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

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Geology General

Filters

              - science_science(4)
              - products_data(2)
              - products_maps(11)
              - products_publications(45)
              - multimedia_audio(2)
              - multimedia_audio-141766(1)
              - multimedia_audio-141767(1)
              - multimedia_image(3)
              - multimedia_image-141774(1)
              - multimedia_image-141775(2)
              - multimedia_video(49)
              - multimedia_video-149194(43)
              - (-)multimedia_video-149195(3)
              - multimedia_video-149197(3)
              - connect_staff_profiles(1)

## 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        December 8, 2009        Inside USGS No. 1, Robert Christiansen, Yellowstone

Featured Films and Shorts        February 21, 2010        The Heat is On: Desert Tortoises and Survival (Full video)

Featured Films and Shorts        December 8, 2009        Inside USGS, No. 3, Robert Fournier, Yellowstone
# C_2022037EN.01003001.xml

| 24.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/30

---

Judgment of the General Court of 1 December 2021 — Inditex v EUIPO — Ffauf Italia (ZARA)

(Case T-467/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark ZARA - Earlier international word mark LE DELIZIE ZARA and earlier national figurative mark ZARA - Proof of genuine use of the earlier marks - Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 47(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001))

(2022/C 37/40)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Industria de Diseño Textil, SA (Inditex) (Arteixo, Spain) (represented by: G. Marín Raigal and E. Armero Lavie, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: H. O’Neill and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Ffauf Italia SpA (Riese Pio X, Italy) (represented by: P. Creta, A. Lanzarini, B. Costa and M. Lazzarotto, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 May 2020 (Case R 2040/2019-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Ffauf Italia and Inditex.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Industria de Diseño Textil, SA (Inditex) to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Industria de Diseño Textil, SA (Inditex) to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 304, 14.9.2020.

---
Donna HORWITZ, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D17-3285

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[January 31, 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 Alliance Distributors Holding Inc., a
Delaware Corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December
31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"),
Jay Gelman, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board, does hereby
certify, pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. ss.
1350), that to 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 result of operations of the Company.

Date: March 22, 2006

                        /s/ Jay Gelman
                        --------------------------------------
                        Jay Gelman
                        Chief Executive Officer and
                        Chairman of the Board
** **

**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Steven C. Bierman, certify that:

 

1.             I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of CNH Equipment Trust 2010-C (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);

 

2.             Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do 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, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4.             I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicer and based on my knowledge and the compliance review conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and

 

5.             All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

 

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated party: The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A.

 

March 29, 2011

 

 
|   | By:    | /s/   Steven C. Bierman                                          |
|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Name:  | Steven   C. Bierman                                              |
|   | Title: | President   (senior officer in charge of the servicing function) |

 

----
Exhibit
32.1





Certification
required by Rule 13a-14(b) or


Rule
15d-14(b) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States
Code





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of NGP Capital Resources Company (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2010, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, John H.
Homier, President and Chief Executive 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 to my knowledge:




(1)
              The 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
      Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
      and results of operations of the
Company.





Date: May
10, 2010





/s/
      John H. HomierJohn
      H. HomierPresident
      and Chief Executive
Officer
# C_2022011EN.01002602.xml

| 10.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 11/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 11/26

---

Judgment of the General Court of 10 November 2021 — Monster Energy v EUIPO — Frito-Lay Trading Company (MONSTER and MONSTER ENERGY)

(Joined Cases T-758/20 and T-759/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word marks MONSTER and MONSTER ENERGY - Genuine use of the marks - Use in connection with the goods in respect of which the marks were registered - Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2022/C 11/35)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Monster Energy Co. (Corona, California, United States) (represented by: P. Brownlow, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: V. Ruzek and E. Śliwińska, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Frito-Lay Trading Company GmbH (Bern, Switzerland) (represented by: V. von Bomhard and J. Fuhrmann, lawyers)

Re:

Two actions brought against the decisions of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 October 2020 (Cases R 2927/2019-2 and R 2928/2019-2), relating to two revocation proceedings between Frito-Lay Trading Company and Monster Energy.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the actions; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the actions;

| 2. | Orders Monster Energy Co. to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Monster Energy Co. to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 53, 15.2.2021.

