alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Quinnteris D. BUSSIE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-1803

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

January 22, 2019

Candice K. Brower, Criminal Conflict & Civil Regional Counsel, and Michael J. Titus, Assistant Regional Conflict Counsel, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Ashley Brooke Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

In this appeal pursuant to *Anders v. California* , 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), we affirm the revocation of Appellant's probation and the resulting sentence, but remand for the trial court to enter a corrected written order specifying that the Appellant only admitted violating the conditions of probation as alleged in the affidavit of violation of probation. *See**Altman v. State* , 252 So.3d 426, 426 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018) (citing to *Margolis v. State* , 148 So.3d 532, 532 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014) (affirming revocation of probation and resulting sentence, but remanding for entry of corrected revocation order of listing only the conditions of probation to which the defendant admitted); *Narvaez v. State* , 674 So.2d 868, 869 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996) (noting that written order of revocation must comport with oral pronouncement, and remanding with instructions to strike from the order violations neither admitted to nor found by the court). Appellant need not be present for this correction.

AFFIRMED , but REMANDED for correction.

Wolf, Lewis, and Wetherell, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED BY


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the report on Form 10-Q of PetroHunter Energy Corporation (the “Company”) for the nine months ended June 30, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted by 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 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.





Date: August 14, 2012
/s/ Martin B. Oring


Martin B. Oring


Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
Case 3:04-cv-00875-B Document 1 Filed 04/26/04 Page 1 of 8 PageID 1
Case 3:04-cv-00875-B Document 1 Filed 04/26/04 Page 2 of 8 PageID 2
Case 3:04-cv-00875-B Document 1 Filed 04/26/04 Page 3 of 8 PageID 3
Case 3:04-cv-00875-B Document 1 Filed 04/26/04 Page 4 of 8 PageID 4
Case 3:04-cv-00875-B Document 1 Filed 04/26/04 Page 5 of 8 PageID 5
Case 3:04-cv-00875-B Document 1 Filed 04/26/04 Page 6 of 8 PageID 6
Case 3:04-cv-00875-B Document 1 Filed 04/26/04 Page 7 of 8 PageID 7
Case 3:04-cv-00875-B Document 1 Filed 04/26/04 Page 8 of 8 PageID 8
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 760 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 760

Expressing support for the designation of July 10, 2024, as Journeyman 
                      Lineworkers Recognition Day.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 10, 2024

 Ms. Cortez Masto (for herself and Mr. Cramer) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Expressing support for the designation of July 10, 2024, as Journeyman 
                      Lineworkers Recognition Day.

