alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                      5
<CIK>                          0000715369
<NAME>                         DYCO OIL AND GAS PROGRAM 1983-2 LTD PSHIP

<S>                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                 JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                   MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                            159,289
<SECURITIES>                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                      34,282
<ALLOWANCES>                            0
<INVENTORY>                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                  193,571
<PP&E>                         31,344,950
<DEPRECIATION>                 31,267,589
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                    316,851
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>              68,153
<BONDS>                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                   0
<PREFERRED>                             0
<COMMON>                                0
<OTHER-SE>                        206,813
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>      316,851
<SALES>                            52,623
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                   53,937
<CGS>                                   0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                      44,894
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                     9,043
<INCOME-TAX>                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                 9,043
<DISCONTINUED>                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                         0
<CHANGES>                               0
<NET-INCOME>                        9,043
<EPS-BASIC>                          1.40
<EPS-DILUTED>                           0



</TABLE>
# C_2021098EN.01002301.xml

| 22.3.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 98/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.3.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 98/23

---

Judgment of the General Court of 3 February 2021 — Mutondo v Council

(Case T-119/19) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - Freezing of funds - Retention of the applicant’s name on the lists of persons covered - Obligation to state reasons - Right to be heard - Proof that inclusion and retention on the lists is well founded - Manifest error of assessment - Continuation of the factual and legal circumstances which led to the adoption of the restrictive measures - Right to private and family life - Presumption of innocence - Proportionality - Plea of illegality)

(2021/C 98/24)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Kalev Mutondo (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, A. Guillerme and T. Payan, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Hix, H. Marcos Fraile, S. Van Overmeire and M.-C. Cadilhac, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment, first, of Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/1940 of 10 December 2018 amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2018 L 134, p. 47) and, second, Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1931 of 10 December 2018 implementing Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against persons acting in violation of the arms embargo with regard to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2018 L 314, p. 1), in so far as those acts concern the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Mr Kalev Mutondo to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Kalev Mutondo to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 139, 15.4.2019.

---
# C_2019263EN.01003202.xml

| 5.8.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 263/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.8.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 263/32

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Riigikohus (Estonia) lodged on 29 May 2019 — Maksu- ja Tolliamet v Heavyinstall OÜ

(Case C-420/19)

(2019/C 263/38)

Language of the case: Estonian

Referring court

Riigikohus

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Maksu- ja Tolliamet

Defendant: Heavyinstall OÜ

Question referred

Is Article 16 of Council Directive 2010/24/EU of 16 March 2010 concerning mutual assistance for the recovery of claims relating to taxes, duties and other measures (1) to be interpreted as meaning that the court of the Member State which has received the request for precautionary measures, when ruling on that request on the basis of national law (which is possible for the requested court under the first sentence of Article 16), is bound to the view taken by the court of the State of establishment of the applicant in relation to the necessity and possibility of the precautionary measure when a document containing that view has been submitted to the court (last sentence of the second subparagraph of Article 16[(1)], according to which this document shall not be subject to any recognition, supplementing or replacement in the requested Member State)?

---

(1)  OJ 2010 L 84, p. 1.

---
#### In the Matter of Jada Dorithah Solay McC., a Child Alleged to be Neglected. Crystal Delores McC., Appellant; Edwin Gould Services for Children and Families, Respondent.

[944 NYS2d 118]-

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Monica Drinane, J.), entered on or about April 18, 2011, which, upon a fact-finding determination of permanent neglect, terminated respondent mother’s parental rights to the subject child, and placed her in the custody of petitioner agency and the Commissioner of Social Services for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Clear and convincing evidence established that despite diligent efforts on the part of the agency, respondent failed to complete her service plan by failing to complete drug treatment. Respondent continually failed to attend intake appointments set up via the agency’s numerous referrals. Respondent’s actions evinced a failure to plan for the child’s return, thereby demonstrating permanent neglect within the meaning of the *616Social Services Law *(see Social Services Law*§ 384-b [7] [a]; *Matter of Fernando Alexander B. [Simone Anita W.],*85 AD3d 658, 659 [2011]; *Matter of Adaliz Marie R. [Natividad G.],*78 AD3d 409, 410 [2010]).

In addition, a preponderance of the evidence established that it is in the child’s best interest that respondent’s parental rights be terminated so that the child could be freed for adoption *(see Matter of Star Leslie W.,*63 NY2d 136, 147-148 [1984]). Respondent still had not completed a drug treatment program by the time of disposition. Meanwhile, the child, who was removed from respondent’s care six days after birth, is now over three years old, and has lived virtually her entire life in the same preadoptive foster home with her other siblings. In addition, the foster parents, who wish to adopt the child, have been tending to her special needs and she has been thriving in their care. Under such circumstances, a suspended judgment is not appropriate *(see e.g. Matter of Jayden C. [Michelle R.],*82 AD3d 674, 675 [2011]; *Matter of Omar Saheem Ali J. [Matthew J.],*80 AD3d 463 [2011]). Concur — Tom, J.P., Andrias, Renwick, DeGrasse and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.
Exhibit 10.2


 





 


100 Constellation Way


Baltimore, MD 21202-3106


 


December 9,
2009


 


Charles
A. Berardesco, Esq.


