alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Ten Most Wanted Fugitives

The FBI is offering rewards for information leading to the apprehension of the Ten Most Wanted Fugitives. Select the images of suspects to display more information.

- DONALD EUGENE FIELDS II Sex Trafficking of Children
- VITEL'HOMME INNOCENT Conspiracy to Commit Hostage Taking; Hostage Taking; Conspiracy to Commit Hostage Taking Resulting in Death; Attempted Hostage Taking Resulting in Death
- RUJA IGNATOVA Conspiracy to Commit Wire Fraud; Wire Fraud; Conspiracy to Commit Money Laundering; Conspiracy to Commit Securities Fraud; Securities Fraud
- OMAR ALEXANDER CARDENAS Unlawful Flight to Avoid Prosecution - Murder
- YULAN ADONAY ARCHAGA CARIAS Racketeering Conspiracy (RICO); Cocaine Importation Conspiracy; Possession of Machine Guns; Conspiracy to Possess Machine Guns
- WILVER VILLEGAS-PALOMINO Narco-Terrorism; International Cocaine Distribution Conspiracy; International Cocaine Distribution
- ALEJANDRO ROSALES CASTILLO Unlawful Flight to Avoid Prosecution - Murder
- BHADRESHKUMAR CHETANBHAI PATEL Unlawful Flight to Avoid Prosecution - First Degree Murder, Second Degree Murder, First Degree Assault, Second Degree Assault, Dangerous Weapon with Intent to Injure
- ARNOLDO JIMENEZ Unlawful Flight to Avoid Prosecution - First Degree Murder
- Ten Most Wanted Fugitives FAQ The following contains current and historical information for internal and external distribution. This information is based on FBI records and is updated by the Investigative Publicity and Public Affairs Unit, Office of Public Affairs.
- ALEXIS FLORES Unlawful Flight to Avoid Prosecution - Kidnapping, Murder
- Ten Most Wanted Fugitives Historical Pictures A compilation of the photos and profiles of wanted individuals from across the history of the FBI's Top Ten Most Wanted Program.
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 Lakeside  Mortgage Fund, LLC
(the  "Company"),  on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30,  2006,  as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I, Placido H. Canta,  Chief Financial Officer of Lakeside Financial Group, Inc.,
the Manager of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.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; and

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

Dated:   August 11, 2006             /S/
                                     ----------------------------------
                                     Placido H. Canta,
                                     Chief Financial Officer of Manager
                                     Lakeside Financial Group, Inc.
Paul MICHELIN, Appellant, v. Louisa MICHELIN, Appellee.

No. 4D18-2474

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[April 4, 2019]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       YEAR                    YEAR         
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1998  
<PERIOD-END>                        DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1998  
<CASH>                               95,757,371              54,724,484  
<SECURITIES>                                  0                       0  
<RECEIVABLES>                         9,786,837               9,582,815  
<ALLOWANCES>                                  0                       0  
<INVENTORY>                           6,264,549               6,324,191  
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                    112,066,634              91,175,100  
<PP&E>                              331,122,400             442,180,977  
<DEPRECIATION>                      (38,114,058)            (50,314,383) 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                      491,881,769             541,142,004  
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                25,994,144              64,782,939  
<BONDS>                             349,667,769             344,740,630  
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         0                       0  
<PREFERRED>                                   0                       0  
<COMMON>                                     10                      10  
<OTHER-SE>                         (133,940,235)           (132,870,876) 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>        491,881,769             541,142,004  
<SALES>                              65,628,307              78,947,025  
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                     73,678,663              86,645,202  
<CGS>                                26,245,012              25,583,482  
<TOTAL-COSTS>                        37,824,923              42,492,432  
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                     12,992,872              13,856,576  
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              0                       0  
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                   55,329,157              57,199,458  
<INCOME-PRETAX>                     (32,468,289)            (26,903,264) 
<INCOME-TAX>                                  0             (25,000,000) 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                 (32,468,289)             (1,903,264) 
<DISCONTINUED>                                0                       0  
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               0                       0  
<CHANGES>                                     0                       0  
<NET-INCOME>                        (32,468,289)             (1,903,264) 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 0                       0  
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 0                       0  
                                                                         

</TABLE>
Case 3:04-cv-01442-B Document 1 Filed 07/06/04 Page 1 of 17 PageID 1
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01442-B Document 1 Filed 07/06/04 Page 2 of 17 PageID 2
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01442-B Document 1 Filed 07/06/04 Page 3 of 17 PageID 3
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01442-B Document 1 Filed 07/06/04 Page 4 of 17 PageID 4
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01442-B Document 1 Filed 07/06/04 Page 5 of 17 PageID 5
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01442-B Document 1 Filed 07/06/04 Page 6 of 17 PageID 6
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01442-B Document 1 Filed 07/06/04 Page 7 of 17 PageID 7
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01442-B Document 1 Filed 07/06/04 Page 8 of 17 PageID 8
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01442-B Document 1 Filed 07/06/04 Page 9 of 17 PageID 9
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01442-B Document 1 Filed 07/06/04 Page 10 of 17 PageID 10
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01442-B Document 1 Filed 07/06/04 Page 11 of 17 PageID 11
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01442-B Document 1 Filed 07/06/04 Page 12 of 17 PageID 12
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01442-B Document 1 Filed 07/06/04 Page 13 of 17 PageID 13
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01442-B Document 1 Filed 07/06/04 Page 14 of 17 PageID 14
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01442-B Document 1 Filed 07/06/04 Page 15 of 17 PageID 15
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01442-B Document 1 Filed 07/06/04 Page 16 of 17 PageID 16
 

 Case 3:04-cv-01442-B Document 1 Filed 07/06/04 Page 17 of 17 PageID 17
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 16, 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 January 8, 2025, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 1279 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-1101, K2025-1100.                

Sean C. Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2025-00928 Filed 1-15-25; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
# C_2018083EN.01001201.xml

| 5.3.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 83/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.3.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 83/12

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud (Czech Republic) lodged on 15 December 2017 — D. H. v Ministerstvo vnitra

(Case C-704/17)

(2018/C 083/18)

Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Referring court

Nejvyšší správní soud

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: D. H.

Applicant:

Defendant: Ministerstvo vnitra

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Does the interpretation of Article 9 of Directive 2013/33/EU (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ 2013 L 180, p. 96) in conjunction with Articles 6 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union preclude national legislation which does not allow the Nejvyšší správní soud (Supreme Administrative Court) to review a judicial decision concerning detention of a foreign national after the foreign national has been released from detention?

1

---

(1)  OJ 2013 L 180, p. 96.

1

---
Keith CANADY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-5372

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 17, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Case 5:05-cv-00025-C Document 15 Filed 10/27/05 Page 1 of 12 PageID 59
 

 Case 5:05-cv-00025-C Document 15 Filed 10/27/05 Page 2 of 12 PageID 60
 

 Case 5:05-cv-00025-C Document 15 Filed 10/27/05 Page 3 of 12 PageID 61
 

 Case 5:05-cv-00025-C Document 15 Filed 10/27/05 Page 4 of 12 PageID 62
 

 Case 5:05-cv-00025-C Document 15 Filed 10/27/05 Page 5 of 12 PageID 63
 

 Case 5:05-cv-00025-C Document 15 Filed 10/27/05 Page 6 of 12 PageID 64
 

 Case 5:05-cv-00025-C Document 15 Filed 10/27/05 Page 7 of 12 PageID 65
 

 Case 5:05-cv-00025-C Document 15 Filed 10/27/05 Page 8 of 12 PageID 66
 

 Case 5:05-cv-00025-C Document 15 Filed 10/27/05 Page 9 of 12 PageID 67
 

 Case 5:05-cv-00025-C Document 15 Filed 10/27/05 Page 10 of 12 PageID 68
 

 Case 5:05-cv-00025-C Document 15 Filed 10/27/05 Page 11 of 12 PageID 69
 

 Case 5:05-cv-00025-C Document 15 Filed 10/27/05 Page 12 of 12 PageID 70
Benjamin Eric BROCK v. Jaime Shae BROCK

