alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 21.1


                              LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES


1.    Practice Xpert Services Corp. was incorporated in California.

2.    Healthcare Administrative Management Corporation was incorporated in State
      of California.

3.    Healthcare Billing Solutions, Inc. was incorporated in State of Montana.

4.    KR Johnson & Associates, Inc. was incorporated in State of Idaho.

5.    PracticeXpert of Texas, Inc. was incorporated in the State of Texas.

6.    National Health Care  Management  Services,  Inc. was  incorporated in the
      State of West Virginia.

7.    Transcriptions Plus, Inc. was incorporated in the State of California.

8.    Physician  Informatics,  Inc., t/a  PracticeOne,  was  incorporated in the
      Commonwealth of Virginia.

9.    PracticeXpert of Idaho, Inc. was incorporated in Idaho.
# C_2022213EN.01001201.xml

| 30.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 213/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 213/12

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 7 April 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Lietuvos vyriausiasis administracinis teismas — Lithuania) — UB v Kauno teritorinė muitinė

(Case C-489/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Union Customs Code - Extinguishment of the customs debt - Goods unlawfully introduced into the customs territory of the European Union - Seizure and confiscation - Directive 2008/118/EC - Excise duties - Directive 2006/112/EC - Value added tax - Chargeable event - Chargeability)

(2022/C 213/13)

Language of the case: Lithuanian

Referring court

Lietuvos vyriausiasis administracinis teismas

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: UB

Respondent: Kauno teritorinė muitinė

Interested party: Muitinės departamentas prie Lietuvos Respublikos Finansų ministerijos

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | Article 124(1)(e) of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 October 2013 laying down the Union Customs Code must be interpreted as meaning that a customs debt is extinguished where goods are seized and subsequently confiscated when they have already been unlawfully introduced into the customs territory of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Article 124(1)(e) of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 October 2013 laying down the Union Customs Code must be interpreted as meaning that a customs debt is extinguished where goods are seized and subsequently confiscated when they have already been unlawfully introduced into the customs territory of the European Union.

| 2. | Article 2(b) and Article 7(1) of Council Directive 2008/118/EC of 16 December 2008 concerning the general arrangements for excise duty and repealing Directive 92/12/EEC, as well as Article 2(1)(d) and Article 70 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, must be interpreted as meaning that the extinguishment of the customs debt on the ground provided for in Article 124(1)(e) of the Union Customs Code does not lead to the extinguishment of the debt linked, respectively, to excise duty and to value added tax in respect of goods unlawfully introduced into the customs territory of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Article 2(b) and Article 7(1) of Council Directive 2008/118/EC of 16 December 2008 concerning the general arrangements for excise duty and repealing Directive 92/12/EEC, as well as Article 2(1)(d) and Article 70 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, must be interpreted as meaning that the extinguishment of the customs debt on the ground provided for in Article 124(1)(e) of the Union Customs Code does not lead to the extinguishment of the debt linked, respectively, to excise duty and to value added tax in respect of goods unlawfully introduced into the customs territory of the European Union.

---

(1)  OJ C 433, 14.12.2020.

---
Derick WATERS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-2180

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed January 29, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Leonard JOSEPH, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D18-2284

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed January 16, 2019.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
##### 



UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
 
 FORM 8-K
 CURRENT REPORT
 Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported)
    
    May 2, 2006
 Targeted Genetics Corporation
 
  Washington
    
    0-23930
    
    91-1549568(State or other jurisdiction
of incorporation)
    
    (Commission File
Number)
    
    (IRS Employer
Identification No.)
 1100 Olive Way, Suite 100, Seattle, Washington
    
    
    98101(Address of principal executive offices)
    
    (Zip Code)
 Registrants telephone number, including area code
    
    (206) 623-7612
 Not Applicable
 
    ̈
    
    Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)
  ̈
    
    Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)
  ̈
    
    Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act
(17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))
  ̈
    
    Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act
(17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))




---



##### 



Item 2.02. Results of Operations and Financial Condition.
  Item 9.01. Financial Statements and Exhibits.
  99.1
    
