alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
m.1L ·Jtj 

### k**fL~tw.~.ftJ** i8o82£p

·tDt!**J-/JI~** 72 #.sl,cts ?/IJrJ R-t- 2..-**~** ¥o/'17o

2o rl\(#..y Zo 15 ciakvri!<Z/ wx-as 7659 '7 ";:-., rLr.·

, . 11-L-**~~ l2u-·~s~6ll,~J,** **qc~,** .-**~~~** I lfJLLU.. j'L


## d_

# ~ ?L

# CPA~ Cofj

# ~>b fh_j ('(lo/if/V\. 

# 6ur ha,lwA

### t01~**~p~** 

### { 

## cJud Cow.,f

### ~ no.s /uo7-oo{u'fS-SC4); t.vo1-

1J1(g9-5 (.+); tvo'7-119'lo-5(A-) ;·**~** &Jo?-'7 ICJCJo--s C4»J 

### [fd;· d

ll2PV! MawrJ rn)

### Cor~ 

## bruJc;'{j& d.cdt

### ~~·(' C-'J 

# .J**/IR~=-/el!_**

### ~ 

## o{Jf<L A/YlbfFI,_.J fi'L(_' 

## ·kfy£1\R. ;**~b** 

## .J2 rU/4t-4rJ A-

### ·~dtJJe 

## .A-CW'fJq**~on Ae}IJ;~A.d**  

## k tN- 

## J.d**mud~** CL 

## tut:r- 

# -d

J;} 

# W;**ewvJ)p;~** 

## ".; 

## /U_c.u:wJ iA..o**t~ur3** /;v:wlt_j tv) 

# ob ;y-A--**~** 

### 3**~** 

### htWr._**~,MPcc/_y** .rtttJuj ;_)

### ~ f)"( ) 

## f**~(}-:>~** 

### M**~** 

## -tlw**rh{~!:J ~<-e-**  

## .Jk,k 

## !J{/I-L60) oP( !ji7WI 

## £«- a-.,.e( 

# 46ur/s .irJ 

## -tli0**~** 

## -

RECEIVED lN

COURT OF CRIMINAl**A~P~Al$.** MAY 2R 2015

"

. 

# w feJ&tk) 

# zs-:d

-
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Northeast Area
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        
                Northeast Area Cities

                    Washington, D.C.
                            Newark, Delaware
                            Boston, Massachusetts
                            Beltsville, Maryland (BHNRC)
                            Beltsville, Maryland (BARC)
                            Frederick, Maryland
                            Orono, Maine
                            Geneva, New York
                            Ithaca, New York
                            University Park, Pennsylvania
                            Wyndmoor, Pennsylvania
                            Kearneysville, West Virginia
                            Leetown, West Virginia
                            Burlington, Vermont


                    Civil Rights & EEO Policy StatementsSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Northeast Area Docs Poster and Presentation Gallery







Servicesheadline bar  **Special Topic Posters and Documents********Scientific Posters****Slide/Video Presentations**


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
#### Gisele Kamanou, Appellant, v Yvonne Bert, Respondent, et al., Defendant.

[941 NYS2d 260]

In an action to recover damages for defamation and tortious interference with contract, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Lefkowitz, J.), entered May 7, 2010, which, upon the granting of a motion of the defendant Yvonne Bert, in effect, pursuant to CPLR 4401 for judgment as a matter of law, made before the close of the plaintiff’s case, is in favor of the defendant Yvonne Bert and against her dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against that defendant.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion of the defendant Yvonne Bert, in effect, pursuant to CPLR 4401 for judgment as a matter of law is denied, the complaint is reinstated, and a new trial is granted.

The Supreme Court erred in granting the motion of the defendant Yvonne Bert, in effect, pursuant to CPLR 4401 for judgment as a matter of law, and dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against her before the plaintiff presented her case *(see*CPLR 4401). “A motion for judgment as a matter of law is to be made at the close of an opposing party’s case or at any time on the basis of admissions *(see*CPLR 4401), and the grant of such a motion prior to the close of the opposing party’s case generally will be reversed as premature even if the ultimate success of the opposing party in the action is improbable” *(Burbige v Siben & Ferber,*89 AD3d 661, 662 [2011]; *see Canteen v City of White Plains,*165 AD2d 856 [1990]; *Goldstein v C.W. Post Ctr. of Long Is. Univ.,*122 AD2d 196 [1986]; *Cass v Broome County Coop. Ins. Co.,*94 AD2d 822, 823 [1983]; *Page v City of New York,*79 AD2d 573 [1980]). Although the plaintiff, who appeared at trial pro se, advised the Supreme Court that she did not bring any witnesses, the Supreme Court should have afforded her the opportunity to testify with an interpreter and present evidence on her own behalf *(see*CPLR 4512) before granting Bert’s motion for judgment as a matter of law pursuant to CPLR 4401. Therefore, the judgment must be reversed, the motion denied, the complaint reinstated, and a new trial granted.

