alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2017437EN.01002301.xml

| 18.12.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 437/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.12.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 437/23

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de première instance de Liège (Belgium) lodged on 19 October 2017 — Benoît Sauvage, Kristel Lejeune v État belge

(Case C-602/17)

(2017/C 437/28)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Referring court

Tribunal de première instance de Liège

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Benoît Sauvage, Kristel Lejeune

Applicants:

Defendant: État belge

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Does Article 15(1) of the Convention to prevent double taxation between Belgium and the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg signed on 17 September 1970, interpreted as allowing a restriction on the power of taxation of the source State in respect of the remuneration of an employee residing in Belgium and performing his activity for a Luxembourgish employer in proportion to the activity performed on Luxembourgish territory, interpreted as allowing a power of taxation to be attributed to the State of residence in respect of the amount of remuneration relating to the activity performed outside Luxembourgish territory, interpreted as requiring the employee to be permanently and every day physically present at the seat of his employer when it is not disputed that he regularly travels there as the result of a judicial assessment, conducted with flexibility, on the basis of objective and verifiable evidence and interpreted as requiring courts and tribunals to evaluate the existence and relevance of the services provided there and elsewhere, day by day, with a view to establishing a proportion over 220 business days, infringe Article 45 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union in that it constitutes a tax hindrance which discourages activities across borders and breaches the general principle of legal certainty in that it does not provide for a stable and secure regime of exemption of the entirety of the remuneration received by a Belgian resident employed by an employer whose actual seat is situated in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg and places him at risk of double taxation of all or part of his income and subjects him to an unpredictable legally uncertain regime?

---
#### Harold W. VAN ALLEN, Claimant-Appellant, v. Anthony J. PRINCIPI, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 04-7058.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

DECIDED: April 12, 2004.

Virginia G. Farrier, Principal Attorney, Mark A. Melnick, David M. Cohen, of Counsel, Washington, DC, for Respondent-Appellee.

Harold W. Van Allen, Hurley, NY, pro se.

ORDER

The appellant having failed to file the brief required by Federal Circuit Rule 31(a) within the time permitted by the rules, it is

ORDERED that the notice of appeal be, and the same hereby is, DISMISSED, for failure to prosecute in accordance with the rules.
Case 3:05-cv-02516-BD Document 1 Filed 12/28/05 Page 1 of 6 PageID 1
Case 3:05-cv-02516-BD Document 1 Filed 12/28/05 Page 2 of 6 PageID 2
Case 3:05-cv-02516-BD Document 1 Filed 12/28/05 Page 3 of 6 PageID 3
Case 3:05-cv-02516-BD Document 1 Filed 12/28/05 Page 4 of 6 PageID 4
Case 3:05-cv-02516-BD Document 1 Filed 12/28/05 Page 5 of 6 PageID 5
Case 3:05-cv-02516-BD Document 1 Filed 12/28/05 Page 6 of 6 PageID 6
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

June 24, 2021

No. 04-20-00572-CV

Bobby HOLLY and Dolores Holly,

Appellants

v.

NEWBERRY RANCHES OF TEXAS LLC,

Appellee

From the 63rd Judicial District Court, Val Verde County, Texas

Trial Court No. 34257

Honorable Enrique Fernandez, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Appellee’s brief was originally due May 28, 2021. Appellee’s first motion for extension 

of time was granted, extending the deadline for filing the brief to June 28, 2021. On June 24, 

2021, appellee filed a motion requesting an additional extension of time to file the brief until July 

13, 2021. After consideration, we GRANT the motion and ORDER appellee to file its brief by

July 13, 2021.

_________________________________

Beth Watkins, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 24th day of June, 2021.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
Exhibit 10bii



EXHIBIT 10bii

[FIRST/SECOND] AMENDMENT TO

ANADARKO PETROLEUM CORPORATION 

KEY EMPLOYEE CHANGE OF CONTROL CONTRACT

        THIS AMENDMENT, dated as of April 24, 2003 ("Amendment"), by and between Anadarko Petroleum Corporation, a Delaware corporation ("Anadarko"), and _________________ (the "Executive"), amends the Key Employee Change of Control Contract by and between Anadarko and the Executive, dated as of the ___________ day of _______, [199__/200_], (the "Contract"). Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Contract. 

