alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2021098EN.01000601.xml

| 22.3.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 98/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.3.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 98/6

---

Appeal brought on 11 December 2020 by Colin Brown against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 5 October 2020 in Case T-18/19, Brown v Commission

(Case C-675/20 P)

(2021/C 98/07)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Colin Brown (represented by: I. Van Damme, advocaat)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission and Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

| — | set aside the judgment under the appeal not to annul the contested decision (1); |
| --- | --- |

—

set aside the judgment under the appeal not to annul the contested decision (1);

| — | conclude, on the basis of the complete record before it, that the contested decision should be annulled and order that the appellant’s entitlement to the expatriation allowance and travel expenses should be restored with effect from 1 December 2017 and that the allowances which were not paid between 1 December 2017 and the date of re-establishment of the appellant’s entitlement be paid to the appellant with interest; and |
| --- | --- |

—

conclude, on the basis of the complete record before it, that the contested decision should be annulled and order that the appellant’s entitlement to the expatriation allowance and travel expenses should be restored with effect from 1 December 2017 and that the allowances which were not paid between 1 December 2017 and the date of re-establishment of the appellant’s entitlement be paid to the appellant with interest; and

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs incurred by the appellant before the Court and the General Court. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs incurred by the appellant before the Court and the General Court.

Pleas in law and main arguments

First plea in law, alleging that the General Court erred in interpreting Article 4(1)(a) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations as to permit or require the removal of an official’s entitlement to an expatriation allowance on account of his obtaining the nationality of his place of employment, absent a change in the place of employment of the official.

Second plea in law, alleging that the application of Article 4(1)(b) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations to the appellant by the General Court in its judgment, and the Commission in the contested decision, gives rise to unjustified discrimination.

---

(1)  Decision of 19 March 2018 of the Office for the Administration and Payment of Individual Entitlements withdrawing the appellant’s entitlement to the expatriation allowance and the payment of travel expenses with effect from 1 December 2017.

---
| 1. | Act                with honesty and integrity, ethically handling any actual or potential                conflicts between his personal, private interests and the interests                of                Trend, avoiding improper personal benefits as a result of his                position. |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | Perform                responsibilities with a view to causing periodic reports filed with                the                SEC or other public communications by Trend to contain disclosures                which                are accurate, timely, complete and                understandable. |
|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 3. | Comply                with federal, state and local laws and regulations applicable to                Trend. |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 4. | Take                appropriately prompt action to report violations of this Code to                the                proper person or persons. |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 5. | Be                accountable for adherence to this                Code. |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 6. | Maintain                accurate financial record keeping. |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------|

| 7. | Refrain                from taking any action that fraudulently influences, coerces, manipulates,                or misleads any independent public or certified accountant engaged                in the                performance of an audit of the financial statements of Trend for                the                purpose of rendering such financial statements materially                misleading. |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----

----

----
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

AUTHER W. CALLICUT, §

§

Petitioner, §

§ Civil Action No. 3:03-CV-1525-M

v. §

§

NATHANIEL QUARTERMAN, Director §

Texas Department of Criminal Justice, §

Correctional Institutions Division, §

§

Respondent. §

___________________________________ §

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

After making an independent review of the pleadings, files and records in this case, and the

Order of the United States Magistrate Judge, dated October 10, 2008, denying the Petitioner’s

“Motion to Have the Court’s Order Reflect the Veracity of Facts Supported by the Records,” the

Court finds that the Order of the Magistrate Judge is correct and it is accepted as the Findings and

Conclusions of the Court.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Findings in the Order of the United States

Magistrate Judge, dated October 10, 2008, are accepted.

SO ORDERED this 2nd day of December, 2008.

_________________________________

BARBARA M. G. LYNN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
Exhibit 99

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


In connection with the Quarterly Report of AlphaRx, Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the
period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof, Michael Lee, as chief executive officer and chief
financial officer of AlphaRx, Inc., do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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) of the
      Exchange Act; and

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


/s/ Michael Lee
-------------------------
Michael Lee
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
February 17, 2003


30
[kpmgconsent002.gif]

|                               |           |       |         
|------------------------------ | --------- | ----- | --------
|KPMG LLP
Chartered Accountants | Telephone | (403) | 691-8000
|2700-205 5th Avenue SW         | Fax       | (403) | 691-8008

|                   |          |            
|------------------ | -------- | -----------
|Calgary AB T2P 4B9 | Internet | www.kpmg.ca



Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Directors of Enterra Energy Corp. as Administrator of Enterra Energy Trust

We consent to the inclusion in this annual report on Form 40-F of our auditors' report dated March 23, 2007 on the consolidated balance sheets of Enterra Energy Trust as at December 31, 2006 and 2005, and the consolidated statements of earnings (loss) and deficit and cash flow for each of the years in the two-year period ended December 31, 2006.