The plaintiffs remaining contentions either are without merit or not properly before us on this appeal *(see*CPLR 5501 [a] [1]). Dillon, J.P, Angiolillo, Florio and Cohen, JJ., concur.
99.4





CERTIFICATION





I, Douglas R. Muir, certify that:





1.

I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form 8-K containing distribution of servicing
reports filed in respect of periods included in the year covered by this annual report of OMI Trust 2002-A;2.

Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a whole, does not contain any untrue statements of
a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading as of the last day of the period covered by this annual report;3.

Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information required to be provided to the trustee by the
servicer under the pooling and servicing agreement is included in these reports;4.

I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicer under the pooling and servicing agreement and
based upon the review required under the pooling and servicing agreement, and except as disclosed in the report, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the pooling and servicing agreement; and5.

I have disclosed to the registrants certified public accountants all significant deficiencies relating to the
servicers compliance with the minimum servicing standards in accordance with a review conducted in compliance with the Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers or similar standard as set forth in the pooling and servicing
agreement.





Date:

December 30, 2002



By:

/s/  Douglas R. MuirDouglas R. Muir Vice President
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

I, Carl F. Fahrenkrug, Chief Executive Officer of Microwave Filter Company,
Inc. (the Company), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

(1) the quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended June
    30, 2010 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section
    13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or
    78o(d); 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: August 12, 2010                      /s/ Carl F. Fahrenkrug
                                                Carl F. Fahrenkrug
                                                Chief Executive Officer

<page>
                                                                    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

I, Richard L. Jones, Chief Financial Officer of Microwave Filter Company, Inc.
(the Company), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

(1) the quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended June
    30, 2010 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section
    13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or
    78o(d); 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: August 12, 2010                      /s/ Richard L. Jones
                                                Richard L. Jones
                                                Chief Financial Officer
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**





**CERTIFICATION
      ACCOMPANYING PERIODIC REPORT**


**PURSUANT
      TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**





I,
      Kris
      G. Radhakrishnan, Chief Financial Officer of American Achievement Group Holding
      Corp., ACC Group Holding Corp. and American Achievement Corporation (the
“Companies”), hereby certify that:





(1) The
      Annual Report of the Companies on Form 10-K for the year ended August 25, 2007
      (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 Companies as of the
      dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.





Date:
      December 7, 2007





/s/
                KRIS G. RADHAKRISHNAN*Name:*
            *Kris
                G. Radhakrishnan**Title:*
            *Chief
                Financial Officer and Treasurer**(principal
              financial officer)*
# L_2008252EN.01004301.xml

| 20.9.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 252/43 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.9.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 252/43

---

Corrigendum to Commission Regulation (EC) No 913/2008 of 18 September 2008 fixing the export refunds on eggs

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 251 of 19 September 2008
  )

On page 21, recital 5:

for:

‘The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets,’,

read:

‘The Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its Chair,’.

---
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2311

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain high-performance 

loudspeakers. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 11, 2005

Mr. WILSON of South Carolina introduced the following bill; which was 

referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain highperformance loudspeakers.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN HIGH-PERFORMANCE LOUD4 SPEAKERS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.85.20 of the Har6 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

7 certain high-performance loudspeakers) is amended by 

8 striking ‘‘12/31/2006’’ and inserting ‘‘12/31/2008’’. 

9 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

10 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 
2

•HR 2311 IH 

1 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

2 the date of enactment of this Act.

Æ
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory: Beltsville, MD
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                                    Software
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    AIP
                        Home
                                    About
                                    Publications
                                    Software
                                    People
                                    Collaborations
                                    Careers
                                    Centennial
                                    Contact
                                    Dairy industry links
                    DirectionsSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




- ARS National Programs
- Search for a scientific manuscript
- Search for a research project
- ARS Software
- Programs and Projects
- Collaborations
- Subjects of Investigation
- Publications

Publicationsheadline bar AIP Book Chapters
               AIP Conference Proceedings
               AIP Other Contributors
               AIP Popular Media
               AIP Popular Media (1990s)
               AIP Popular Media (2000-2009)
               AIP Publications
               AIP Research Reports
               Presentations
               Old articles


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
#### MURRAY MARCUS, PETITIONER-APPELLANT, v. EASTERN AGRICULTURAL ASSOCIATION, INC., RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.

Argued May 23, 1960

Decided June 6, 1960.

*Mr. William, E. O’Connor, Jr.,*argued the cause for the appellant *(Mr. Henry L. Gertner,*attorney).

*Mr. Brian D. Conlan*argued the cause for the respondent *(Messrs. Gurry and Conlan,*attorneys).

Per Curiam.

The judgment is reversed for the reasons expressed in the dissenting opinion of Judge Conford in the court below.

Mr. Justice Hall votes to affirm the judgment for the reasons expressed in the majority opinion of Judge Mintz.

*For*reversal—Chief Justice Weintbaub, and Justices Burling, Jacobs, Francis, Proctor and Schettino—6.

