magro
Citigroup Managed Futures LLC
Chief Financial Officer and Director

Date: May 15, 2008

---
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 308 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 308

 Condemning former President Donald J. Trump's call to ``defund'' the 
     Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 19, 2023

Mr. Landsman (for himself, Mr. Swalwell, and Mr. Nickel) submitted the 
   following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the 
                               Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Condemning former President Donald J. Trump's call to ``defund'' the 
     Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Whereas former President Donald J. Trump's call for defunding Federal law 
        enforcement agencies is a baseless, self-serving broadside against the 
        men and women who keep our Nation safe;
Whereas the good work of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department 
        of Justice sends criminals to prison for bank robbery, sex trafficking, 
        child pornography, hate crimes, terrorism, fraud, and so much more;
Whereas the former President and his allies in Congress must not subjugate 
        justice and public safety because of their own personal grievances;
Whereas Senators and Representatives from across the political spectrum and of 
        both political parties should denounce such attempts by the former 
        President and his allies to degrade public trust in our Federal law 
        enforcement agencies;
Whereas the House of Representatives must recommit that the United States is a 
        Nation of laws; and
Whereas, as free people, we rely on the necessary and professional work of our 
        Federal law enforcement agencies to promote the safety and general 
        welfare of our country: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) recognizes and appreciates the dedication and devotion 
        demonstrated by the men and women of Federal law enforcement 
        agencies who keep the communities of the United States and the 
        United States safe;
            (2) condemns calls to ``defund'' the Department of Justice 
        and Federal Bureau of Investigation;
            (3) rejects attempts by a vocal minority made up of MAGA 
        extremists to degrade public trust in Federal law enforcement 
        agencies;
            (4) reaffirms that no politician should be above the law or 
        targeted by the law because of who they are or what party they 
        represent; and
            (5) pledges to unite as Democrats and Republicans to fully 
        fund our patriots in Federal law enforcement who put their 
        lives on the line to preserve, protect, and defend the 
        Constitution of these United States.
                                 <all>
```
GILL FAMILY PROPERTIES, LLC, Appellant, v. KEITH SMITH MECHANICAL, LLC, f/k/a Bootheel Mechanical, Respondent.

No. ED 106950

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.

Filed: March 26, 2019

FOR APPELLANT: Dustin L. Mayer, Mayer Law Office, 140 South Walnut, Suite B, Dexter, Missouri 63841.

FOR RESPONDENT: Dwight D. Crader, David Crader Attorney at Law, LLC, PO Box 1063, Sikeston, Missouri 63801, John C. Steffens, Lewis Rice, LLC, PO Box 1150, Cape Girardeau, Missouri 63702.

Before Lisa P. Page, C.J., Mary K. Hoff, J. and Philip M. Hess, J.

***ORDER***

PER CURIAM

Appellant Gill Family Properties, LLC ("Gill" or "Appellant") appeals judgment of the Circuit Court of Cape Girardeau County entered after bench trial on Appellant's petition claiming unjust enrichment and Respondent's counter-claim petition alleging breach of contract and seeking recovery *quantum meruit* , awarding $40,928.28 to Respondent Keith Smith Mechanical, LLC ("Smith" or "Respondent"). Gill raises one point on appeal, arguing the trial court erred in considering Exhibit KSM-18 and accompanying testimony in assessing damages, because they exceeded the scope of the pleadings and the prayer for relief.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find that the trial court did not err. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for use of the parties setting forth the reasons for the decision.

Finding no error, we affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).1

1

All references are to Missouri Supreme Court Rules (2018) unless otherwise indicated.
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

                    CERTIFICATION OF CEO AND CFO 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 on Form 10-Q of Packaging Dynamics
Corporation (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2005 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), Frank V. Tannura, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and
Patrick T. Chambliss, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section.
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:

      (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/ FRANK V. TANNURA
------------------------------
Name: Frank V. Tannura
Title: Chief Executive Officer
Date: May 6, 2005

/s/ PACTRICK T. CHAMBLISS
------------------------------
Name: Patrick T. Chambliss
Title: Chief Financial Officer
Date: May 6, 2005

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
Section.18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section. 906 has been
provided to Packaging Dynamics Corporation and will be retained by Packaging
Dynamics Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
#### Carol B. Gilmore, Respondent, v Roy Gilmore, Appellant.

[720 NYS2d 350]

In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Ma-hon, J.), dated November 10, 1999, as granted that branch of the plaintiffs motion which was to find him in contempt for the willful failure to comply with a pendente lite order of the same court (Kutner, J.), dated June 24, 1996, and denied his cross motion to vacate an order of preclusion of the same court (Kutner, J.), dated September 16, 1996, entered upon his default in opposing it.

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

The defendant’s motion to vacate a prior order of preclusion was untimely since it was brought approximately three years after the order with notice of entry was served on him *(see,*
      *507CPLR 5015 [a]). In addition, the defendant failed to provide a reasonable excuse for the default *(see, Blackman v Blackman,*131 AD2d 801; *Spatz v Bajramoski,*214 AD2d 436).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Altman, J. P., Goldstein, McGinity and Schmidt, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 55 (Tuesday, March 24, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 12383]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-6305]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-65,366]


Hewlett Packard Company; Business Critical Systems Mission 
Critical Business Software Division Open VMS Operating System 
Development Group Including Employees Working Off Site In New 
Hampshire, Florida, New Jersey, Colorado, and Marlborough, MA; Notice 
of Termination of Investigation

    Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an 
investigation was initiated on February 25, 2009 in response to a 
petition filed by the California State TAA Coordinator on behalf of the 
workers at Hewlett Packard Company, Business Critical Systems--Mission 
Critical Business Software Division, Open VMS Operating System 
Development Group, Marlborough, Massachusetts, including employees 
working off-site in New Hampshire, Florida, New Jersey, and Colorado.
    The petition regarding the investigation has been deemed invalid. 
State representatives can only submit petitions on behalf of workers 
previously employed in their respective states. Consequently, the 
investigation has been terminated.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 12th day of March 2009.
Richard Church
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-6305 Filed 3-23-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-19-00412-CV

Cornelius Roy PRINCE, III, d/b/a Texas Concepts,

Appellant

v.

Dixie BATTOE,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 3, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2019CV00375

Honorable J. Frank Davis, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE MARTINEZ, JUSTICE ALVAREZ, AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the appellant’s motion to dismiss is 

GRANTED, and this appeal is DISMISSED. Costs of the appeal are taxed against the party who 

incurred them. 

SIGNED October 23, 2019.

_________________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice