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

The FBI has 56 field offices (also called divisions) centrally located in major metropolitan areas across the U.S. and Puerto Rico. They are the places where we carry out investigations, assess local and regional crime threats, and work closely with partners on cases and operations.

- Los Angeles City Covered: Los Angeles. Along with our main office in Los Angeles, we have 10 satellite offices, known as resident agencies, in the area.
- Tampa Counties Covered: Hernando, Hillsborough, and Pasco. Along with our main office, we have six satellite offices, known as resident agencies, in the area.
- St. Louis Counties Covered: Jefferson, Lincoln, St. Charles, St. Louis, and Warren. Along with our main office in St. Louis, we have three satellite offices in the area.
- Springfield Counties Covered: Adams, Brown, Cass, Christian, DeWitt, Greene, Logan, Macoupin, Mason, Menard, Montgomery, Morgan, Pike, Sangamon, Schuyler, and Scott.
- Seattle County Covered: King. Along with our main office in Seattle, we have nine satellite offices, known as resident agencies, in the state.
- San Juan Covers Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
- San Francisco Counties Covered: Marin, Napa, San Francisco, and San Mateo. Along with our main office in San Francisco, we have seven satellite offices in the area.
- San Diego Counties Covered: San Diego (except areas covered by the North County Resident Agency). Along with our main office in San Diego, we have two satellite offices.
- San Antonio Counties Covered: Atascosa, Bandera, Bexar, Comal, Frio, Gillespie, Gonzalez, Guadalupe, Karnes, Kendall, Kerr, Kimble, Mason, Medina, Real, Uvalde, and Wilson.
- Salt Lake City Counties Covered: Morgan, Salt Lake, Summit (western section), Tooele, and Wasatch. Along with our main office in Salt Lake City, we have 18 satellite offices.
- Sacramento Along with our main office in Sacramento, we have eight satellite offices, known as resident agencies, in the area.
- Richmond Covers most of the state of Virginia—82 counties and 24 independent cities—except Northern Virginia and the Eastern Shore.
- Portland Counties Covered: Clackamas, Clatsop, Columbia, Hood River, Multnomah, and Washington. Along with our main office in Portland, we have five satellite offices.
- Pittsburgh County Covered: Allegheny. Along with our main office in Pittsburgh, we have nine satellite offices, known as resident agencies, in the area.
- Phoenix Counties and Territories Covered: Gila, Maricopa, and Pinal; Ak-Chin, Ft. McDowell, Gila River, Salt River, San Carlos, and Tonto-Apache Indian Reservations.
Exhibit 99.1

Nalco Holding Company and Subsidiaries
Segment Information
2007 Results Reclassified to Conform with 2008 Presentation
(Unaudited)

(dollars in millions)


Three Months
ended
March 31,
2007


Three Months
ended
June 30,
2007


Three Months
ended
September 30,
2007


Three Months
ended
December 31,
2007


Year
ended
December 31,
2007Industrial and Institutional Services



$
404.4




$
432.7




$
449.1




$
467.3




$
1,753.5Energy Services




294.4





316.7





326.7





341.2





1,279.0Paper Services




186.7





194.8





195.9





200.6





778.0Other




23.8





26.7





26.5





25.0





102.0Net Sales



$
909.3




$
970.9




$
998.2




$
1,034.1




$
3,912.5Segment direct contribution:Industrial and Institutional Services



$
85.1




$
93.6




$
98.2




$
97.7




$
374.6Energy Services




62.0





74.5





71.1





78.5





286.1Paper Services




26.3





31.9





31.6





32.2





122.0Other




(22.5
)




(27.2
)




(18.3
)




(22.1
)




(90.1
)Capital charge elimination




20.1





20.9





22.0





23.2





86.2Total segment direct contribution




171.0





193.7





204.6





209.5





778.8Expenses not allocated to segments:Administrative expenses




53.6





52.5





51.0





68.1





225.2Amortization of intangible assets




15.2





15.4





15.6





15.9





62.1Business optimization expenses




—





2.3





7.2





5.8





15.3Operating earnings




102.2





123.5





130.8





119.7





476.2Other income (expense), net




(0.3
)




