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

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Geology General

Filters

              - science_science(2)
              - products_publications(4)

## By Location

              - alabama(9)
              - alaska(84)
              - arizona(29)
              - arkansas(5)
              - california(117)
              - colorado(35)
              - commonwealth of the northern mariana islands(1)
              - connecticut(6)
              - delaware(3)
              - district of columbia(4)
              - florida(11)
              - georgia(8)
              - guam(2)
              - hawaii(76)
              - idaho(16)
              - illinois(3)
              - indiana(6)
              - iowa(7)
              - kansas(2)
              - kentucky(7)
              - louisiana(6)
              - maine(8)
              - maryland(9)
              - massachusetts(14)
              - michigan(9)
              - minnesota(6)
              - mississippi(7)
              - missouri(8)
              - montana(21)
              - (-)nebraska(6)
              - nevada(26)
              - new hampshire(4)
              - new jersey(8)
              - new mexico(23)
              - new york(9)
              - north carolina(10)
              - north dakota(11)
              - ohio(1)
              - oklahoma(4)
              - oregon(19)
              - pennsylvania(11)
              - puerto rico(5)
              - rhode island(6)
              - south carolina(10)
              - south dakota(41)
              - tennessee(4)
              - texas(22)
              - u.s. virgin islands(2)
              - utah(42)
              - vermont(1)
              - virginia(13)
              - washington(31)
              - west virginia(3)
              - wisconsin(14)
              - wyoming(17)

## By Year

publication        January 1, 1872        Final report of the United States Geological Survey of Nebraska and portions of the adjacent Territories, made under the direction of the Commissioner of the General Land Office

publication        January 1, 1903        Preliminary report on the geology and water resources of Nebraska west of the one hundred and third meridian

publication        May 14, 2012        Evaluation of geophysical techniques for the detection of paleochannels in the Oakland area of eastern Nebraska as part of the Eastern Nebraska Water Resource Assessment

publication        January 1, 2001        Vertical profiles of streambed hydraulic conductivity determined using slug tests in central and western Nebraska

Project        February 21, 2017        High Plains Water-Level Monitoring Study

Project        August 4, 2021        Groundwater Quality and Age of Secondary Bedrock Aquifers, Eastern Nebraska
Cathy ZAHN and Robert Zahn v. Akelia A. WATKINS, Metropolitan Property and Casualty Insurance Company and State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, et al.

2018-CC-0337

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 6, 2019

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF CADDO**

Writ denied.

CRICHTON, J., additionally concurs and assigns reasons.

Crichton, J., additionally concurs and assigns reasons.

Circumstances unique to this case give rise to a genuine issue of material fact and therefore, in my view, the decisions of the lower court are correct. See La. C. Civ. P. art 966(c) and *Maggio v. Parker* , 17-1112 (La. 6/27/18), 250 So.3d 874.
Exhibit  32.1


                        CERTIFICATIONS  UNDER  SECTION  906


    Pursuant  to  section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a)
and  (b)  of  section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of
the  undersigned  officers  of Xtreme Companies, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the
"Company"),  does  hereby  certify,  to  such  officer's  knowledge,  that:

    The  Annual  Report for the year ended December 31, 2003 (the "Form 10-KSB")
of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the  Securities  Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the Form
10-KSB  fairly  presents,  in all material respects, the financial condition and
results  of  operations  of  the  Company.

    Dated:  April  13,  2004

                           /s/  Kevin  Ryan
                           --------------------
                           Kevin  Ryan,  Chief  Executive  Officer


    Dated:  April  13,  2004
                           /s/  Barrett  Evans
                           -----------------
                           Barrett  Evans,  Interim  Chief  Financial  Officer
1840.

#### DEAN *v.*THE STATE.

The evidence was sufficient to authorize the verdict of guilty, and there was no error in refusing a new trial.

Accusation of cattle stealing, from Miller superior court— Judge Worrill. March 1, 1909.

Submitted May 4, —

Decided May 18, 1909.

*W. I. Geer, W. D. Sheffield,*for plaintiff in error.

*J. A. Laing, solicitor-general, R. R. Arnold,*contra.

Russell, J.

