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

|   | 1. | The Annual Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | The information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|--------|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Dated:  November 14, 2011 | /s/ Graham Taylor                                                                                                                 |   |
|--------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                           | Graham Taylor, President, CEO, Chief Financial Officer and Director (Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer) |   |

----
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         December 12, 2024.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on November 25, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 798 to Competitive Product List*. Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-503, K2025-501.                

Sean C. Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2024-29170 Filed 12-11-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
C. C., Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, the Guardian Ad Litem, and Jewish Family Services, Respondents.

No. 1D18-2935

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

September 25, 2018

C.C., pro se, Petitioner.

Ward L. Metzger, Appellate Counsel, Children's Legal Services, Jacksonville, for Respondent Department of Children and Families.

No appearance for Guardian ad Litem or Jewish Family Services, Respondents.

Per Curiam.

The petition for writ of mandamus is denied on the merits. *See**Clark v. Nichols M. N. P.* , 225 So. 3d 416 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (holding that to be entitled to mandamus relief compelling a ruling on a pending matter, a petitioner must demonstrate that he has noticed the matter for hearing in the lower tribunal).

Wolf, Kelsey, and Jay, JJ., concur.
Keith D. SMITH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-3307

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed April 24, 2018 Rehearing Denied July 6, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Transport

Passenger Rights

• Information Campaign

2013-2015

• Presenter: Pedro Garcia-Gracia

DG MOVE – Unit D4

• Passenger rights
Transport

EU INSTITUTIONS (LEGISLATORS)

2
Transport

PASSENGERS RIGHTS & The EU

• The EU is the first –and only- integrated area with 

passenger rights rules covering all modes of transport

• AIR (1991); Specific law for disabled passengers

(2007)

• RAIL (2007); SHIP (2010); BUS & COACH (2011)

Passengers in the EU enjoy a minimum set of rights: 

non-discrimination, information, assistance and 

compensation

3
Transport

PASSENGERS RIGHTS AWARENESS 

It is not enough adopting legislation at EU level 

but raising passenger rights awareness

• Only 34% of travellers are aware of their

rights

• 2010: each person travelled 12,869km

• 2011: Europeans made > 1 billion holiday

trips

4
Transport

FIRST PASSENGERS RIGHTS CAMPAIGN

2009 

Campaign

Poster

5
Transport

2010-12 AIR & RAIL 

CAMPAIGN

• YOUR PASSENGER RIGHTS AT 

HAND

• 1st Organised Campaign

• 2 years duration

• Several actions: website, posters,

leaflets, videos, passenger rights ambassador,

etc...

6
Transport

Passenger Rights Poster Example - 1

7
Transport

Passenger Rights Poster Example - 2

8
Transport

Passenger Rights Poster Example - 3

9
Transport

Passenger Rights Poster Example - 4

• 20000 posters to be displayed in transport hubs until 2015

10
Transport

Passenger Rights Poster Example - 5

• 1 million leaflets to be distributed until 2015

11
Transport

Building partnerships. A reason to 

display posters? 

1. Law obligation to inform passengers

2. 20 years of collaboration

3. Regular Official meetings in Brussels

4. Learn from experience

5. Listen to all actors involved

6. Rights go local

12
Transport

Thank you

• Your Passenger Rights:

• ec.europa.eu/passenger-rights

• Europe Direct: 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11

• European Consumer Centre:

• ec.europa.eu/consumers/ecc

13
STATE EX REL. Thomas Payne HORN v. STATE of Louisiana

No. 2017-KH-0866

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

September 14, 2018

PER CURIAM:

*465Denied. The application was not timely filed in the district court, and relator fails to carry his burden to show that an exception applies. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8 ; *State ex rel. Glover v. State* , 93-2330 (La. 9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189.