—





(1.9
)




(2.6
)




(4.8
)Interest income




2.6





1.9





2.7





1.9





9.1Interest expense




(68.3
)




(68.2
)




(69.1
)




(68.4
)




(274.0
)Earnings before income taxes and minority interests



$
36.2




$
57.2




$
62.5




$
50.6




$
206.5


Note: Reclassifications made to 2007 results to conform with 2008 presentation included:

|  |                                                                                                                                                     
|- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|• | Results in India and Japan that had been previously reported in the Other segment are now reported as part of the three primary end-market segments.

|  |                                                                                                                                    
|- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|• | The transfer of certain petrochemical and emerging markets customers from Industrial and Institutional Services to Energy Services.

---
**Exhibit 31.1**

**Certification Under Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

****

I, Graham Millington, being the President and Chief Executive Officer of Sea Sun Capital Corporation, certify that:

- I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2004.		      - Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 and is not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report; and		        - Based on my knowledge, the financial statements and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for the periods presented in this annual report.		          - The registrant’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 registrant and have:		            Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;			
- Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of his/her annual report (the “Evaluation Date”); and			       Presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;			
The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):		
- All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,            					summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrants auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and			       Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls; and			
The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have indicated in this annual report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date or our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.		
Dated:  July 15, 2005/s/  Graham Millington_________				Graham Millington
Case 3:04-cv-01554-BD Document 77 Filed 05/31/06 Page 1 of 3 PageID 783
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01554-BD Document 77 Filed 05/31/06 Page 2 of 3 PageID 784
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01554-BD Document 77 Filed 05/31/06 Page 3 of 3 PageID 785
Case 3:03-cv-02619-K Document 1 Filed 10/24/03 Page 1 of 12 PageID 1
Case 3:03-cv-02619-K Document 1 Filed 10/24/03 Page 2 of 12 PageID 2
Case 3:03-cv-02619-K Document 1 Filed 10/24/03 Page 3 of 12 PageID 3
Case 3:03-cv-02619-K Document 1 Filed 10/24/03 Page 4 of 12 PageID 4
Case 3:03-cv-02619-K Document 1 Filed 10/24/03 Page 5 of 12 PageID 5
Case 3:03-cv-02619-K Document 1 Filed 10/24/03 Page 6 of 12 PageID 6
Case 3:03-cv-02619-K Document 1 Filed 10/24/03 Page 7 of 12 PageID 7
Case 3:03-cv-02619-K Document 1 Filed 10/24/03 Page 8 of 12 PageID 8
Case 3:03-cv-02619-K Document 1 Filed 10/24/03 Page 9 of 12 PageID 9
Case 3:03-cv-02619-K Document 1 Filed 10/24/03 Page 10 of 12 PageID 10
Case 3:03-cv-02619-K Document 1 Filed 10/24/03 Page 11 of 12 PageID 11
Case 3:03-cv-02619-K Document 1 Filed 10/24/03 Page 12 of 12 PageID 12
Case 2:04-cv-00293-J Document 16 Filed 10/07/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 107
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-1306

MAMADOU ALPHA BARRY,

 Petitioner,

v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration 

Appeals.

Submitted: October 17, 2013 Decided: October 29, 2013

Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Alexander J. Segal, GRINBERG & SEGAL, P.L.L.C., New York, New 

York, for Petitioner. Stuart F. Delery, Acting Assistant 

Attorney General, Daniel E. Goldman, Senior Litigation Counsel, 

Puneet Cheema, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, 

D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Mamadou Alpha Barry, a native and citizen of Guinea, 

petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration 

Appeals affirming without opinion the Immigration Judge’s 

decision finding Barry ineligible for adjustment of status as an 

alien who knowingly made a frivolous application for asylum. 