Two contentions are raised by the counsel for the plaintiff in error. He insists that the State failed to prove the venue; and also that it failed to prove the identity of the steer alleged to have been stolen. The steer is described in the indictment as “one yellow-colored steer with white spots on his body and a white spot in his forehead.” It is true that all the witnesses except one swore that the steer that belonged to the prosecutor and which was afterwards found in the possession of Mr. Brinson was a red steer, with white spots on his body and a white spot in his forehead. Even the prosecutor himself testified that he would not call the steer a yellow steer, but he denominated him as being of a dull *251red color, though he further said that some people would call him a yellow-colored steer. The witness Powell, however, testified positively that he was a yellow steer, with a white spot in his forehead and white spots on his flanks; and this witness testified that he was with the prosecutor when the steer was found in Brinson’s pasture. This testimony, when taken in connection with the statement of the prosecutor, that some people might call the steer a yellow steer, was sufficient, if preferred by the jury, to fix the id entity of the steer in question and establish it as the same steer described in the indictment. And when it is borne in mind that all the witnesses testified as to the white marks on the animal’s side, and the spot on his forehead, the jury were authorized to find that the allegation of the indictment, descriptive of the animal stolen, was substantially proved.

The most that can be said as to the point that the venue was not shown is that the testimony of several of the witnesses upon, that point is insufficient. But the testimony of Steve Ivy is positive and sufficient. He swore that he helped the defendant drive the steer in question to the defendant’s home, and that they found the steer on Boykin’s drain in Miller county.

There was no error in refusing a new trial.

*Judgment affirmed.*
# C_2022165EN.01001902.xml

| 19.4.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 165/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.4.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 165/19

---

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 24 February 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo -Portugal) — Suzlon Wind Energy Portugal — Energia Eólica Unipessoal, Lda v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

(Case C-605/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 2(1)(c) - Applicability ratione temporis - Supplies subject to VAT - Supplies of services for consideration - Criteria - Intra-group relationship - Supplies consisting in repairing or replacing components of wind turbines under guarantee and preparing non-compliance reports - Debit notes issued by the supplier of services with no reference to VAT - Deduction by the supplier of the VAT charged on the goods and services for which it has been invoiced by its subcontractors in respect of those supplies)

(2022/C 165/22)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Supremo Tribunal Administrativo

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Suzlon Wind Energy Portugal — Energia Eólica Unipessoal, Lda

Defendant: Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

Operative part of the judgment

Article 2(1)(c) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as meaning that transactions forming part of a contractual framework which identifies a supplier of services, the purchaser of those services and the nature of the services in question, duly accounted for by the taxable person, bearing a heading confirming the nature of the services and having given rise to remuneration received by the supplier constituting the actual value of those services in the form of debit notes, form a supply of services for consideration within the meaning of that provision, notwithstanding, first, any absence of profit for the taxable person and, second, the existence of a guarantee relating to the goods in respect of which those services were provided.

---

(1)  OJ C 44, 8.2.2021.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001114674
<NAME> N/A
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                  1,000
<CASH>                                          20,104
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   72,522
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,980
<INVENTORY>                                     32,097
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               191,205
<PP&E>                                          48,020
<DEPRECIATION>                                  32,347
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 291,349
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           63,514
<BONDS>                                          8,709
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           845
<OTHER-SE>                                     225,738
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   291,349
<SALES>                                        135,288
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               162,523
<CGS>                                           64,103
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   82,236
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                67,639
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   908
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,146
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 11,470
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,588
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,882
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,882
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .09


</TABLE>
##### 



EXHIBIT 99.10
  LETTER TO
    BENEFICIAL HOLDERS
    REGARDING THE OFFER TO EXCHANGEUnregistered
    93/4% Senior
    Notes Due 2011
    for
    93/4% Senior
    Notes Due 2011
    which have been registered under the Securities Act of 1933
    ofThe
    Majestic Star Casino, LLCandMajestic
    Star Casino Capital Corp. IIPursuant to the Prospectus
    dated          ,
    2006
   THE EXCHANGE OFFER WILL EXPIRE
    AT 5:00 P.M., NEW YORK CITY TIME,
    ON          ,
    2006, UNLESS EXTENDED (SUCH TIME AND DATE, AS THE SAME MAY BE
    EXTENDED FROM TIME TO TIME, THE EXPIRATION DATE).
    TENDERS MAY BE WITHDRAWN AT ANY TIME PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION
    DATE.
  ,
    2006
    3 4 3 4
  A tender of any
    Unregistered Notes may be made only by us as the registered
    holder and pursuant to your instructions.
    The Exchange Offer will expire at 5:00 p.m., New
    York City time,
    on          ,
    2006, unless extended by the Issuers.
  The accompanying Letter of