1.      As permitted by Section 12 of the Contract and effective as of April 24, 2003, the Contract is hereby amended by replacing the last paragraph of Section 5(d) with the following: 
"For purposes of this Section 5(d), any good faith determination of "Good Reason" made by the Executive shall be conclusive. Anything in this Agreement to the contrary notwithstanding, a termination by the Executive for any reason during the 30-day period immediately following the first anniversary of the Effective Date (unless such Effective Date is attributable to the consummation by the Company of a Business Combination which constitutes a Change of Control and as set out in 2(c)(iii), at least a majority of the members of the board of directors of the corporation resulting from such Business Combination were members of the Incumbent Board at the time of the execution of the initial agreement, or of the action of the Board, providing for such Business Combination) shall be deemed to be a termination for Good Reason for all purposes of this Agreement."



2.      As amended hereby, the Contract is specifically ratified and reaffirmed.

        IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be executed this 24th day of April, 2003.

 
ANADARKO PETROLEUM CORPORATION

By:____________________________________

        Charles G. Manley

        Executive Vice President, Administration 













EXECUTIVE

_______________________________________
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Annual Report of International Isotopes, Inc and subsidiaries (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Form 10-K), I, Steve T. Laflin, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, in my capacity as such, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(1)

To my knowledge, the Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and



(2)

The information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.







March 31, 2010

/s/ Steve T. Laflin

Steve T. Laflin

Chief Executive Officer
L.C.M. and J.K. v. SHELBY COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES

2160770

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

February 9, 2018

Affirmed.
Antonio NICHOLS v. ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

2170265

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

January 2, 2018

Dismissed.
# C_2017293EN.01001201.xml

| 4.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 293/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 293/12

---

Appeal brought on 3 May 2017 by Vatseva against the order of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 7 April 2017 in Case T-920/16: Vatseva v European Court of Human Rights

(Case C-231/17 P)

(2017/C 293/16)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Vatseva (represented by: K. Mladenova, advokat)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Court of Human Rights

Other party to the proceedings:

By order of 6 July 2017 the Court of Justice (Eight Chamber) held that the appeal was inadmissible.

---
EX PARTE Eddie D. THOMAS

(In re Eddie Donnell Thomas v. Monica Vanchell Foster)

2170036

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

November 28, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
STATE of Louisiana v. Mark PRIEST

NO. 2019-KO-0418

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 20, 2019

Denied.
Solicitation of Interest: FCSM Interest Group on 

Computational Statistics and the Production of Official 

Statistics (CSPOS)

Effective 2018, the Federal Committee on Statistical Methodology (FCSM) granted permission to 

found and operate a working group on Computational Statistics and the Production of Official 

Statistics (CSPOS) under its umbrella. As a first deliverable, the CSPOS interest group, in 

conjunction with sponsors from Washington Statistical Society and the Interagency R Users 

Group, hosted the first-of-its-kind Government Advances in Statistical Programming (GASP) 

workshop at the Bureau of Labor Statistics in October 2018. The workshop brought together 

producers and consumers of federal data to discuss issues related to access, reproducibility, 

computational strategies, and implementation in the context of official statistics. (A program and 

presentation slides from the event are available at http://washstat.org/presentations/.) The 

initial feedback from the GASP workshop was positive, indicating that the workshop and activities 

related to the discussion of computational statistics in the production environments provide real 

value to the federal statistical community.

Building on the success of GASP, the CSPOS co-chairs would like to extend the invitation to federal 

agencies to participate in regular meetings and activities, and to help shape the direction that 

CSPOS will take in 2019. Membership in this FCSM interest group will be limited to federal civil 

servants, however, contractors and interested parties can provide briefings and participate in 

specific meetings and workshops. Agencies may have more than one participating member; the 

participation of agency IT professionals is highly encouraged. Any topics related to 

computational statistics, and the supporting software, architecture, and implementation needed 

to produce official statistics are in-scope. We foresee a series of monthly meetings in early 2019

to identify the most promising areas to explore, beginning with a kickoff meeting to be held: 

Tuesday, March 5th, from 2:30 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. 

At the Bureau of Labor Statistics 

Janet Norwood Training and Conference Center, Conference Room 3

2 Massachusetts Avenue, NE, Washington, DC 20212

Interested participants should provide their name to Harold Gomes (gomes.harold@bls.gov) no 

later than Friday, March 1st, so that their names can be provided to BLS security. 