Based on our review of the record, we conclude that the 

preponderance of the evidence supports the agency’s finding that 

Barry filed a frivolous asylum application. See Matter of Y-L-, 

24 I. & N. Dec. 151, 157 (B.I.A. 2007). Accordingly, we deny 

the petition for review. We dispense with oral argument because 

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process. 

PETITION DENIED
Exhibit 10.20


 








SECOND AMENDMENT TO SECURITIES PURCHASE AGREEMENT


This Second Amendment to Securities Purchase Agreement (this "Amendment"), dated as of September 23, 2016, is entered into by and among Leo Motors, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the "Company"), and BOU Trust (the "Purchaser").


RECITALS:


A. On May 17, 2016, the Company entered into a securities purchase agreement (the "Purchase Agreement") pursuant to which the Company has the right to issue and sell to Purchaser from time to time, and Purchaser is obligated to purchase from the Company, up to $10,000,000 worth of shares of the Company's common stock, as more fully described in the Purchase Agreement.  Capitalized terms used herein and not defined herein shall have the meanings given to them in the Purchase Agreement.


B. On August 3, 2016, the Company and Purchaser entered into that First Amendment to the Purchase Agreement.


C. The Company and the Purchaser desire to further amend the Purchase Agreement, as amended, as set forth herein.


AGREEMENTS


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and mutual promises contained herein and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and legal sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged and intending to be legally bound hereby, the parties agree as follows:


1. The definition of "VWAP" in Section 1.1 of the Purchase Agreement is hereby amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows:


"'VWAP' means, for any date, the price determined if the Common Stock is then listed or quoted on a Trading Market, the daily volume weighted average price of the Common Stock for such date (or the nearest preceding date) on the Trading Market on which the Common Stock is then listed or quoted for trading as reported by Bloomberg Financial L.P. (based on a Trading Day from 9:30 a.m. (New York City time) to 4:02 p.m. (New York City time)."


2. Except as modified herein, the terms of the Purchase Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.


3. This Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which when so executed shall be deemed to be an original and shall be binding upon all parties, their successors and assigns, and all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same Amendment.  A signature delivered by facsimile shall constitute an original.


[Signature Page Follows]











[SIGNATURE PAGE TO AMENDMENT TO SECURITIES PURCHASE AGREEMENT]


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of the date set forth above.












LEO MOTORS, INC., a Nevada corporation












By: /s/ Shi Chul Kang


Name: Shi Chul Kang


Title: Co-Chief Executive Officer

















By: /s/ Jeong Youl Choi


Name: Jeong Youl Choi


Title: Co-Chief Executive Officer




  







BOU TRUST












By: /s/ Alan Uryniak


Name: Alan Uryniak


Title: Trustee
# C_2016462EN.01002701.xml

| 12.12.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 462/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.12.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 462/27

---

Action brought on 6 October 2016 — La Patrouille v EUIPO — Alpha Industries (AEROBATIX)

(Case T-710/16)

(2016/C 462/35)

Language in which the application was lodged: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: La Patrouille (Pantin, France) (represented by: A. Lakits-Josse, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Alpha Industries, Inc. (Chantilly, Virginia, United States of America)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Applicant for the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark containing the word element ‘AEROBATIX’ — Application for registration No 13 285 952

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Procedure before EUIPO

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 July 2016 in Case R 2344/2015-5

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision inasmuch as it rejected the mark applied for in respect of the goods ‘clothing, shoes; headgear’ and authorise registration of the mark applied for in respect of those goods; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision inasmuch as it rejected the mark applied for in respect of the goods ‘clothing, shoes; headgear’ and authorise registration of the mark applied for in respect of those goods;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

Pleas in law

| — | Lack of likelihood of confusion |
| --- | --- |

—

Lack of likelihood of confusion

| — | The Board of Appeal based its finding of a likelihood of confusion, in essence, on the alleged intellectual resemblances, yet they do not immediately strike the consumer. |
| --- | --- |

—

The Board of Appeal based its finding of a likelihood of confusion, in essence, on the alleged intellectual resemblances, yet they do not immediately strike the consumer.

| — | The Board of Appeal disregarded the importance of the word element AEROBATIX which, taken together with the figurative element, is sufficient to remove all likelihood of confusion. |
| --- | --- |

—

The Board of Appeal disregarded the importance of the word element AEROBATIX which, taken together with the figurative element, is sufficient to remove all likelihood of confusion.