---



##### 



Transmittal is furnished to you for informational purposes
    only and may not be used by you to tender Unregistered Notes
    held by us and registered in our name for your account or
    benefit.
  INSTRUCTIONS TO
    REGISTERED HOLDER
    FROM BENEFICIAL OWNER
    OF
    93/4%
    SENIOR NOTES DUE 2011
    OF THE MAJESTIC STAR CASINO, LLC
    AND MAJESTIC STAR CASINO CAPITAL CORP. II
      (fill in amount)
    (check appropriate box)
  o (insert principal amount of Unregistered Notes to
    be tendered, if any)
    o
  no-action




---



##### 



o
    A Qualified Institutional Buyer (as defined in
    Rule 144A under the Securities Act)o
    An Institutional Accredited Investor (as defined in
    Rule 501(a)(1), (2), (3) or (7) under the
    Securities Act)o
    A non U.S. person (as defined in
    Regulation S of the Securities Act) that purchased the Old
    Notes outside the United States in accordance with Rule 904
    of the Securities Acto
    Other
    (describe) _
    _  SIGN
    HERE
  _
    _
  _
    _
  (please
    print) _
    _
  _
    _
  _
    _
  _
    _
  _
    _
  _
    _
 3
**EXHIBIT 35.1**

 

**SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT**

**New Holland Credit Company, LLC**

 

The undersigned, a dulyauthorized officer of New Holland Credit Company, LLC (“NHCC”), as Servicerpursuant to the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of April 1, 2009 (asamended from time to time, the “Sale and Servicing Agreement”) by and amongNHCC, CNH Capital Receivables LLC and CNH Equipment Trust 2009-B, does herebycertify that:

 

1.             NHCC is Servicer under the Sale and Servicing Agreement.

 

2.             The undersigned is duly authorized as required pursuantto the Sale and Servicing Agreement to execute and deliver this Certificate tothe Indenture Trustee.

 

3.             This Certificate is delivered pursuant to Section 4.9(a) ofthe Sale and Servicing Agreement and Item 1123 of Regulation AB.

 

4.             A review of the Servicer’s activities during the periodfrom the trust’s initial cutoff date, March 31, 2009, to and including December 31,2009 and of its performance under the Sale and Servicing Agreement has beenmade under my supervision.

 

5.             To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, theServicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Sale and ServicingAgreement in all material respects throughout the period from the trust’sinitial cutoff date, March 31, 2009, to and including December 31,2009.

 

6.             IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executedthis Certificate this 29th day of March 2010.

 

----

 
| March 29, 2010 |   |                  |
|---------------------|--------|-----------------------|
|                |   |                  |
|                |   |                  |
|                | By:    | /s/ Steven C. Bierman |
|                | Name:  | Steven C. Bierman     |
|                | Title: | President             |

 

----
<PAGE>

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

The undersigned officer of Continan Communications, Inc. (the "Company") hereby
certifies to my knowledge that the Company's annual report on Form 10-KSB for
the year ended December 31, 2007 (the "Report"), as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission the on date hereof, fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company. This certification is provided solely pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, and shall not be deemed to be part of the Report or "filed" for any
purpose whatsoever.


Date: April 14, 2008                        Name: /s/ Geoffrey A. Fox
                                                  -----------------------
                                                  Geoffrey A. Fox
                                                  Title: Chief Executive Officer
Jermiah LIVINGSTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-3495

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

February 12, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
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 Annual Report of Spearhead Limited, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michel
L. Marengere, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

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

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

/s/ Michel L. Marengere
-----------------------
Michel L. Marengere
Chief Executive Officer
March 16, 2005
United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

January 29, 2021

ERRATA

______________________

Appeal No. 2020-1478

THE DIAMOND SAWBLADES MANUFACTURERS’ 

COALITION,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

UNITED STATES,

Defendant-Appellee

v.