    
    Press Release of Targeted Genetics Corporation dated May 2, 2006
 SIGNATURES
  Targeted Genetics CorporationBy:
    
    /s/ David J. PostonDavid J. Poston
     VP Finance, Chief Financial Officer and
     Treasurer
  2




---



##### 



INDEX TO EXHIBITS
 ExhibitNumber
    
    Description99.1
    
    
    Press Release of Targeted Genetics Corporation dated May 2, 2006
 3
<PAGE>

                                  Exhibit 10.10

                                    RWG Inc.
                               6601 Windy Hill Way
                                 Reno, NV 89511



                              ENGAGEMENT AGREEMENT


This Agreement, dated July 1, 2003, between SulphCo, Inc. a Nevada Corporation
and RWG Inc., a Nevada Corporation, is to set forth the conditions for the
engagement of the services of Dr. Rudolf W. Gunnerman, President and CEO of RWG
Inc. to SulphCo, Inc. and its shareholders.

Description of Services: Dr. Gunnerman will be responsible for the functions of
the Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board.

Service Fees:  SulphCo, Inc. will pay a yearly fee of $300,000.00.

Agreement Term: This Agreement will terminate after one year, on July 1, 2004.





\S\ KIRK S. SCHUMACHER
----------------------
Kirk S. Schumacher
President, SulphCo, Inc.



\S\ RUDOLF W. GUNNERMAN
-----------------------
Rudolf W. Gunnerman
President and CEO, RWG Inc.
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.                  

###### Department of State

          - [Public Notice: 12623]

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

Proposal to extend the Memorandum of Understanding Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Chile Concerning the Imposition of Import Restrictions on Categories of Archaeological Material of Chile (“the Chile Agreement”).

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Allison Davis Lehmann, Cultural Heritage Center, Bureau of Educational                               ( print page 106722)                            and Cultural Affairs: (202) 904-0878;                         *culprop@state.gov;*                         include “Chile” in the subject line.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Pursuant to the authority vested in the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Educational and Cultural Affairs, and pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 2602(f)(1), an extension of the Chile Agreement is hereby proposed.

                    A copy of the Chile Agreement, the Designated List of categories of material currently restricted from import into the United States, and related information can be found at the Cultural Heritage Center website:                     *https://culturalheritage.state.gov.*

Allison R. Davis Lehmann,

Executive Director, Cultural Property Advisory Committee, Department of State.

[FR Doc. 2024-31256 Filed 12-27-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
EXHIBIT 32.1














CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002







In connection with the Quarterly Report of Bravo Resource Partners Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended October 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





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





Date:  February 7, 2012

/s/ Tyrone CarterTyrone Carter,

Acting Chief Executive Officer





/s/ Tyrone CarterTyrone Carter,

Acting Principal Financial Officer
STATE of Louisiana v. Leopold "Chuck" LACOSTE, II

No. 2018-KP-0649

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

February 25, 2019

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE THIRTY-SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF TERREBONNE**

PER CURIAM:

Denied. Relator does not identify an illegal term in his sentence, and therefore, his filing is properly construed as an application for post-conviction relief. *See* *State v. Parker* , 98-0256 (La. 5/8/98), 711 So.2d 694. Relator's sentencing claims are not cognizable on collateral review. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.3 ; *State ex rel. Melinie v. State* , 93-1380 (La. 1/12/96), 665 So.2d 1172 ; *see also* *State v. Cotton* , 09-2397 (La. 10/15/10), 45 So.3d 1030.

Relator has now fully litigated an application 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.

Weimer, J., recused.
##### Table of Contents



UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549
 FORM 8-K
 CURRENT REPORT
Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of
The Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): July 20, 2006
 Volkswagen Public Auto Loan Securitization, LLCVolkswagen Auto Loan Enhanced Trust 2005-1
  Delaware
    
    333-103709
    
    83-0349353333-103709-03
    
    20-6706266(State or other jurisdiction
of Incorporation)
    
    (Commission File Number)
    
    (Registrants IRS
Employer Id. Nos.)
 3800 Hamlin Road, Auburn Hills, Michigan 48326
   
  
  o
 o
 o
 o




---



TABLE OF CONTENTS  Item 8.01 Other Events.Item 9.01 Financial Statements and Exhibits.Exhibit IndexServicer Certificate    Table of Contents  
   