2160998

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

December 20, 2017

Dismissed.
Case 1:04-cv-00219-C Document 26 Filed 07/14/06 Page 1 of 5 PageID 56
 

 Case 1:04-cv-00219-C Document 26 Filed 07/14/06 Page 2 of 5 PageID 57
 

 Case 1:04-cv-00219-C Document 26 Filed 07/14/06 Page 3 of 5 PageID 58
 

 Case 1:04-cv-00219-C Document 26 Filed 07/14/06 Page 4 of 5 PageID 59
 

 Case 1:04-cv-00219-C Document 26 Filed 07/14/06 Page 5 of 5 PageID 60
EXHIBIT 10.10.BB


 


DEBT CONVERSION AGREEMENT


 


THIS DEBT
CONVERSION AGREEMENT (the “Agreement”) is made and entered into effective as of
the 22nd day of July, 2003, by and between ANTHONY
M. FRANK, TTEE, ANTHONY M. FRANK DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLAN, UNDER AGREEMENT
DATED 12/01/98, FBO:  SHIRLEY M. PEGG,
(hereinafter referred to as “Buyer”) and ELECTROPURE, INC., a California
corporation (hereinafter referred to as “Electropure” or the “Company”).


 


R E C I T A L S


 


WHEREAS, Buyer
loaned the Company Four Hundred Thousand Dollars ($400,000) under the terms of
that certain 8% Convertible Term Note dated September 16, 2001 (the “Term
Note”).


 


WHEREAS, as of
June 30, 2003, a total of $8,000.00 in interest accrued under the above Term
Note is due and payable to Buyer by the Company.


 


WHEREAS, Buyer
wishes to convert all of the interest accrued on the Term Note through June 30,
2003 into shares of Electropure, Inc. Common Stock and the Company wishes to
issue such shares to extinguish the debt owed Buyer.


 


NOW, THEREFORE,
in consideration of the foregoing and of the mutual obligations herein
contained, it is agreed as follows:


 


1.             CONVERSION


 


(a)           On the effective date set forth
above, Buyer hereby converts all of the $8,000.00 in interest accrued on the
Term Note into Shares of Electropure, Inc. Common Stock, $0.01 par value, at an
effective conversion rate of $0.20 per share, for a total of 40,000 Shares (the
“Shares”).


 


(b)           The Shares shall have the rights,
preferences, privileges, restrictions and other terms set forth in the By-laws
of the Company.


 


(c)           Upon conversion hereby and pursuant
to the Debt Conversion Agreement previously entered into between the parties,
Buyer acknowledges that all interest accrued and due through June 30, 2003
pursuant to the terms of the 8% Convertible Term Note entered into between the
parties on September 16, 2002 has been satisfied in full and that any default
by Electropure for failure to pay interest due on the Term Note through June
30, 2003 has been cured.


 


2.             REPRESENTATIONS
AND WARRANTIES OF BUYER           Buyer represents and warrants to the Company:


 


1
EXHIBIT 32.2

PRB GAS TRANSPORTATION, INC.
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION

In connection with this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of PRB Gas Transportation, Inc. for the fiscal quarter ended
June 30, 2005, I, William P. Brand, Jr., Vice President of PRB Gas 
Transportation, Inc., hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

| | 1. | This Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended
  June 30, 2005 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 this Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended

  June 30, 2005 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of PRB Gas Transportation, Inc. for the periods presented therein.

Date:
August 15, 2005

|                              |  | 
|----------------------------- |  | 
|/s/ William P. Brand, Jr.     |  | 
|                              |  | 
|William P. Brand, Jr.         |  | 
|Vice President - Finance      |  | 
|(Principal Financial Officer) |  |
#### E. J. Ricou and I. L. Ricou, Partners, Trading and Doing Business as E. J. Ricou & Son, *Plaintiffs in Error,*v. Linen Thread Company, a Corporation, *Defendant in Error.*

Division B.

