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


 


INTEGUMEN
LIMITED


Sand
Hutton Applied Innovation Campus


Sand
Hutton


York


North
Yorkshire


YO41
1LZ


England


 


ENHANCE
SKIN PRODUCTS INC.


50
West Liberty Street


Suite
880


Reno


NV
89501


United
States of America


 


15
September 2016


 


	Re
    	Enhance
    Skin Products Inc. (the “Company”)


 


Dear
Sirs


 


We
refer to the option agreement, dated 7 July 2016, between (1) Integumen Limited, formally known as BioSurface Limited (“Integumen”)
and (2) the Company (the “Option Agreement”). This letter constitutes a side letter to the Option Agreement.


 


Save
as otherwise provided for in this letter, defined terms used in this letter shall have the meaning ascribed to such terms in the
Option Agreement.


 


We
the undersigned being all of the parties to the Option Agreement hereby agree and confirm that, in consideration for the participation
by each party hereto in the good faith negotiations in relation to the entry into an asset purchase agreement in relation to certain
assets owned by the Company, the Option Agreement shall be amended, in accordance with Clause 10.3 of the Option Agreement, by
the deletion of the current Clause 3.2 of the Option Agreement and its replacement with the following new Clause 3.2:


 


“3.2The
Option shall lapse on 23 September 2016.”


 


This
letter may be executed in any number of counterparts each of which when executed and delivered shall be an original, but all the
counterparts together shall constitute one and the same instrument.


 




    	 	 	 



     

    


 


This
letter shall be governed by the laws of England and Wales and the parties hereby irrevocably submit to the jurisdiction of the
courts of England and Wales in relation to any dispute arising from, or in connection with, this letter.


 


Yours
faithfully


 


	 	 	 
	Duly authorised, for and on behalf of

                                                          INTEGUMEN LIMITED
	 	Duly authorised, for and on behalf of 

                                                         ENHANCE SKIN PRODUCTS INC.
Servando GREGORIO, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-3182

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed February 20, 2019.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Matthew Tyrone SIMMONS, DOC #Y56160, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-1053

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed February 27, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Rasbian M. WARD v. STATE

CR-16-0933

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

September 21, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Reh. denied.
EXHIBIT 4.2

 

	
Number
   B-
    	
Incorporated   Under the Laws of the State of Delaware
    	
Shares
   -0-
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
Cusip No.
    


 

LIBERTY EXPEDIA HOLDINGS, INC.

 

Series B Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share

 

Specimen Certificate

 

This Certifies that [                    ]  is the owner of [                    ] FULLY PAID AND NON-ASSESSABLE SHARES OF SERIES B COMMON STOCK, PAR VALUE $0.01 PER SHARE, OF LIBERTY EXPEDIA HOLDINGS, INC. (hereinafter called the “Corporation”) transferable on the books of the Corporation by the holder hereof in person or by duly authorized attorney upon surrender of the Certificate properly endorsed. This Certificate is not valid unless countersigned by the Transfer Agent and registered by the Registrar.

 

Witness, the seal of the Corporation and the signatures of its duly authorized officers.

 

Dated:

 

Liberty Expedia Holdings, Inc.

 

[Corporate Seal]

 

	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
President
    	
 
    	
Secretary
High Temperature Pavement Test Facility- RPD 135

Contract Funds ($K)
| Projects                                      | FY13   | FY14    | FY15  |
|-----------------------------------------------|--------|---------|-------|
| Basic APTV                                    | 190    | 0       | 0     |
| Maintenance and Equipment                     | 50     | 100     | 50    |
| Set-up Database, Process and Analyze Data     | 0      | 75      | 150   |
| Test Pavement Construction                    | 300    | 600     | 200   |
| Data Acquisition System & Instrumentation | 100    | 150     | 50    |
| APTV Building Construction & Testing      | 1320   | 175     | 0     |
| APTV Operation                                | 0      | 0       | 300   |
| TOTAL                                         | $ 1960 | $ 1,100 | $ 750 |

1

# image1.emf

# image2.emf

# oleObject1.bin

# Microsoft_Word_97_-_2003_Document1.doc
#### Como D. Massey, *Appellant,*v. Pineapple Orange Company, a Corporation, *Appellee.*

Division B..

Decision Filed October 12, 1927.