Relator has now fully litigated two applications for post-conviction relief in state court. Similar to federal habeas relief, *see*28 U.S.C. § 2244, Louisiana post-conviction procedure envisions the filing of a successive application only under the narrow circumstances provided in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4 and within the limitations period as set out in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8. Notably, the Legislature in 2013 La. Acts 251 amended that article to make the procedural bars against successive filings mandatory. Relator's claims have now been fully litigated in accord with La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.6, and this denial is final. Hereafter, unless he can show that one of the narrow exceptions authorizing the filing of a successive application applies, relator has exhausted his right to state collateral review. The district court is ordered to record a minute entry consistent with this per curiam.
### The Center for the Polyurethane s Industry (CPI) Guidance Document

The guidance document “ Hazard Information to Consider When L abeling of Diphenylmethane Diisocyanate (MDI), Poly meric MDI and Isocy anate - terminated MDI Prepoly mers Containing Products for the Consumer Market **”** has been updated. This document provides information about the potentia l hazards from exposure to MDI, PMDIand Isoc yan ate - terminated MDI prepoly mers. This information is intended to assist company label writers who are responsible for communicating the potential hazards and safe handling guidelines for consumer products to p rospective customers, also known as Do - It - Yourself (DIY) users. The document is available online at: http://poly urethane.americanchemistry.com/Resources - and Document - Library

/10309.pdf
### **Exhibit4.14**

 

### **AMENDMENTNUMBER 1**

### **TOBINA ENTERPRISES**

**WARRANT TO PURCHASE SHARES OF COMMON STOCKOFPROUROCARE MEDICAL INC.**

** **

The warrantagreement made as of April 5, 2004, by and between ProUroCare Inc., aMinnesota corporation (the “Company”), and BINA Enterprises (the “Agreement”)is hereby amended as follows:

 

The final sentence of thefirst paragraph of the Agreement is hereby deleted and replaced with thefollowing sentence:

 

This Warrant may beexercised by Holder at any time after the date hereof; *provided,however*, that, Holder shall in no event have the right to exercisethis Warrant or any portion thereof after six years from the date hereof, atwhich time all of Holder’s rights hereunder shall expire.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, theparties have executed this Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement effective asof April 5, 2007.

 
|   | **PROUROCARE  MEDICAL INC.** |
|--------|------------------------------|
|   |                         |
|   |                         |
|   | By:                          |  /s/ Richard C. Carlson |
|   | Its:                         | *Chief  Executive Officer* |

 

 
| ATTEST: |                                           |
|---------|------------------------------------------------|
|    |                                           |
|    |                                           |
| By      |                                           |   |
|    |  RICHARD THON, *Chief  Financial Officer* |   |

 

----
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

February 27, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

131474(51) Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

AGE LULGJURAJ,

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 131474 

 COA: 267040 

Macomb CC: 04-005159-NI 

SAMIRA BASIC and ABID BASIC, 

Defendants-Appellees. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s November 

30, 2006 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order 

was entered erroneously. 

KELLY, J., would grant reconsideration and, on reconsideration, would grant leave 

to appeal. 

p0220 

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. 

February 27, 2007 

 Clerk
### NU M BER 13- 08- 0016 2-C V 

## COURT OF A PP EA LS T H I R T E E N T H D I S T R I C T O F T E X AS CORPUS CHRI ST I - E DI NBURG

PROG RESO INDEPE NDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, A PPE LLA NT,
v . EL EA ZA R PER EZ , JR ., A PPEL LE E.

On A pp eal f rom th e 3 89t h Dist rict C ou rt of H ida lgo C ou nty , T exas . 

## ME MOR A N D U M OP I N I ON B ef or e Just i ces Yañez, R odri guez, and V el a M em or andu m O pi ni on P erC ur i am Appel lan t, Prog re so Indepen dent Scho ol Di str ic t, has filed an unop posed moti on to dis mis s t his i nter loc utor y appeal on g ro unds that the a ppeal has bec ome moot. The Co urt, hav ing co nsi dered th e doc uments on fil e and a p p e lla n t’s u noppos ed moti on to dis mis s the appeal , is of t he opi nio n that the moti on s houl d be g ra nted. See T EX
.2

R. A PP
. P. 42.1( a)

. Appel lan t’ s moti on to dis mis s is g ra nted, and the appeal is hereby DI SM ISSE D. Pe ndi ng moti ons, i f any , are l ik ew is e D ISM ISSE D. Cos ts are tax ed ag ain st appel lan t. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 42.1( d) ( "Abse nt ag re ement of the par

ti es, the cour

t w il l tax co sts ag ain st the a ppel lan t.")

. Hav ing di smi ss ed th e appea l at ap pe l l an t' s r eq ue s t, no mo ti on for r eh ea r i ng w i l l be en te rta i ne d, an d ou r ma nda te w ill is sue forthw it h.