Whereas the United States relies on safe, reliable, affordable, and clean 
        electricity to power its economy, as well as homes, businesses, 
        industries and manufacturers, colleges and universities, schools, 
        hospitals, cities, and communities, and so much more;
Whereas journeyman lineworkers play a critical role in keeping the United States 
        energy grid running 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year;
Whereas journeyman lineworkers perform heroic services during national and 
        regional disasters, including hurricanes, wildfires, tornadoes, and ice 
        storms, and also work in tough terrain, extreme heat, and cold areas of 
        the country;
Whereas journeyman lineworkers consistently work long hours often under 
        dangerous conditions to restore power;
Whereas journeyman lineworkers put their lives on the line every day to ensure 
        the delivery of safe and reliable power to the United States, and its 
        territories;
Whereas July 10, 2024, marks the 128th anniversary of the death of Henry Miller, 
        the first president of the International Brotherhood of Electrical 
        Workers, who was killed in the line of duty while trying to restore 
        electricity during an outage in Washington, D.C.; and
Whereas there should be a day to honor the hundreds of thousands of men and 
        women who have also put their lives on the line over the past 128 years 
        to provide skillful service in times of local or national crisis: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate--
            (1) supports the designation of July 10, 2024, as 
        Journeyman Lineworkers Recognition Day;
            (2) honors and recognizes the contributions and sacrifices 
        of countless journeyman lineworkers who often place themselves 
        in harm's way to serve their customers and their communities; 
        and
            (3) encourages the people of the United States to observe 
        Journeyman Lineworkers Recognition Day with appropriate 
        reflection.
                                 <all>
```
#### Mrs. George Kohn, et al., *Appellants,*v. L. Jonas & Company, *Appellee.*

Division A.

Decision Filed July 14, 1927.

*Whitalcer Brothers,*for Appellants;

*Altman & Morrow,*for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of *259the 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 decree; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and decreed by the Court that the said decree of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

Ellis, C. J., and Strum and Brown, J. J., concur.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         January 7, 2025.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 26, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 1206 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-1004, K2025-1003.                

Sean C. Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2025-00032 Filed 1-6-25; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
# C_2016118EN.01003701.xml

| 4.4.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 118/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.4.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 118/37

---

Appeal brought on 17 February 2016 by Carlo de Nicola against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 18 December 2015 in Case F-82/12 De Nicola v EIB

(Case T-71/16 P)

(2016/C 118/42)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Carlo de Nicola (Strassen, Luxembourg) (represented by: G. Ferabecoli, lawyer)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Investment Bank

Other party to the proceedings:

Form of order sought by the appellant

Form of order sought by the appellant

The appellant claims that the Court should:

| — | Uphold the present appeal and, partially reversing the judgment under appeal, annul points 2 and 3 of the operative part, together with paragraphs 68 to 75 of the judgment itself; |
| --- | --- |

—

Uphold the present appeal and, partially reversing the judgment under appeal, annul points 2 and 3 of the operative part, together with paragraphs 68 to 75 of the judgment itself;

| — | Consequently, order the EIB to compensate Dr De Nicola for the damage suffered, as requested in the application initiating proceedings or, in the alternative, refer the case to another Chamber of the Civil Service Tribunal in order that it may, in a different formation, give a fresh decision on the annulled paragraphs; |
| --- | --- |

—

Consequently, order the EIB to compensate Dr De Nicola for the damage suffered, as requested in the application initiating proceedings or, in the alternative, refer the case to another Chamber of the Civil Service Tribunal in order that it may, in a different formation, give a fresh decision on the annulled paragraphs;

| — | Order the European Investment Bank to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the European Investment Bank to pay the costs.

Grounds of appeal and main arguments

Grounds of appeal and main arguments

The present appeal is brought against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (single Judge) of 18 December 2015 in De Nicola v European Investment Bank (F-82/12).

De Nicola

European Investment Bank

The grounds of appeal and main arguments are similar to those relied on in Case T-55/16 P De Nicola v European Investment Bank.

De Nicola

European Investment Bank