*T, S. Tranthcm,*for Appellant;

*Hampton & Greene,*for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

This .cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon-the transcript.of the record of the order or decree herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said order or decree; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the *636Court that the said order or decree of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVEOFFICER PURSUANT TOSECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I,Stuart J. Doshi, certify that:

 

1.    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Qof GeoPetro Resources Company;

 

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

 

3.    Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements, and other financial information included in this report, fairlypresent in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;

 

4.    The registrant’s other certifying officerand I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e))for the registrant and have:

 

(a)   Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

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

 

(c)   Disclosed in this report any change inthe registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred duringthe registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscalquarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting;

 

5.    The registrant’s other certifying officerand I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controlover financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committeeof registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

 

(a)   All significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s abilityto record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

 

(b)   Any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 
| Date: November 14,  2008 | /s/ Stuart J. Doshi         |
|-------------------------------|-----------------------------|
|                          | Stuart J. Doshi,  President |
|                          | and                         |
|                          | Chief Executive Officer     |

 

----
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 20-0286

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

LOGAN RAY GARDNER,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including February 8, 2021, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

December 21 2020

12/21/2020

Case Number: DA 20-0286
Steven Harold CLARK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-1960

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed March 12, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
# C_2022482EN.01001702.xml

| 19.12.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 482/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.12.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 482/17

---

Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — Lenovo Global Technology Belgium v Joint Undertaking EuroHPC

(Case T-717/20) (1)

(Public procurement - Tendering procedure - Acquisition, delivery, installation and maintenance of the Leonardo Supercomputer for the hosting entity Cineca - Rejection of a tenderer’s bid - Equal treatment - Principle of sound administration - Manifest error of assessment)

(2022/C 482/25)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Lenovo Global Technology Belgium BV (Machelen, Belgium) (represented by S. Sakellariou, G. Forwood and F. Abou Zeid, lawyers)

Defendant: European High-Performance Computing Joint Undertaking (represented by P.-E. Partsch and F. Dewald, lawyers)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by L. André, M. Ilkova, P.-J. Loewenthal, C. Vollrath and T. Van Noyen, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision Ares(2020)5103538 of the European High-Performance Computing Joint Undertaking (EuroHPC) of 29 September 2020 rejecting the tender submitted by the applicant concerning the third lot in call for tenders SMART 2019/1084 relating to the acquisition, delivery, installation and maintenance of the Leonardo Supercomputer for the hosting entity Cineca and awarding the contract to another tenderer.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Lenovo Global Technology Belgium BV to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European High-Performance Computing Joint Undertaking (EuroHPC); |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Lenovo Global Technology Belgium BV to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European High-Performance Computing Joint Undertaking (EuroHPC);

| 3. | Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 53, 15.2.2021.

---
George T. DRAYTON, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-0353

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

February 25, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
EXHIBIT 32

            CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO

                      18 U.S.C 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In  connection  with  the  Quarterly Report on Form 10QSB of Mass Megawatts Wind
Power,  Inc.  (the Company) for the period ended July 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the Report), Jonathon
Ricker,  the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
hereby  certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of  2002,  that,  to  the  best  of  his  knowledge:

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

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


Dated:    9/12/03                        /s/  Jonathon  Ricker
       ----------------                --------------------------------------
                                       Jonathon  Ricker
                                       Chief  Executive  Officer  and
                                       Chief  Financial  Officer

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



<PAGE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 21-0621

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

BRITTNEY ANN ALLEN,

Defendant and Appellant. 

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including January 6, 2023, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

November 29 2022

11/29/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0621
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-7535

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

ARTHUR LEE HAIRSTON, SR.,

 Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern 

District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. John Preston Bailey, 

Chief District Judge. (3:00-cr-00024-JPB-JES-1)

Submitted: February 16, 2012 Decided: February 23, 2012

Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Arthur Lee Hairston, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Oliver 

Mucklow, Assistant United States Attorney, Martinsburg, West 

Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Arthur Lee Hairston appeals the district court's order 

granting in part Hairston’s 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (2006) motion for 

reduction of sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no 

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated 

by the district court. United States v. Hairston, No. 

3:00-cr-00024-JPB-JES-1 (N.D.W. Va. Nov. 1, 2011). 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_2020433EN.01005001.xml

| 14.12.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 433/50 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.12.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 433/50

---

Judgment of the General Court of 15 October 2020 — Rothenberger v EUIPO — Paper Point (ROBOX)

(Case T-49/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark ROBOX - Earlier EU word mark OROBOX - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Independent subcategory of goods - Taking into consideration of a descriptive element - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2020/C 433/63)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Rothenberger AG (Kelkheim, Germany) (represented by: V. von Bomhard and J. Fuhrmann, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: G. Sakalaitė-Orlovskienė, J.F. Crespo Carrillo and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Paper Point S.n.c di Daria Fabbroni e Simone Borghini (Arezzo, Italy)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 31 October 2019 (Case R 210/2019-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Paper Point and Rothenberger.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Rothenberger AG to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Rothenberger AG to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 87, 16.3.2020.

---
March 29 , 2012



### JUDGMENT


## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NATHANIEL CLAYTON WE ATHERS , Appellant

NO. 14

- 11

- 00593

- CV V.