Requests for more information can be directed to the CSPOS co-chairs, Nathan Cruze 

(nathan.cruze@nass.usda.gov) and Harold Gomes (gomes.harold@bls.gov), and our FCSM 

liaison, Wendy Martinez (martinez.wendy@bls.gov)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

MARK ANTHONY §

§

Petitioner, §

§

VS. § NO. 3-05-CV-1790-K 

§ 

DAN JOSLIN, Warden, §

FCI-Seagoville §

§

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. 

SO ORDERED this 14th day of November, 2005.

 s/Ed Kinkeade 

ED KINKEADE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 Case 3:05-cv-01790-K Document 9 Filed 11/14/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 96
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 1 8
- 0 667 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v. NATASHA LOPEZ ,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including October 26 , 20 20 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 11 2020

08/11/2020

Case Number: DA 18-0667
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 21
- 0578 CITY OF WHITEFISH,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. ALEXANDRU CURRY,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including April 27, 2022, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

March 21 2022

03/21/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0578
EXHIBIT 32.1




                   CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
              CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER AND CHIEF ACCOUNTING OFFICER
                                   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 Tarpon  Industries,  Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Periodic  Report"),
we,  James W.  Bradshaw,  Chief  Executive  Officer and Active  Chief  Financial
Officer of the Company,  and Matthew Soderman,  Chief Accounting  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 Periodic  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 Periodic Report fairly presents,  in
          all  material  respects,   the  financial  condition  and  results  of
          operations of the Company.


Dated:  November 13, 2006
                                     /s/ James W. Bradshaw
                                    ------------------------------------------
                                    James W. Bradshaw, Chief Executive Officer
                                    and Acting Chief Financial Officer


Dated:  November 13, 2006
                                     /s/ J. Stanley Baumgartner, Jr.
                                    ------------------------------------------
                                    J. Stanley Baumgartner, Jr. Chief Financial
                                    Officer
EX PARTE Anthony TYSON

1160935 (CR-14-0945)

Supreme Court of Alabama.

December 15, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Cert. denied.
Case 3:06-cv-00175-G Document 4 Filed 01/27/06 Page 1 of 3 PageID 86
Case 3:06-cv-00175-G Document 4 Filed 01/27/06 Page 2 of 3 PageID 87
Case 3:06-cv-00175-G Document 4 Filed 01/27/06 Page 3 of 3 PageID 88
Christopher Lee DUNCAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-176

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed April 3, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Lenard Thomas MASTEN, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-2128

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed May 3, 2019.

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and David B. Falstad, Special Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Katie Salemi Ashby, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

KELLY, SLEET, and LUCAS, JJ., Concur.
Non-traditional data 

sources for statistics -

introduction

25 October 2022 

FCSM Research & Policy Conference

Maciej Truszczynski, Statistics Denmark
Agenda 

1. Emissions and Ship Traffic – Dominik Rozkrut, Statistics Poland

2. Nowcasting Global Poverty – Daniel Gerszon Mahler, World Bank

3. Creation of a Composite Quality Indicator for Estimates Based 

on Administrative Data Using Clustering – Roxanne Gagnon, 

Statistics Canada

4. Non-traditional data and statistics – some general aspects –

Maciej Truszczynski, Statistics Denmark

5. Discussion, wrap up and conclusions 
Landscape

 Many ongoing initiatives to produce statistics with ‘non-traditional’ data sources. 

 Some major ‘groups’ of data that form the basis for the calculations: geospatial, 

AIS, mobile phone, scanner.

 Different grades of implementation across countries and organizations – still 

initial phase. 

 No ‘plug and play’ methodology and databases to be used by countries – some 

initiatives with the UN global platform and regional hubs

 The crucial aspect of quality assurance – projects conducted in different 

countries.
Perspective of a statistical institute

 National statistical institutes are subject to various requirements regarding data 

production and quality.

 Different quality frameworks to be complied with: UN Fundamental Principles, 

European Statistics Code of Practice...

 Examples of requirements: professional independence; impartiality and 

objectivity; coherence and comparability.

 Citizen generated data and production of statistics: a possible way forward. 