---
# C_2019399EN.01000301.xml

| 25.11.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 399/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.11.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 399/3

---

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 24 September 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État — France) — Google LLC, successor in law to Google Inc. v Commission nationale de l’informatique et des libertés (CNIL)

(Case C-507/17) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Personal data - Protection of individuals with regard to the processing of such data - Directive 95/46/EC - Regulation (EU) 2016/679 - Internet search engines - Processing of data on web pages - Territorial scope of the right to de-referencing)

(2019/C 399/03)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil d’État

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Google LLC, successor in law to Google Inc.

Defendant: Commission nationale de l’informatique et des libertés (CNIL)

In the presence of: Wikimedia Foundation Inc., Fondation pour la liberté de la presse, Microsoft Corp., Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and Others, Article 19 and Others, Internet Freedom Foundation and Others, and Défenseur des droits

Operative part of the judgment

On a proper construction of Article 12(b) and subparagraph (a) of the first paragraph of Article 14 of Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and of Article 17(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data and repealing Directive 95/46 (General Data Protection Regulation), where a search engine operator grants a request for de-referencing pursuant to those provisions, that operator is not required to carry out that de-referencing on all versions of its search engine, but on the versions of that search engine corresponding to all the Member States, using, where necessary, measures which, while meeting the legal requirements, effectively prevent or, at the very least, seriously discourage an internet user conducting a search from one of the Member States on the basis of a data subject’s name from gaining access, via the list of results displayed following that search, to the links which are the subject of that request.

---

(1)  OJ C 347, 16.10.2017.

---
Exhibit 32.1

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350,as adopted Pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of American Lorain Corporation (the Company) for the period ended March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Si Chen, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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) 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: May 15, 2009

/s/ Si ChenSi Chen 
Chief Executive Officer

---
Exhibit32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

William H. Joyce, Chairmanand Chief Executive Officer of Nalco Finance Holdings LLC("Nalco") and Bradley J. Bell, Executive VicePresident and Chief Financial Officer of Nalco, in conjunction with thefiling of Nalco's 10-Q financial report (the"Report") with the Securities and ExchangeCommission, covering the calendar quarter ending September 30, 2005,hereby certify as follows:

|          |                                                                                           |
|----------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| a.  | The Reportfully complies with the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, and |

|          |                                                                                                                                     |
|----------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| b.  | The information in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations for Nalco. |

|  | /s/WILLIAM H.JOYCE                                 WilliamH. Joyce Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Date: November10, 2005 |
|--|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|  | /s/ BRADLEY J.BELL                                    Bradley J. Bell Executive Vice President and Chief FinancialOfficer Date: November 10, 2005 |
|--|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

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

|Calgary AB T2P 4B9 | Internetwww.kpmg.ca
|------------------ | -------------------



To the Board of Directors of Enterra Energy Corp., as Administrator of Enterra Energy Trust

We consent to the use of our report, dated March 29, 2006, included in the Amendment No.1 to the Form 40-F.

We also consent to the incorporation by reference of such report in the registration statements (No. 333-129601) on Form F-10, (No. 333-113609 and 333-115318) of Form F-3 and (No. 333-120996) on Form S-8 of Enterra Energy Trust.

[kpmgconsent002.gif]

Chartered Accountants Calgary, Canada

March 29, 2006

KPMG LLP, a Canadian limited liability partnership is the Canadianmember firm of KPMG International, a Swiss cooperative