---
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-90,729-01

EX PARTE DONALD MILLER BALL, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 2012-0434-A IN THE 217 DISTRICT COURT TH

FROM ANGELINA COUNTY

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Applicant pleaded guilty to aggravated sexual assault of a child and was sentenced to twentyfive years’ imprisonment. The Twelfth Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal. Ball v. State, No.

12-13-00190-CR (Tex.App.—TylerAug. 20, 2014)(not designated for publication). Applicant filed

this application for a writ 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 raises eight grounds in his application. The district clerk properly forwarded this

application to this Court under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 73.4(b)(5). However, the

application was forwarded before the trial court made findings of fact and conclusions of law. We

remand this application to the trial court to complete its evidentiary investigation and make findings
2

of fact and conclusions of law.

The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law as to whethertrial counsel’s

performance was deficient and Applicant would have insisted on a trial but for counsel’s alleged

deficient performance. The trial court shall also make findings regarding whether false testimony

was presented during the punishment hearing, and if so, whether such testimony was material. Ex

parte Weinstein, 421 S.W.3d 656 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). The trial court may make any other

findings and conclusions that it deems appropriate in response to Applicant’s claims.

The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law within ninety days from

the date of this order. The district clerk shall then immediately forward to this Court the trial court’s

findings and conclusions and the record developed on remand, including, among other things,

affidavits, motions, objections, proposed findings and conclusions, orders, and transcripts from

hearings and depositions. See TEX.R.APP. P. 73.4(b)(4). Any extensions of time must be requested

by the trial court and obtained from this Court.

Filed: January 15, 2020

Do not publish
STATE v. Caleb Tyler HAYWOOD

CR-16-0309

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

July 21, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Reh. denied.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-6150

ANDREW WILSON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

CAROLYN LEE; DOCTOR JOHN DOE,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, District

Judge. (CA-01-639-AM)

Submitted: May 16, 2002 Decided: May 23, 2002

Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Andrew Wilson, Appellant Pro Se. Coreen Antoinette Bromfield, RAWLS

& MCNELIS, P.C., Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
* The district court also found Wilson’s complaint failed to

state a claim upon which relief may be granted under 28 U.S.C.A.

§ 1915A(b)(1) (West Supp. 2001). Because we conclude Wilson’s

complaint was barred by the statute of limitations, we need not

address the merits of Wilson’s claim.

2

PER CURIAM:

Andrew L. Wilson appeals the district court’s dismissal of his

civil rights action filed under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.

2001). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion

and find the district court correctly concluded Wilson’s complaint

was barred by the statute of limitations.* See Hardin v. Straub,

490 U.S. 536, 538 (1989); Owens v. Okure, 488 U.S. 235, 249-50

(1989); National Advertising Co. v. City of Raleigh, 947 F.2d 1158,

1162 (4th Cir. 1991). Accordingly, we affirm on this ground. We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions

are adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
# C_2021079EN.01001902.xml

| 8.3.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 79/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.3.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 79/19

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Giustizia Amministrativa per la Regione Siciliana (Italy) lodged on 27 November 2020 — Caruter s.r.l. v S.R.R. Messina Provincia S.c.P.A., Comune di Basicò, Comune di Falcone, Comune di Fondachelli Fantina, Comune di Gioiosa Marea, Comune di Librizzi, Comune di Mazzarrà Sant’Andrea, Comune di Montagnareale, Comune di Oliveri, Comune di Piraino, Comune di San Piero Patti, Regione Siciliana — Urega — Ufficio regionale espletamento gare d’appalti lavori pubblici Messina, Regione Siciliana — Assessorato regionale delle infrastrutture e della mobilità

(Case C-642/20)

(2021/C 79/25)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Giustizia Amministrativa per la Regione Siciliana

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Caruter s.r.l.

Defendants: S.R.R. Messina Provincia S.c.P.A., Comune di Basicò, Comune di Falcone, Comune di Fondachelli Fantina, Comune di Gioiosa Marea, Comune di Librizzi, Comune di Mazzarrà Sant’Andrea, Comune di Montagnareale, Comune di Oliveri, Comune di Piraino, Comune di San Piero Patti, Regione Siciliana — Urega — Ufficio regionale espletamento gare d’appalti lavori pubblici Messina, Regione Siciliana — Assessorato regionale delle infrastrutture e della mobilità

Question referred

Does Article 63 of Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014, (1) concerning reliance on the capacities of other entities, in conjunction with the principles of freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services enshrined in Articles 49 and 56 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), preclude the application of the Italian national rules relating to ‘criteria for selection and the supplementing or amending of tendering documentation’ laid down in the penultimate sentence of Article 83(8) of the Public Procurement Code established by Legislative Decree No 50 of 18 April 2016, according to which where recourse is had to reliance on the capacities of other entities (referred to in Article 89 of the Public Procurement Code established by Legislative Decree No 50 of 18 April 2016), the agent must in any event fulfil the majority of the requirements and provide the majority of the services?