*For*affirmance—Justice Hall—1.
#### ONONDAGA COUNTY, Respondent, v. STRONG et al., Appellants

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

March 20, 1912.)

Action by Onondaga County against Daniel H. Strong and others.

PER CURIAM.

Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.

McLENNAN, P. J., not voting.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM RADNOR
HOLDINGS CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENITRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-26-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-25-1999
<CASH>                                           3,980
<SECURITIES>                                       593
<RECEIVABLES>                                   34,871
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     30,099
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                79,133
<PP&E>                                         217,252
<DEPRECIATION>                                  28,227
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 289,730
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           50,677
<BONDS>                                        211,802
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                      15,466
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   289,730
<SALES>                                        148,747
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               148,747
<CGS>                                          107,006
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  107,006
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,110
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (957)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (361)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (596)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (596)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 4.4.1


 


August 14, 2009


 


JPMorgan
Special Situations (Mauritius) Limited


c/o
Global Special Opportunities Group Middle Office


26/F Chater House, 8
Connaught Road


Central, Hong Kong


 


Intel Capital
Corporation


c/o
Intel Semiconductor Limited


32/F.,
Two Pacific Place


88
Queensway


Central,
Hong Kong


 


Dear Sir or Madame:


 


We refer to that certain investors’ rights agreement dated as of September 26,
2008 (“Investors’ Rights Agreement”) by and among Li Yi (), Trony Solar Holdings
Company Limited (the “Company”), each of the ordinary holders identified
on schedule 1 therein, JPMorgan Special Situations (Mauritius) Limited and
Intel Capital Corporation (together the “Investors”).


 


The
Company is preparing for an initial public offering of the Company’s securities
(“IPO”) and hereby undertakes:


 


(i)                   to register in the IPO 50% of the
Registrable Securities held by the Investors at the time of the IPO; and


 


(ii)                subsequent to the IPO and subject to the
conditions set out in the Investors’ Rights Agreement, to perform its
obligations to register Registrable Securities held by the Investors as such
obligations are set out in the Investors’ Rights Agreement.


 


At the
request of the Company and subject to the compliance by the Company of the
aforesaid undertakings, each of the Investors, by countersigning this letter, hereby consents that the Company may prepare for and effect the
IPO and take all other actions that the Company deems appropriate in connection
with the IPO.


 

















 


Please
countersign this letter to confirm your agreement and acceptance of the terms
of this letter.


 


Sincerely yours,


TRONY SOLAR HOLDINGS COMPANY LIMITED


 


 


	
  By:

  	
  /s/ Li Yi

  	
   

  
	
  Name: Li Yi

  	
   

  	
   

  
				



 


 


Agreed
and accepted by:


 


J.P. Morgan Securities (Asia Pacific) Limited (as Global
Co-ordinator of the IPO)


 


 


	
  By:

  	
  /s/ Chris Hsieh

  	
   

  
	
  Name: Chris Hsieh

  	
   

  	
   

  
				



 


 


Intel
Capital Corporation


 


 


	
  By:

  	
  /s/ Michael J
  Scown

  	
   

  
	
  Name: 
  Michael J Scown

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Title: 
  Authorized Signatory

  	
   

  	
   

  
				



 


 


JPMorgan
Special Situations (Mauritius) Limited


 


 


	
  By:

  	
  /s/ Nick Barnes

  	
   

  
	
  Name: 
  Nick Barnes

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Title: 
  Executive Director

  	
   

  	
   

  
				



 


2
#### Kerlin Izabel GERONIMO-DONIS, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 10-72020.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted July 12, 2011.*

Filed July 13, 2011.

*315Hector Ricardo Ortega, Ortega, Canossa & Associates, PLC, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner.

Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Gregory Darrell Mack, Esquire, Senior Litigation Counsel, Oil, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Kerlin Izabel Geronimo-Donis, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision, dismissing his appeal of the immigration judge’s denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture.

Geronimo-Donis contends that he was persecuted by gang members who robbed and threatened him. To establish a nexus between the alleged persecution and a protected ground, Geronimo-Davis contends that he was a member of a social group consisting of people who resist criminal threats by gang members, and that his anti-gang position constituted political opinion.

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that Geronimo-Donis failed to establish that any harm he suffered, or fears, from gangs is on account of a protected ground. *See INS v. Elias-Zacarias,*502 U.S. 478, 482-84, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992) (forced recruitment by persecutors seeking to fill their ranks is not necessarily persecution on account of political opinion); *Barrios v. Holder,*581 F.3d 849, 855-56 (9th Cir.2009) (petitioner who resisted gang recruitment did not establish persecution on account of social group or political opinion); *Santos-Lemus v. Mukasey,*542 F.3d 738, 745-47 (9th Cir.2008) (speculative fear of future gang activity and persecution does not serve as a basis for asylum relief). Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because Ger*316onimo-Donis did not establish that it was more likely than not that he will be tortured by or with the acquiescence of the Guatemalan government. *See Silaya v. Mukasey,*524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th Cir.2008).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.