PERC UR IAM Me moran dum Opi nio n del iv ered and fil ed th is the 5th d ay of June, 2008.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

Capitol Appraisal Group, L.L.C.

,

Appellant,

v.

Western Refinin g Co., L.P.

,

Appellee

. §

§

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 14

- 00 296

- C V

Appeal from the

County Court at Law No. 5

of El Paso C ounty, Texas

(TC# 2014

- DCV

- 004 46 )

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the Appell ant’s third motion for extension of time within which to

file the brief until February 4 , 201 5

. NO FURTHER MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

TO F ILE THE APPELL ANT ’S BR IEF WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that the Hon. S. Anthony Safi , the Appell ant ’s attorney, prepare

the Appell ant ’s brief and forward the same to this Court on or before February 4, 2015

.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 15 th day of January , 20 1 5

.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure , C.J., Rivera and Rodriguez , JJ.
|   | Exhibit 32.1 |
|--------|--------------|

| 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. |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Signatures                       |   | Title                           |   | Date          |
|----------------------------------|--------|---------------------------------|--------|---------------|
|                             |   |                            |   |          |
| /s/ Teck Fong KongTeck Fong Kong |   | Chief Executive OfficerDirector |   | June 28, 2012 |
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Early Warnings and Alerts

Filters

              - science_science(12)
              - products_data(2)
              - products_publications(25)
              - multimedia_audio(4)
              - multimedia_audio-141766(3)
              - (-)multimedia_audio-141767(1)
              - multimedia_image(1)
              - multimedia_image-141774(1)
              - multimedia_video(28)
              - multimedia_video-149194(25)
              - multimedia_video-149195(3)
              - news_news-149245(1)
              - news_news-149248(2)
              - news_news-149249(1)
              - (-)news_news-149250(4)
              - connect_social_media(1)
              - other_basic-42(1)

## By Location

              - california(2)
              - oregon(1)
              - washington(2)

## By Year

Featured Story        April 25, 2024        Preparing for volcano hazards: Where is the world’s largest lahar evacuation drill held?

Featured Story        August 25, 2022        Earthquake Detected! Here’s How You Can Prepare

Featured Story        February 16, 2021        ShakeAlert Earthquake Early Warning Delivery for the Pacific Northwest

Featured Story        April 6, 2017        Earthquake Early Warning:  Vital for City Transit

Interviews        July 6, 2010        Science for a Dangerous Planet
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Early Warnings and Alerts

Filters

              - science_science(12)
              - (-)products_data(2)
              - products_publications(25)
              - multimedia_audio(4)
              - multimedia_audio-141766(3)
              - multimedia_audio-141767(1)
              - multimedia_image(1)
              - (-)multimedia_image-141774(1)
              - multimedia_video(28)
              - multimedia_video-149194(25)
              - multimedia_video-149195(3)
              - news_news-149245(1)
              - news_news-149248(2)
              - news_news-149249(1)
              - news_news-149250(4)
              - connect_social_media(1)
              - other_basic-42(1)

## By Location

              - california(1)

## By Year

Data Release        July 21, 2022        Data Release for Latency Testing of Wireless Emergency Alerts intended for the ShakeAlert earthquake early warning system for the West Coast of the United States of America

Posters        August 30, 2022        September Public Lecture Flyer, 2022

Data Release        May 7, 2018        Coastal Storm Modeling System (CoSMoS) for Southern California, v3.0, Phase 2
### IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE November 19, 2019 Session **STATE OF TENNESSEE v. RHASEAN LOWRY Appeal from the Criminal Court for Hamilton County** 