BOSUN TOOLS CO., LTD.,

Defendant-Appellant

Decided: January 27, 2021

Precedential Opinion

______________________

Please make the following change:

On page 2, line 27, “PRC, that” is changed to “PRC, 

which”

Case: 20-1478 Document: 54 Page: 1 Filed: 01/29/2021
EXHIBIT 10.13


 


ANDREW CORPORATION


EXECUTIVE SEVERANCE BENEFIT PLAN AGREEMENT


 


THIS AGREEMENT, made this 5th day of July, 2004, by and between Andrew
Corporation (the “Company”) and John Dickson (the “Executive”),


 


WITNESSETH:


 


WHEREAS, the Company maintains the Andrew Corporation Executive
Severance Benefit Plan, as amended and restated effective May 14, 2004 (the
“Plan”); and


 


WHEREAS, the Executive has been designated as an eligible participant
in the Plan;


 


NOW, THEREFORE, the Executive and Company hereby agree as follows:


 


1.                                       Plan
Benefits.  The Executive has been
designated as a TIER II Participant in the Plan and shall be eligible solely
for the benefits set forth therein applicable to TIER II Participants.  The receipt of such benefits shall be subject
to all of the terms and conditions set forth in the Plan, including, but not
limited to, terms related to the amount, time and form of benefits.  By execution of this Agreement, the
Executive agrees to be bound by the provisions of the Plan, as amended and
restated effective May 14, 2004, and as may be subsequently amended.


 


2.                                       Arbitration.  The Executive acknowledges that
Section 7.2 of the Plan contains an arbitration provision, and by
execution of this Agreement agrees to be bound by the terms of such arbitration
provision.


 


3.                                       Plan
Not Contract of Employment.  The
Plan does not constitute a contract of employment and nothing in the Plan shall
be construed to give the Executive the right to be retained by the Company or
to any benefits not specifically provided by the Plan.


 


4.                                       Plan
Supercedes Prior Change in Control Severance Agreements.  The Executive acknowledges and agrees that
the benefits and terms set forth in the May 14, 2004 restatement of the Plan,
as applicable to the Participant based on the Tier designated in paragraph 1
above, are a replacement for and in lieu of any benefits to which the Executive
may have been entitled under the Plan prior to its restatement or under any
other agreement with the Company relating to Change in Control severance
benefits.  The Executive further
acknowledges such benefits and terms may be subsequently amended pursuant to
Section 7.1 of the Plan.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be
executed as of the date first above written.


 


	
  EXECUTIVE

  	
  ANDREW CORPORATION

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  /s/ John R.D. Dickson

  	
   

  	
  /s/ Ralph E. Faison

  	
   

  
	
  , individually

  	
   

  	
  By: Ralph E. Faison

  
	
   

  	
  Its: President & Chief Executive Officer
Travis Octavious JACKSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-3065

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[January 17, 2019]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
**Exhibit 23**

 

 

**Consent ofIndependent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

** **

 

The Board of DirectorsAdvanced Power Technology, Inc.:

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in theregistration statement (Nos. 333-49800, 333-81376, 333-114317, 333-122154, and333-125970) on Form S-8 of Advanced Power Technology, Inc. of our reportsdated March 1, 2006, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets ofAdvanced Power Technology, Inc. as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, the relatedconsolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity and comprehensiveincome (loss), and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year periodended December 31, 2005, and management’s assessment of the effectiveness ofinternal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004 and theeffectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31,2005, which reports appear in the December 31, 2005 annual report on Form 10-Kof Advanced Power Technology, Inc.

 

 
|   |   | **/s/ KPMG LLP** |   |   |
|--------|--------|------------------|--------|--------|

 

 

Portland, OregonMarch 1, 2006

 

----
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-94,067-01

EX PARTE RUDY RODRIGUEZ, JR., Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 1069837-A IN THE 183 DISTRICT COURT RD

FROM HARRIS COUNTY

Per curiam.

O P I N I O N

Applicant was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. The First Court of

Appeals affirmed his conviction. Rodriguez v. State, No. 01-08-00584-CR (Tex. App.—Houston

[1 Dist.] Oct. 9, 2009)(not designated for publication). Applicant filed this application for a writ st

of habeas corpus in the county of conviction, and the district clerk forwarded it to this Court. See

TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07.

Applicant contends that appellate counsel failed to timely inform Applicant that conviction

had been affirmed and advise of right to file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Based on the

record, the trial court has determined that appellate counsel’s performance was deficient and that

Applicant would have timely filed a petition for discretionary review but for counsel’s deficient
2

performance.

Relief is granted. Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997); Ex parte Crow,

180 S.W.3d 135 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Applicant may file an out-of-time petition for

discretionary review of the judgment of the First Court of Appeals in cause number 01-08-00584-

CR . Should Applicant decide to file a petition for discretionary review, must file it with this Court

within thirty days from the date of this Court’s mandate.

Copies of this opinion shall be sent to the TexasDepartment ofCriminal Justice–Correctional

Institutions Division and the Board of Pardons and Paroles.

Delivered: May 31, 2023

Do not publish