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS , Appellee

____________________

Today the Court heard appellee = s motion to dismiss the appeal from the judgment
signed by the court below on June 6, 2011. Having considered the motion and found it
meritorious, we order the appeal DISMISSED

. We further order that all costs incurred by reason of this appeal be paid by

NATHANIEL CLAYTON WE ATHERS

. We further order this decision certified below for observance.
# C_2018094EN.01002501.xml

| 12.3.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 94/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.3.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 94/25

---

Order of the General Court of 16 January 2018 — Pebagua v Commission

(Case T-715/16) (1)

1

((Action for annulment - Environment - Protection against invasive alien species - Prevention and management of the introduction and spread of invasive alien species - Regulation (EU) No 1143/2014 - Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1141 - Adoption of a list of invasive alien species of concern to the European Union - Inclusion of the Procambarus clarkii species - No individual concern - Regulatory act entailing implementing measures - Manifest inadmissibility))

(2018/C 094/33)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Asociación de la pesca y acuicultura del entorno de Doñana y del Bajo Guadalquívir (Pebagua) (Isla Mayor, Spain) (represented by: A. Uceda Sosa, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Hermes and E. Sanfrutos Cano, Agents)

Defendant: European

Re:

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking the annulment of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1141 of 13 July 2016 adopting a list of invasive alien species of Union concern pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 1143/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ 2016 L 189, p. 4).

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed.

| 2. | Asociación de la pesca y acuicultura del entorno de Doñana y del Bajo Guadalquívir (Pebagua) shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Asociación de la pesca y acuicultura del entorno de Doñana y del Bajo Guadalquívir (Pebagua) shall pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 441, 28.11.2016.

1

---
Case 3:00-cv-00022-P Document 19 Filed 04/24/01 Page 1 of 13 PageID 45
 

 Case 3:00-cv-00022-P Document 19 Filed 04/24/01 Page 2 of 13 PageID 46
 

 Case 3:00-cv-00022-P Document 19 Filed 04/24/01 Page 3 of 13 PageID 47
 

 Case 3:00-cv-00022-P Document 19 Filed 04/24/01 Page 4 of 13 PageID 48
 

 Case 3:00-cv-00022-P Document 19 Filed 04/24/01 Page 5 of 13 PageID 49
 

 Case 3:00-cv-00022-P Document 19 Filed 04/24/01 Page 6 of 13 PageID 50
 

 Case 3:00-cv-00022-P Document 19 Filed 04/24/01 Page 7 of 13 PageID 51
 

 Case 3:00-cv-00022-P Document 19 Filed 04/24/01 Page 8 of 13 PageID 52
 

 Case 3:00-cv-00022-P Document 19 Filed 04/24/01 Page 9 of 13 PageID 53
 

 Case 3:00-cv-00022-P Document 19 Filed 04/24/01 Page 10 of 13 PageID 54
 

 Case 3:00-cv-00022-P Document 19 Filed 04/24/01 Page 11 of 13 PageID 55
 

 Case 3:00-cv-00022-P Document 19 Filed 04/24/01 Page 12 of 13 PageID 56
 

 Case 3:00-cv-00022-P Document 19 Filed 04/24/01 Page 13 of 13 PageID 57
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection
with the Quarterly Report of James River Coal Company (the Company) on Form
10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Samuel M. Hopkins,
II, Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|    |                                                                                                                                                           
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|(1) | The Report fully
  complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
  Exchange Act of 1934; and                                 
|    |                                                                                                                                                           
|(2) | The information
  contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
  financial condition and result of operations of the registrant.

May 11, 2005

| |                                    | 
| | ---------------------------------- | 
| | /s/   Samuel
  M. Hopkins, II     
| |                                    | 
| |                                   
| | Samuel M. Hopkins,
  II           
| | Title:  Chief
  Accounting Officer



---
1744.

#### Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co. *v.*Arnold.

Action for damages, from city court of Atlanta — Judge Reid. January 4, 1909.

Argued April 16,

Decided July 6, 1909.

*Tye, Peeples, Bryan & Jordan,*for plaintiff in error.

*Burton Smith, Lawton Halley,*contra.

Powell, J.

The evidence is such as to authorize the verdict. The trial was free from material error. *Judgment affh-mcd.*
# C_2021182EN.01006701.xml

| 10.5.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 182/67 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.5.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 182/67

---

Order of the General Court of 11 March 2021 — UPL Europe and Indofil Industries (Netherlands) v EFSA

(Case T-162/20) (1)

(2021/C 182/91)

Language of the case: English

The President of the Seventh Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 201, 15.6.2020.

---
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FILED

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION AUS 4 2008
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
) CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT
VS. ) CABE NOY:—3:63-GRp88--42)-
PABLO RIVERA }

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
CONCERNING PLEA OF GUILTY
After reviewing all relevant matters of record, including the Notice Regarding Entry ofa Plea
of Guilty, the Consent of the defendant, and the Report and Recommendation Concerning Plea of
Guilty of the United States Magistrate Judge, and no objections thereto having been filed within ten
days of service in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the undersigned District Judge is of the
opinion that the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge concerning the Plea of Guilty
is correct, and it is hereby accepted by the Court. Accordingly, the Court accepts the plea of guilty,

and Defendant is hereby adjudged guilty. Sentence will be imposed in accordance with the Court's

scheduling order.

SIGNED this / day of As , 2008.