**No. 294418 Don W. Poole, Judge** 

**___________________________________ No.**  **E2019 -** **00113 -** **CCA -** **R3 -** **CD**

**___________________________________** THOMAS T. WOODALL, J., joining in part, concurring in result only in part. Ijoin the majority in all issues except the issue regarding the trial court’s denial of Defendant’s request for the trial court to charge facilitation as a lesser included offense of felony murder. As to that issue, I concur in results only. At trial, the State made no objection to Defendant’s request for facilitation to be added as a lesser included offense on the basis that the request was not in writing. Likewise, on appeal, the State only argues the merits of the issue and does not assert the issue is waived by Defendant. The majority opinion, sua sponte, has treated the issue as waived. The majority is correct that a written request for the instruction is not in the record. However, the majority’s conclusion that no written request was made at all in the trial court is not the only logical speculation. In light of no objection by the State either in the trial court or on appeal, and nothing mentioned by the trial court that the request should be denied because it was not in writing, it is just as logical to speculate that a written request was made, but was not included in the appellate record. However, after summarizing applicable law regarding plain error review, the majority essentially analyzes the issue on its merits in order to conclude that Defendant is not entitled to plain error relief. Instead of providing plenary review in order to deny plain error review when, as in this case, the issue of waiver is not raised by the appellee State, I believe that the issue should be addressed on its merits with the ultimate conclusion reached by the majority opinion

– Defendant is not entitled to relief.

____________________________________________ THOMAS T. WOODALL, JUDGE
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center

Filters

              - science_education(1)
              - multimedia_image(1)
              - multimedia_image-141771(1)
              - multimedia_video(1)
              - multimedia_video-149195(1)
              - other_basic-42(1)

## By Location

              - alaska(13)
              - arizona(6)
              - california(14)
              - colorado(9)
              - florida(6)
              - georgia(3)
              - hawaii(1)
              - iowa(2)
              - (-)kansas(4)
              - louisiana(2)
              - michigan(1)
              - minnesota(2)
              - montana(2)
              - nebraska(2)
              - nevada(1)
              - new york(1)
              - north carolina(1)
              - north dakota(1)
              - ohio(1)
              - oregon(34)
              - pennsylvania(2)
              - south carolina(2)
              - south dakota(343)
              - tennessee(2)
              - texas(3)
              - utah(5)
              - virginia(1)
              - washington(2)
              - wisconsin(1)

## By Year

Education        October 12, 2018        Earth As Art 1

General        October 16, 2019        Earth As Art 6

Featured Films and Shorts        April 26, 2021        EarthShots — Satellite Images of Environmental Change

Photography        September 14, 2016        A Study in Algae
STATE of Louisiana v. Tony J. TABOR

No. 2018-KH-0161

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

September 21, 2018

Reconsideration denied.

WEIMER, J., recused.
Exhibit 32

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 Annual Report of Aberdene Mines Limited (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended December 31, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the
"report"), I, Hugh Grenfal, Jr., Chief Executive Officer and 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 this Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

	Dated this 29th day of January, 2004


/s/

_______________________________________
Hugh Grenfal, Jr.
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Earth

Filters

              - science_science(3)
              - products_maps(2)
              - products_publications(10)
              - multimedia_before_after(1)
              - multimedia_image(2)
              - multimedia_image-204460(2)
              - multimedia_video(4)
              - multimedia_video-149195(4)
              - (-)other_basic-42(1)

## By Location

              - arizona(1)
              - california(4)
              - colorado(9)
              - delaware(1)
              - district of columbia(1)
              - (-)georgia(1)
              - illinois(1)
              - indiana(1)
              - iowa(1)
              - kansas(1)
              - maryland(1)
              - michigan(1)
              - nebraska(1)
              - nevada(1)
              - south dakota(6)
              - virginia(2)
              - washington(1)

## By Year

General        October 16, 2019        Earth As Art 6
# IfeWST *bkt-l5 $k%-l£ 341-/J- *b*JOmt& ELECTRONICRECORD 3'7/«-/S"

COA # 06-14-00088-CR STYLE: 

### Companion cases Samuel Deleon Garza v. The State ofTexas COA DISPOSITION: Affirmed OFFENSE: 22.01 

### COUNTY: Hunt TRIAL COURT: 196th District Court DATE: 3/10/15 Publish: No TCCASE #: 28,996



### IN THE COURT OF CRIMINALAPPEALS Samuel Deleon Garza v. The State of STYLE: Texas 

## PRO S£ Petition FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS: 

## refuSerf 

# DATE: QWy 3.^. ZU>Jf JUDGE: /22 CCA#: 

# Ikk'ts rMo %fi~/s CCADisposition: DATE: JUDGE: SIGNED: PUBLISH:

REHEARING IN CCA IS: JUDGE: PC: DNP:

MOTION FOR

ELECTRONIC RECORD
Jason CHARLES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-834

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed August 22, 2018.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.