---

(1)  Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC (OJ 2014 L 94, p. 65).

---
Earl BUTLER, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Leighton G. MORSE, Esq., et al., Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-0937

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 27, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.

Transferred.
EXHIBIT 13.1

CERTIFICATIONS 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 on Form 20-F of Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited, a limited liability company incorporated
in the Republic of India (the Company) for the period ending March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned officers of the Company certifies
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to such officers best knowledge, that:

1. the Report fully complies, in all material respects, 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 as of, and for, the periods presented in the Report.

The foregoing certification is provided solely for purposes of complying with the provisions of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and is not intended to
be used or relied upon for any other purpose.

Date: October 2, 2006

/s/ Narasimhan SrinathNarasimhan SrinathExecutive Director/s/ Rajiv DharRajiv DharChief Financial Officer
## NUMBER 13
- 2 2
- 00 228
- CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

– EDINBURG

BRANDON PORTILLO , A ppellant ,

v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS , A ppellee

.

On a ppeal from the 9 4 th District Court of Nueces County, Texas.



## ORDER OF ABATEMENT

Before Justices Benavides, Hinojosa, and Silva Order Per Curiam
This appeal is before the Court on its own motion

. Upon review of the reporter’s
record, portions of the record are lost, missing, or destroyed

. Upon review, s tate’s exhibit

3 in volume 13 i s listed as a CD consisting of medical records and is password protected

. Furthermore, the exhibit page indicates t he item is “unable to view when copied.” Due to2 this status, we construe this portion of the record as lost, missing, or destroyed.

T his sequence of events requires us to effectuate our responsibility to avoid further delay and to preserve the parties’ rights. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 35.3(b), (c). Accordingly,
this appeal is abated and the cause remanded to the trial court. The trial court shall cause a hearing to be held to det ermine if the reporter’s record, specifically state’s exhibit 3 in

v olume 13
, or any other part thereof, is missing, lost
, or destroyed

. Furthermore, the court

is instructed to make findings under T EX

. R. A PP

. P

. 34.6(f), if necessary. Otherwise, the court shall determine what steps are necessary to ensure the prompt preparation of a
reporter ’s record and shall enter any orders required to avoid further delay and to preserve the parties’ rights. The t rial c ourt is instructed to take notice of the Uniform Format Manual for Texas Reporters’ Records, section 8.3, which specifical ly states computer files must
not be password

- protecte d. The trial court shall cause its findings, together with any orders it may enter, to be
included in a supplemental clerk ’s record. Furthermore, the trial court shall cause a
supplemental reporter ’s record of any proceedings to be prepared. The supplemental

clerk ’s record and supplemental reporter ’s record shall be filed with the Clerk of this Court on or before the expiration of thirty days from the date of this order.

PER CURIAM
Do not publish. T EX . R. A PP . P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed on the 18th day of August, 2022.
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 amended Quarterly Report ofInternational Luxury Products, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2004 (the “Report”), I, David Lazar, Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby 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), as applicable, 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.



|Dated: September 9, 2020 | By: | /s/ David Lazar                                                                                       
|------------------------ | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                         |     | David Lazar                                                                                           
|                         |     | Chief Executive Officer                                                                               
|                         |     | Chief Financial Officer
        (Principal Executive Officer and
        Principal Accounting Officer)
# C_2021329EN.01000402.xml

| 16.8.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 329/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.8.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 329/4

---

Appeal brought on 28 December 2020 by Marina Karpeta-Kovalyova against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 15 October 2020 in Case T-249/19, Karpeta-Kovalyova v Commission

(Case C-717/20 P)

(2021/C 329/05)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Marina Karpeta-Kovalyova (represented by: S. Pappas, avocat)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

By order of 6 July 2021, the Court of Justice (Eighth Chamber) decided that the appeal is dismissed as manifestly unfounded and ordered the appellant to bear her own costs.

---