  
 Exhibit 99.1
    
    Volkswagen Auto Loan Enhanced Trust 2005-1 Servicer
Certificate for the Collection Period ended July 1, 2006
provided to Citibank, N.A., as indenture trustee. (Filed
with this report.)
  Dated: July 20, 2006
    Volkswagen Public Auto Loan Securitization, LLCBy:
    /s/ Timothy J. FlahertyTimothy J. FlahertyAssistant Treasurer Volkswagen Auto Loan Enhanced Trust 2005-1By:
    VW Credit, Inc. as Administrator By:
    /s/ Timothy J. FlahertyTimothy J. FlahertyAssistant Treasurer




---



##### Table of Contents



Exhibit Index
 Exhibit No.
    
    Document DescriptionExhibit 99.1
    
    Volkswagen Auto Loan Enhanced Trust 2005-1 Servicer
Certificate for the Collection Period ended July 1, 2006
provided to Citibank, N.A., as indenture trustee. (Filed
with this report.)
# C_2021349EN.01001001.xml

| 30.8.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 349/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.8.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 349/10

---

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 15 July 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — DocMorris NV v Apothekerkammer Nordrhein

(Case C-190/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Medicinal products for human use subject to a medical prescription - Directive 2001/83/EC - Scope - Advertising by a mail-order pharmacy intended to influence not the customer’s choice of a particular medicinal product, but the choice of pharmacy - Prize competition - Free movement of goods - National legislation - Prohibition on offering, advertising or granting advantages and other promotional gifts in the field of therapeutic products - Selling arrangements falling outside the scope of Article 34 TFEU)

(2021/C 349/12)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: DocMorris NV

Defendant: Apothekerkammer Nordrhein

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 November 2001 on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use, as amended by Directive 2012/26/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012, must be interpreted as not applying to national legislation which prohibits a pharmacy which sells medicinal products by mail order from organising an advertising campaign in the form of a prize competition allowing participants to win everyday items other than medicinal products, participation in that competition being subject to the submission of an order for a medicinal product for human use subject to a medical prescription, together with that prescription; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 November 2001 on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use, as amended by Directive 2012/26/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012, must be interpreted as not applying to national legislation which prohibits a pharmacy which sells medicinal products by mail order from organising an advertising campaign in the form of a prize competition allowing participants to win everyday items other than medicinal products, participation in that competition being subject to the submission of an order for a medicinal product for human use subject to a medical prescription, together with that prescription;

| 2. | Article 34 TFEU must be interpreted as not precluding such national legislation. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Article 34 TFEU must be interpreted as not precluding such national legislation.

---

(1)  OJ C 279, 24.08.2020.

---
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-16-0000883 07-SEP-2018 08:07 AM
EXHIBIT
      NO. 32.1





Certification
      Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Systems Management Solutions, Inc.,
      a
      Nevada corporation (the "Company"), hereby certifies that:





To
      my
      knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter
      ended June 30, 2007 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of
      Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated:
      AUGUST 06, 2007


By:
            /s/
              JIM
              KARLAKJIM
                KARLAKPRESIDENT
                AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
# C_2023024EN.01001501.xml

| 23.1.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.1.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/15

---

Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 12 October 2022 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy dla Warszawy-Woli w Warszawie — Poland) — R1, R2 (C-650/20) v O1, O2 (C-650/20) and C (C-651/20) v T, O (C-651/20)

(Joined Cases C-650/20 and C-651/20) (1)

(Removal from the register)

(2023/C 24/20)

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Rejonowy dla Warszawy-Woli w Warszawie

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: R1, R2 (C-650/20), C (C-651/20)

Defendants: O1, O2 (C-650/20), T, O (C-651/20)

Operative part of the order

Joined Cases C-650/20 and C-651/20 are removed from the register of the Court.

---

(1)  Date lodged: 30.11.20.

---
Steven Francis D'AMICO, Appellant, v. Robert E. SMITH, Warden, Appellee.