However, more analysis and adjustment need to be conducted. 
Non-traditional data 

sources for statistics –

some general aspects

Maciej Truszczynski, Statistics Denmark

25 October 2022
General aspects (1)

The scene

Legislative 

framework, 

incl. the 

GDPR

The grass is 

always 

greener... 

Exchange of 

experiences

Promises, 

expectations 

and reality

IT 

infrastructure

Capacity 

challenges
General aspects (2)

Data

Quality, 

continuity and 

adaptation to 

statistical 

needs

Collaboration 

with private 

sector data 

providers

Input vs output 

harmonization

Access, 

dialogue and 

emergencies

...can we afford 

not to go in this 

direction?
Thank you
Case 3:06-cv-00419-M Document 23 Filed 08/15/06 Page 1 of 13 PageID 347
 

 Case 3:06-cv-00419-M Document 23 Filed 08/15/06 Page 2 of 13 PageID 348
 

 Case 3:06-cv-00419-M Document 23 Filed 08/15/06 Page 3 of 13 PageID 349
 

 Case 3:06-cv-00419-M Document 23 Filed 08/15/06 Page 4 of 13 PageID 350
 

 Case 3:06-cv-00419-M Document 23 Filed 08/15/06 Page 5 of 13 PageID 351
 

 Case 3:06-cv-00419-M Document 23 Filed 08/15/06 Page 6 of 13 PageID 352
 

 Case 3:06-cv-00419-M Document 23 Filed 08/15/06 Page 7 of 13 PageID 353
 

 Case 3:06-cv-00419-M Document 23 Filed 08/15/06 Page 8 of 13 PageID 354
 

 Case 3:06-cv-00419-M Document 23 Filed 08/15/06 Page 9 of 13 PageID 355
 

 Case 3:06-cv-00419-M Document 23 Filed 08/15/06 Page 10 of 13 PageID 356
 

 Case 3:06-cv-00419-M Document 23 Filed 08/15/06 Page 11 of 13 PageID 357
 

 Case 3:06-cv-00419-M Document 23 Filed 08/15/06 Page 12 of 13 PageID 358
 

 Case 3:06-cv-00419-M Document 23 Filed 08/15/06 Page 13 of 13 PageID 359
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 Horizon Lines, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for
the period ending June 22, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), I, Charles G. Raymond, President and Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:(1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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.
 /s/ CHARLES G. RAYMONDCharles G. RaymondPresident and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

LUBBOCK DIVISION

BARBARA SUE TABOR, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, )

Commissioner of Social Security, )

) Civil Action No. 5:05-CV-236-C

Defendant. ) ECF

ORDER

Plaintiff is appealing an adverse decision of the Defendant, Jo Anne B. Barnhart,

Commissioner of Social Security, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The United States Magistrate

Judge filed her Report and Recommendation on June 13, 2006. No written objections have been

filed. It is, therefore,

ORDERED that the findings and conclusions in the Report and Recommendation are

hereby ADOPTED as the findings and conclusions of the Court and that the above-styled and

-numbered cause is hereby reversed and remanded to the Commissioner for further proceedings.

Dated this 12th day of July, 2006.

_________________________________

SAM R. CUMMINGS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 

 Case 5:05-cv-00236-C Document 22 Filed 07/12/06 Page 1 of 1 PageID 80
# C_2017402EN.01001102.xml

| 27.11.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 402/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.11.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 402/11

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundespatentgericht (Germany) lodged on 5 September 2017 — LN

(Case C-527/17)

(2017/C 402/13)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Bundespatentgericht

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: LN

Applicant:

Defendant: Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Must Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 concerning the supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products (1) be interpreted as meaning that, for the purposes of that regulation, an authorisation under Directive 93/42/EEC (2) for a combined medical device and medicinal product within the meaning of Article 1(4) of Directive 93/42/EEC is to be treated as a valid marketing authorisation under Directive 2001/83/EC (3), where, as part of the authorisation procedure laid down in Annex I, Section 7.4, first paragraph, to Directive 93/42/EEC, the quality, safety and usefulness of the medicinal product component has been verified by the medicinal products authority of a Member State in accordance with Directive 2001/83/EC?

1

2

3

---

(1)  OJ L 152, p. 1.

1

(2)  Council Directive 93/42/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning medical devices (OJ 1993 L 169, p. 1).

2

(3)  Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 November 2001 on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use (OJ 2001 L 311, p. 67).

3

---