We also consent to the incorporation by reference of our report in the Registration Statement (No. 333-129601) on Form F-10, in the Registration Statement (No. 333-120996) on Form S-8 and in the Registration Statements (No. 333-113609 and No. 333-115318) on Form F-3 of the Trust.

[kpmgconsent004.gif]

Chartered Accountants Calgary, Canada

March 30, 2007

KPMG LLP, a Canadian owned limited liability partnership, is the Canadianmember firm of KPMG International, a Swiss association
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 OmniReliant Holdings, Inc. (the
      "Company") on Form 10-QSB/A for the quarter ended September 30, 2007 as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
      I, Paul Morrison, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
      Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)
      The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities and 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.





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      OmniReliant Holdings, Inc. and will be retained by OmniReliant Holdings, Inc.
      and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
      request.





October
      1, 2008




/s/ Paul MorrisonChief
              Executive Officer,Chief
              Financial Officer
Tait LUNDQUIST, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Karen LUNDQUIST, et al., Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-4569

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

February 26, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Tyrone TERRY, DOC# 527778, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-1120

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed February 1, 2019

Affirmed.
* Pursuant to 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-30801

DORREL TRICHE; WAYNE VICKNAIR; RUSSELL WEBRE, Plaintiffs - Appellants - Cross-Appellees,

versus

OVERNITE TRANSPORTATION COMPANY Defendant - Appellee - Cross-Appellant

and

NALCO CHEMICAL CO

Defendant - Third Party Plaintiff Appellee - Appellant,

versus

BLUE GRASS CHEMICAL SPECIALTIES LP Third Party Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court For the Eastern District of Louisiana

(95-CV-691)

August 8, 1997

Before REYNALDO G. GARZA, HIGGINBOTHAM, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Plaintiffs’ counsel have fo rcefully urged the inadequacy of

the damage awards. We are not, however, persuaded that the awards2

are so inadequate that we must reverse and remand for a new trial.

Rather, they fall within a permissible range, albeit on the low

side. We are pointed to no other reversible error in the record,

and we affirm the judgment of the district court. Each side will

bear their own costs of this appeal.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

MICHAEL ALLEN BITER, ID # 1012208, )

Petitioner, )

vs. ) No. 3:03-CV-0685-D

 )

DOUGLAS DRETKE, Director, )

Texas Department of Criminal )

Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, )

Respondent. )

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

After reviewing all relevant matters of record in this case, including the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge, the objections raised thereto,

the Supplemental Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate

Judge, and the objections thereto, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the undersigned

District Judge is of the opinion that the Findings and Conclusions of the Magistrate Judge, as

supplemented, are correct and they are accepted as the Findings and Conclusions of the Court.

SIGNED March 30, 2006.

_________________________________

SIDNEY A. FITZWATER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 Case 3:03-cv-00685-D Document 38 Filed 03/30/06 Page 1 of 1 PageID 214
# C_2021452EN.01004001.xml

| 8.11.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 452/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.11.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 452/40

---

Order of the General Court of 5 August 2021 — DK Company v EUIPO — Hunter Boot (DENIM HUNTER)

(Case T-387/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Withdrawal of the application for registration - No need to adjudicate)

(2021/C 452/49)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: DK Company A/S (Ikast, Denmark) (represented by: S. Hansen, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Gája, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Hunter Boot Ltd (Edinburgh, United Kingdom)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 April 2020 (Case R 849/2018-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Hunter Boot and DK Company.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action;

| 2. | DK Company A/S shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO). |
| --- | --- |

2.

DK Company A/S shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

---

(1)  OJ C 262, 10.8.2020.

---
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-24-00294-CV

Appellant, LeAnn Marie Hilton// Cross-Appellant, Andrea Skola

v.