Decision Filed November 25, 1927.

*Abbott <& Gaulden,*for Plaintiffs in Error;

*Herbert Ü. Feibelman,*for Defendant in Error.

Per Curiam.

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

Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.
Case 3:05-cr-00075-N Document 418 Filed 03/21/06 Page 1 of 1 PageID 836
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

TIMOTHY WAYNE DENNIE §

§

Petitioner, §

§

VS. § NO. 3-05-CV-0822-N

§ 

DOUGLAS DRETKE, Director § (Consolidated With:

Texas Department of Criminal Justice, § No. 3-05-CV-0823-N)

Correctional Institutions Division §

§

Respondent. §

ORDER

After conducting a review of the pleadings, files and records in this case, and the Findings

and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §

636(b)(1), I am of the opinion that the Findings and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge are

correct and they are hereby accepted as the Findings of the Court. 

Signed May 18, 2006.

 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 Case 3:05-cv-00822-N Document 23 Filed 05/18/06 Page 1 of 1 PageID 179
Alan Jerome CROTZER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-4154

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 15, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
---

Exhibit 32.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Garuda Capital
  Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended
  March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
  date hereof (the “Report”), I, C. Robin Relph, Chief Executive
  Officer and Chief Financial 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:

| | 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.

By: /s/C. Robin Relph 
  C. Robin Relph, 
  Chief Executive Officer and 
  Chief Financial Officer 
  May 23, 2005

---
# C_2019093EN.01001301.xml

| 11.3.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 93/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.3.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 93/13

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 23 January 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — Walbusch Walter Busch GmbH & Co. KG v Zentrale zur Bekämpfung unlauteren Wettbewerbs Frankfurt am Main eV

(Case C-430/17) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Consumer protection - Directive 2011/83/EU - Distance contracts - Article 6(1)(h) - Obligation to provide information on the right of withdrawal - Article 8(4) - Contract concluded through a means of distance communication which allows limited space or time to display the information - Meaning of ‘limited space or time to display the information’ - Brochure inserted in a periodical - Mail order coupon containing a hyperlink referring to information on the right of withdrawal))

(2019/C 93/16)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Walbusch Walter Busch GmbH & Co. KG

Defendant: Zentrale zur Bekämpfung unlauteren Wettbewerbs Frankfurt am Main eV

Operative part of the judgment

The assessment of whether, in a specific case, the means of communication allows limited space or time to display the information, in accordance with Article 8(4) of Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, must be carried out having regard to all of the technical features of the trader’s marketing communication. In that regard, it falls to the national court to ascertain whether, having regard to the space and time occupied by the communication and the minimum size of the typeface which is appropriate for the average consumer targeted by that communication, all the information set out in Article 6(1) of that directive may objectively be displayed within that communication.

Article 6(1)(h) and Article 8(4) of Directive 2011/83 must be interpreted to the effect that, in a situation where the contract is concluded through a means of distance communication which allows limited space or time to display the information, and where a right of withdrawal exists, the trader is required to provide the consumer, on the means of communication in question and before the conclusion of the contract, with information regarding the conditions, time limit and procedures for exercising that right. In such a situation, that trader must provide the consumer with the model withdrawal form, as provided for in Annex I(B) to that directive, by another source in plain and intelligible language.

---

(1)  OJ C 347, 16.10.2017.

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-7169

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

JAMES EDWARD ELLERBE,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior

District Judge. (5:97-cr-00100-BR)

Submitted: October 11, 2007 Decided: October 18, 2007

Before MICHAEL and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James Edward Ellerbe, Appellant Pro Se. John Samuel Bowler,

Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

James Edward Ellerbe appeals the district court’s order

denying his motion for production of documents. We have reviewed

the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm

for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v.

Ellerbe, No. 5:97-cr-00100-BR (E.D.N.C. July 10, 2007). 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