No. 1D18-2165

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

December 28, 2018 Rehearing Denied February 19, 2019

Steven Francis D'Amico, pro se, Appellant.

Beverly Brewster, Assistant General Counsel, Department of Corrections, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

We affirm the amended order transferring Appellant's petition for writ of habeas corpus to the circuit in which Appellant was convicted and sentenced. *See**Torres v. State* , 208 So.3d 831, 831 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (affirming the order transferring a habeas petition because the appellant challenged the sufficiency of the charging instrument therein); *Baker v. State* , 164 So.3d 38, 39 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015) ("[T]he court of conviction, has jurisdiction over Baker's habeas petition because the petition challenges the sufficiency of the charging document which amounts to a collateral attack on Baker's 1996 conviction.").

AFFIRMED .

Wolf, Lewis, and Wetherell, JJ., concur.
Patrick M. BADGETT, Sr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-3650

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Opinion filed January 18, 2019

Patrick M. Badgett, Sr., Lake Butler, pro se.

Ashley B. Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Bonnie Jean Parrish, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed without prejudice to Appellant to pursue administrative remedies through the Department of Corrections.

AFFIRMED.

ORFINGER, BERGER and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.
# C_2022011EN.01000901.xml

| 10.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 11/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 11/9

---

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 11 November 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo — Spain) — Ferimet SL v Administracíon General del Estado

(Case C-281/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 168 - Right of deduction - Article 199 - Reverse charge procedure - Principle of fiscal neutrality - Material conditions governing the right to deduct - Supplier’s status as taxable person - Burden of proof - Fraud - Abusive practice - Invoice referring to a fictitious supplier)

(2022/C 11/11)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Supremo

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Ferimet SL

Defendant: Administracíon General del Estado

Operative part of the judgment

Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, read in conjunction with the principle of fiscal neutrality, must be interpreted as meaning that a taxable person must be refused the right to deduct value added tax (VAT) relating to the acquisition of goods supplied to that taxable person where he or she has knowingly mentioned a fictitious supplier on the invoice which that taxable person him- or herself has issued in respect of that transaction under the reverse charge procedure, if, taking into account the factual circumstances and the evidence provided by that taxable person, the information necessary to verify that the true supplier had the status of taxable person is lacking, or if it is established to the requisite legal standard that the taxable person has committed VAT fraud or knew or ought to have known that the transaction relied on as a basis for the right of deduction was connected with such a fraud.

---

(1)  OJ C 320, 28.9.2020.

---
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Geology General

Filters

              - products_publications(7)
              - multimedia_image(25)
              - multimedia_image-141771(22)
              - multimedia_image-141775(3)
              - multimedia_video(43)
              - multimedia_video-149194(15)
              - (-)multimedia_video-149195(5)
              - multimedia_video-149197(1)
              - multimedia_video-149198(22)

## By Location

              - alaska(1)
              - arizona(3)
              - california(3)
              - connecticut(1)
              - delaware(3)
              - district of columbia(3)
              - florida(1)
              - (-)hawaii(5)
              - kentucky(1)
              - maine(1)
              - maryland(3)
              - massachusetts(1)
              - montana(2)
              - nevada(2)
              - new hampshire(1)
              - new jersey(1)
              - new york(1)
              - north carolina(1)
              - pennsylvania(1)
              - rhode island(1)
              - south dakota(2)
              - utah(1)
              - virginia(1)
              - washington(1)
              - west virginia(1)
              - wisconsin(4)
              - wyoming(2)

## By Year

Featured Films and Shorts        May 25, 2018        Kīlauea Volcano – USGS 24 Hour Watch: Monitoring Lava Flow

Featured Films and Shorts        December 31, 2017        Kīlauea Summit Eruption | Lava Returns to Halemaʻumaʻu

Featured Films and Shorts        June 6, 2018        Kīlauea Volcano —Compilation of Lower East Rift Zone (Audio Described)

Featured Films and Shorts        May 10, 2018        USGS Status Update of Kīlauea Volcano - May 10, 2018

Featured Films and Shorts        June 4, 2018        Kīlauea Volcano — Video Compilation of Kapoho Bay Ocean Entry