Appellee, Andrea Skola// Cross-Appellee, LeAnn Marie Hilton

FROM THE 250TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

NO. D-1-GN-23-002920, THE HONORABLE MAYA GUERRA GAMBLE, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

PER CURIAM

On May 31, 2024, this Court granted Appellant and Cross-Appellee LeeAnn 

Marie Hilton’s agreed motion to abate this appeal until July 1, 2024, to allow the trial court 

to rule on a pending post-judgment motion to modify. Hilton has now filed a suggestion of 

bankrutpcy. See Tex. R. App. P. 8.1. We therefore reinstate this appeal, lift our prior abatement,

and now abate this appeal until a party files a motion to reinstate or a motion to sever. See id. 

R. 8.2, 8.3. Hilton is ordered to inform this Court of the resolution of the bankruptcy proceeding 

or some other event that would allow this appeal to be reinstated. Should she fail to provide such 

notice, the appeal will be subject to dismissal for want of prosecution on this Court’s or another 

party’s motion. See id. R. 42.3(b), (c).
Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Triana and Kelly

Bankruptcy

Filed: May 25, 2024
EXHIBIT 10.1






EXTENSION AGREEMENT


EXTENSION AGREEMENT dated as of September 19, 2016 between Strata Skin Sciences, Inc. (the "Company"), a Delaware corporation, and Jeffrey F. O'Donnell, Sr. (the "Consultant") effective as of October 1, 2016 (the "Effective Date").


Recitals:


The parties entered into a Consulting Agreement dated as of November 4, 2015, which was amended as of July 20, 2016, (the "Agreement"), under which the Consultant provided consulting services to the Company.  The Consulting Agreement continued in effect through September 30, 2016.  The parties wish to extend the term of the Agreement through December 31, 2016, as provided in this Amendment.


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and covenants set forth herein, and intending to be legally bound hereby, the parties agree as follows:


1. Section 3 of the Agreement is hereby amended to extend the termination date of the Agreement to December 31, 2016.


2. The parties acknowledge and agree that all of the terms, provisions, covenants and conditions of the Agreement shall hereafter continue in full force and effect in accordance with their terms, except to the extent amended, modified or revised herein.


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







STRATA SKIN SCIENCES, INC.












	
By:

	 /s/ David K. Stone                                                    	 	 /s/ Jeffrey F. O'Donnell, Sr.                                
	 	
David K. Stone, Chair

	 	
Jeffrey F. O'Donnell, Sr.


	 	
Nominating and Governance Committee
i i i i i i



### MEM ORA ND UM OP INION

No. 04-09-00187- CV I n the I ntere st of D.D. , et al., Children , Fr om the 407th J udicial District Court, Be x ar County , Texas

Trial Court No. 2007-PA-01580 Honora ble Charles E. Monte may or , J udg e Presiding PER CU RI AM Sitt ing: Kar en Ang elini , J ustice

Sandee B ry an Mar ion , J ustice Phy lis J . Speedlin , J ustice Deliver ed and F iled: May 20, 2009 APPEAL DI SMI SSED Appellant Sare tha Davis has filed a docketing statement in which she move s for dismissal of this appea l. No op p o sition t o the motion has been f iled. We gr ant the motion and dismiss t he appea l. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 42.1(a) . Costs of appeal a re ta x ed ag ainst appellant. See id. 42.1(d). PER CU RI AM
Eric MARSHALL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-1666

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed February 8, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Exhibit
32.1




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


Rule
15d-14(b) and 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 NGP Capital Resources Company (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008, 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:  November
10, 2008





By:
                /s/ John H. HomierJohn
      H. HomierPresident
      and Chief Executive
Officer
EXHIBIT 31.1: Rule 13a-14(a) Certification

I, Jon DeYoung, certify that:

       1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Centale,
Inc.;

       2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does 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, the financial statements, and other
financial information included in this  report, fairly present in all
material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash
flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented
in this  report;

       4.  The small business issuer's other certifying officers and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the
small business issuer and have:

       a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,
to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer,
including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others
within those entities, particularly during the period in which this
report is being prepared;

       b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's
disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our
conclusions 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 in the small business
issuer's internal controls over financial reporting that occurred during
the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business
issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

       5.  The small business issuer's other certifying officers and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controls over
financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit
committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):

       a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which
are reasonably likely to  adversely affect the small business issuer's
ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;
and

       b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's
internal controls over financial reporting.

Date: August 21, 2006                 /s/ Jon DeYoung
                                      ------------------------------------
                                      Jon DeYoung, Chief Executive Officer
EX PARTE J.S.

(In re: the Adoption Petition of E.S.H. and S.M.H.)

2160868

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

August 18, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. dismissed.