The appellant argues, in particular, that the claim for damages in Case F-82/12 was wrongly treated as equivalent to the claim for damages in Case F-55/08, and that there was an incorrect finding of res judicata regarding some of the requests for compensation.

res judicata

---
Shawn M. MATZEN, Appellant, v. Rene M. MATZEN, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-3741

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 22, 2019.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Exhibit 10.3


 





AMENDMENT NO. 3


TO 


EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


 


This
Amendment No. 3 to the Employment Agreement (“Amendment”), dated September 26, 2016, is by and between Drone
Aviation Holding Corp., a Nevada corporation with an address 11651 Central Parkway #118, Jacksonville, FL 32224 (the “Company”),
and Felicia Hess (the “Executive”).


 


WHEREAS, the parties entered
into an Employment Agreement on May 18, 2015 (the “Employment Agreement”); and


 








WHEREAS, the parties entered
into an Amendment No. 1 on October 2, 2015 (Hess Amendment No. 1); and


 


WHEREAS, the parties entered
into an Amendment No. 2 on April 27, 2016 (Hess Amendment No. 2); and


 


WHEREAS, the parties wish
to further amend the Employment Agreement as set forth below, with the understanding that all other provisions of the Employment
Agreement shall remain unchanged;


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration
of the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, the parties hereto agree as follows:


 


	1.	Section 3 of the Employment Agreement- Term of Employment- is hereby extended  from May
18, 2018 to December 31, 2018.




 


	2. 	The terms and conditions of all other sections of the Employment Agreement shall
remain unchanged and in full force and effect.




 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed
this agreement as of the date first stated above.


 





	 	DRONE
    AVIATION HOLDING CORP.
	 	 	 
	 	By:
     	/s/
    Kendall W. Carpenter
	 	Name:
    	Kendall
    W. Carpenter
	 	Title:
    	Chief
    Financial Officer
	 	 	 
	 	By:	/s/
    Felicia Hess
	 	Name:
    	Felicia
    Hess
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

RONALD DEE SMITH, ID # 1056446, )

Petitioner, )

vs. ) No. 3:04-CV-1240-P

) ECF

NATHANIEL QUARTERMAN, 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 and any 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 are correct and they are accepted as the Findings

and Conclusions of the Court.

SIGNED this 18 day of April 2007. th

_________________________________

JORGE A. SOLIS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 Case 3:04-cv-01240-P Document 24 Filed 04/18/07 Page 1 of 1 PageID 120
EXHIBIT 4.21 AMENDMENT TO MINING LEASE AND OPTION TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT THIS AMENDING AGREEMENT made the 3rd day of December, 2013, AMONG: Max Resource, Inc., a corporation pursuant to the laws of Nevada (the Lessee) - and - Max Resource Corp., a corporation pursuant to the laws of Alberta (ParentCo) - and - Claremont Nevada Mines LLC, a limited liability company pursuant to the laws of Nevada (Claremont) - and - JR Exploration LLC, a limited liability company pursuant to the laws of Utah (JRE) (together Claremont and JRE may be referred to herein as the Owners and individually each as an Owner) RECITALS:  A. The Lessee, ParentCo, Clarement and JRE entered into a Mining Lease and Option to Purchase Agreement dated as of December 3, 2012 (the Original Agreement); B. The Parties wish to amend the Confidentiality Agreement in the manner set forth below; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and covenants contained in this Agreement, the Parties agree as follows: 1. All capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein have the meaning ascribed to them in the Original Agreement. 2. Subparagraph 5.1.1(b) of the Original Agreement is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: 5.1.1(b) (i) $40,000 on the first anniversary of the Effective Date; and (ii) $160,000 on or before February 15, 2014. 3. Except as expressly amended herein, the Original Agreement is hereby ratified, approved and confirmed to be in full force and effect. 4. Time is of the essence of this Amendment Agreement.   -2- 5. This Amending Agreement is governed by and will be construed in accordance with the laws of the state of Nevada and the federal laws of the United States of America applicable therein.  Each Party irrevocably attorns to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of Nevada with respect to any matter arising under or relating to this Amending Agreement. 6. This Amending Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts each of which will be deemed to be an original, and all of which taken together will be deemed to constitute one and the same instrument. This Amending Agreement may be executed and delivered by electronic means and each of the Parties may rely on such electronic execution as though it were an original hand-written signature IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Parties have executed this Amending Agreement. MAX RESOURCE, INC.Per:/s/ Stuart RogersName: Stuart RogersTitle: President  MAX RESOURCE CORP.Per:/s/ Stuart RogersName: Stuart RogersTitle: President  CLAREMONT NEVADA MINES LLCPer:/s/ E.L. HunsakerName: E. L. Hunsaker IIITitle:  President  JR Exploration LLCPer:/s/ Rick EversonName: Rick EversonTitle:  Manager
Exhibit 10.4



CONSENT



This CONSENT is given as of April 24, 2003 by ASHANTI GOLDFIELDS COMPANY LIMITED, a Ghana corporation (AGC), and ASHANTI GOLDFIELDS TEBEREBIE
LIMITED, a Cayman Islands corporation (Ashanti and, together with AGC, the Ashanti Entities).



Reference is made to that certain Purchase Agreement dated as of May 11, 2000, as amended as of March 19, 2003 (the Stock Purchase Agreement),
by and among AGC, Ashanti, Pioneer Asset Management USA Inc. (formerly The Pioneer Group, Inc.) and Pioglobal Goldfields II Limited (formerly Pioneer Goldfields II Limited) (Pioglobal), pursuant to which Ashanti
purchased from Pioglobal all of the outstanding shares of capital stock of Pioneer Goldfields Limited. Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Stock Purchase Agreement.



Pursuant to Section 2.3(f) of the Stock Purchase Agreement, Pioglobal may
assign its right to receive Supplemental Payments thereunder with the prior written consent of Ashanti.



The Ashanti Entities have been informed by Pioglobal and HSBC Bank USA (Bank), that Pioglobal intends to sell, assign and transfer to Bank,
all of Pioglobals right, title and interest to the remaining Supplemental Payments to be made by Ashanti under the Stock Purchase Agreement (the Purchased Interest), effective upon the execution and delivery of this Consent by the
Ashanti Entities.



Each of the Ashanti Entities hereby
acknowledges that the Stock Purchase Agreement is in full force and effect and, other than the amendment dated as of March , 2003 to the Stock Purchase Agreement and the Note delivered by
Ashanti to Pioglobal pursuant to Section 2.3(c) of the Stock Purchase Agreement, the Stock Purchase Agreement has not been modified, changed, altered, supplemented, amended or terminated in any respect.



Each of the Ashanti Entities hereby consents to the assignment, sale,
conveyance, transfer and delivery by Pioglobal to Bank of the Purchased Interest.



Each of the Ashanti Entities hereby irrevocably agrees that it shall hereafter make payment in respect of the Supplemental Payments directly to Bank or to its order, and shall otherwise treat Bank (and its successors
and assigns) as the Seller under the Stock Purchase Agreement with respect to the payment of Supplemental Payments, including, without limitation, under Sections 2.3(d), 2.3(e), 2.3(f) and 18.6 of the Stock Purchase Agreement, and that
Bank may enforce its rights to receive such payments directly against Ashanti or AGC, as the case may be.





|ASHANTI GOLDFIELDS COMPANY LIMITED |  | ASHANTI GOLDFIELDS TEBEREBIE LIMITED
|---------------------------------- |  | ------------------------------------
|                                   |  |                                     
|By:                                |  | /s/ Sam E. Jonah                    
|Name:                              |  | Sam E. Jonah                        
|Title:                             |  | Chief Executive
# C_2021471EN.01004601.xml

| 22.11.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 471/46 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.11.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 471/46

---

Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2021 — LP v Parliament

(Case T-519/20) (1)

(Civil service - Accredited parliamentary assistants - Refusal to offer employment - Conditions of employment - Character references - Manifest error of assessment - Due diligence)

(2021/C 471/64)

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Applicant: LP (represented by: J. Bosquet and G. Op de Beeck, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: C. González Argüelles and J. Van Pottelberge, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking annulment of the decision of the Parliament of 22 October 2019 rejecting the applicant’s application for employment.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders LP to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders LP to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 348, 19.10.2020.

---
# C_2022037EN.01003101.xml

| 24.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/31

---

Order of the General Court of 22 November 2021 — Garment Manufacturers Association in Cambodia v Commission

(Case T-454/20) (1)

(Action for annulment - Common commercial policy - Generalised arrangement of preferential customs tariffs established by Regulation (EU) No 978/2012 - Temporary withdrawal of trade preferences applicable to certain products originating in Cambodia for reason of serious and systematic violations of human rights - Lack of direct concern - Lack of individual concern - Inadmissibility)

(2022/C 37/42)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Garment Manufacturers Association in Cambodia (Phnom Penh, Cambodia) (represented by: C. Borelli, S. Monti and C. Ziegler, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Biolan and E. Schmidt, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for the partial annulment of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/550 of 12 February 2020, amending Annexes II and IV to Regulation (EU) No 978/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the temporary withdrawal of the arrangements referred to in Article 1(2) of Regulation (EU) No 978/2012 in respect of certain products originating in the Kingdom of Cambodia (OJ 2020 L 127, p. 1).

Operative part of the order

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

1.

The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

| 2. | Garment Manufacturers Association in Cambodia is ordered to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Garment Manufacturers Association in Cambodia is ordered to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 287, 31.8.2020.

---