General
Counsel, Chief Compliance Officer,


Corporate
Secretary and Senior Vice President


Constellation
Energy Group, Inc.


100
Constellation Way


Baltimore,
Maryland 21202


 


Re:          Waiver of Change in Control Severance
Agreement


 


Dear
Charlie,


 


I
hereby irrevocably and unconditionally consent to the termination of my Second
Amended and Restated Change in Control Severance Agreement with Constellation
Energy Group, Inc. (the “Company”), dated December 31, 2008.  From and after the date hereof, such
agreement is null and void and neither I nor the Company has any further rights
or obligations thereunder.


 


	
   

  	
  Sincerely,

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  /s/
  Michael J. Wallace

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Michael
  J. Wallace

  



 


 


ACKNOWLEDGED: 
CONSTELLATION ENERGY  GROUP, INC.


 


 


	
  By:

  	
  /s/ Charles A. Berardesco

  	
   

  	
  Date: December 9, 2009

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Name: Charles A. Berardesco

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Title: Senior Vice President and General
  Counsel
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 846 Referred in House (RFH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 846

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 27, 2011

     Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
   To designate the United States courthouse located at 80 Lafayette 
 Street in Jefferson City, Missouri, as the Christopher S. Bond United 
                           States Courthouse.

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

SECTION 1. CHRISTOPHER S. BOND UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE.

    (a) Designation.--The United States courthouse located at 80 
Lafayette Street in Jefferson City, Missouri, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Christopher S. Bond United States Courthouse''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the United States 
courthouse referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a 
reference to the ``Christopher S. Bond United States Courthouse''.

            Passed the Senate July 26, 2011.

            Attest:

                                                NANCY ERICKSON,

                                                             Secretary.
```
Exhibit
32.1

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

In connection
with the Quarterly Report of Vascular Solutions, Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2009, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Howard Root, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify to my knowledge, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. §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.

| |                          | 
| | ------------------------ | 
| | /s/ Howard
 Root        
| | Howard Root             
| | Chief
 Executive Officer
| | April 16,
 2009         

---
`Exhibit 10.19


                              Contract to Serve on
                       GenoMed's Scientific Advisory Board


Date: 12/11/02



By my signature below I agree to serve as a member of the Scientific Advisory
Board (SAB) of GenoMed, LLC; (the "Company").


I understand and agree that my commitment to the Company is limited to the
following items:


     a. From time to time, to provide advice, consultation or assistance via
telephone conversation, email or FAX.

     b. To provide GenoMed with my curriculum vitae, of which a brief summary,
subject to my final editorial consent, will be included on GenoMed's website (at
www.genomedics.com).

     I understand and agree that I will not at any time or in any manner,
either directly or indirectly, divulge, disclose, or communicate in any manner
any information that is proprietary to the Company. I will protect such
information and treat it as strictly confidential.

     I understand that, as a member of the Company's Scientific Advisory Board,
I may be invited by the Company to participate in additional projects, such as
helping to explain the company's scientific approach to various funding entities
such as venture capital firms, or to analyze the company's scientific data, but
that these additional projects will be negotiated on a case by case basis, and
that I am in no way obligated to perform such duties by the current contract.


     I understand and agree that the Scientific Advisory Board Contract will be
a five (5) year agreement, but that it can be terminated on 30 days' written
notice by either party for any reason whatsoever. The compensation for my
services will be paid by the Company as follows:


1. The option to purchase 100,000 common shares of the Company, exercisable upon
the first anniversary from the date of this Contract.


2. The option to purchase 100,000 common shares of the Company payable upon the
second anniversary from the date of this Contract.


3. The option to purchase 100,000 common shares of the Company payable upon the
third anniversary from the date of this Contract.


4. The option to purchase 100,000 common shares of the Company payable upon the
fourth anniversary from the date of this Contract.


5. The option to purchase 100,000 common shares of the Company payable upon the
fifth anniversary from the date of this Contract.




Signed:/s/ Sergio Danilov                    Date 12/11/02


For GenoMed, Inc:
Signed:/s/ David W. Moskowitz                Date Dec. 11, 2002`
# C_2021471EN.01004302.xml

| 22.11.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 471/43 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.11.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 471/43

---

Judgment of the General Court of 29 September 2021 — AlzChem Group v Commission

(Case T-569/19) (1)

(Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Documents relating to a procedure for the recovery of State aid following a decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery - Refusal to grant access - Exception relating to the protection of the purpose of inspections, investigations and audits - Overriding public interest - Principle of non-discrimination - Obligation to state reasons)

(2021/C 471/60)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: AlzChem Group AG (Trostberg, Germany) (represented by: A. Borsos and J. Guerrero Pérez, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Ehrbar and K. Herrmann, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2019) 5602 final of 22 July 2019 refusing to grant the applicant access to documents relating to the procedure for the recovery of State aid following a decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders AlzChem Group AG to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders AlzChem Group AG to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 363, 28.10.2019.

---
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices 

# Order

March 10, 2014

14 8865 (2 8 )

ANTHONY EUGENE FLEMMING

,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v SC: 14 8865

COA: 31 8227

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, NEWBERRY

CORRECTIONAL FACILITY WARDEN and KENT

COUNTY PROSECUTOR

,

Defendant s

- Appellee s

.

___________________________________ On order of the Chief Justice, plaintiff’s motion to waive fees is DENIED because

MCL 600.2963 requires that a prisoner pursuing a civil ac tion be liable for filing fees.

Ordinarily, MCL 600.2963(8) would preclude plaintiff from seeking leave to appeal in

this Court because of an inability to provide the initial partial fee. However, applying

that statutory section to bar plaintiff from ini tiating an application for leave to appeal

from the original complaint for habeas corpus filed in the court of appeals would violate

the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Smith v Bennett, 365 US

708; 81 S Ct 895; 6 L Ed 2d 39 (1961).

The Clerk shall furnish two copies of this order to plaintiff. Plaintiff has 21 days

from the certification of this order to submit one of those copies to this Court. By doing

that, plaintiff becomes responsible for paying the $375 filing fee. MCL 600. 2963.

Failure to timely submit the order will result in the appeal not being docketed in this

Court. The Clerk shall retain plaintiff’s pleadings until he timely submits the order or the

21

- day period for doing so has expired.

Plaintiff is not required to pay an initial partial fee at the time he submits the order

to this Court. The Department of Corrections is directed to co llect amounts equal to 50

percent of the deposits made to plaintiff’s account each month and remit $375 to this

Court when that full amount is collected. Plaintiff may not file further appeals in thisI, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

March 10, 2014 2

Clerk Court from civil cases initiated by him until the entry fee in this appeal is paid in

full. MCL 600.2963(8).
NO. 07-01-0089-CV

	IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

	FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	AT AMARILLO

	PANEL B

	JUNE __1, 2001

	______________________________

	VERONICA BRODESSER,

			Appellant

	v.

	CATHY CRAWFORD, Guardian of the Person of 

	Elizabeth Brodesser and STEVE GARY, Guardian 

	of the Estate of Elizatbeth Brodesser, 

			Appellees

	_________________________________

	FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 3 FOR LUBBOCK COUNTY;

	NO. 2000-783,559; HON. PAULA LANEHART, PRESIDING

	_______________________________

Before BOYD, C.J., and QUINN and JOHNSON, JJ. 

	Veronica Brodesser  attempts to perfect an appeal to this Court.  By letter from this

Court dated May 16, 2001, we informed appellant that the filing fee of $125.00 required to

perfect this appeal was outstanding and that the failure to pay same by May 28, 2001

would result in the dismissal of hiser case.  To date, appellant has not paid the $125.00 filing

fee. 

	Due to appellant’s failure to pay the filing fee, we dismiss the appeal pursuant to

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3 (c). 

	                                               			Per Curiuam

Do not publish.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v *1020Fred Snow, Appellant.

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant’s contention that he is entitled to a new trial because he was denied *Brady*material cannot be reviewed on this appeal from the judgment of conviction since none of the matters upon which defendant relies appears in the record. We reject defendant’s other arguments that the verdict is repugnant *(see, People v Tucker,*55 NY2d 1) and that the second felony offender statute is unconstitutional *(see, People v Sherman,*96 AD2d 1003; *see also, People v Morse,*62 NY2d 205, 217-218). (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Marshall, J.—rape, first degree.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Denman, Boomer, Pine and Schnepp, JJ.
ex10-3.htm






  



  







  





ADDENDUM TO ACQUISITION AGREEMENT





AND PLAN OF MERGER





THIS ADDENDUM to the Acquisition Agreement and Plan of Merger dated June 12, 2009 (the “Agreement”), is entered into by and among Minatura Gold, a Nevada corporation (“MGOL”), Gold Resource Partners, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company (“GRP”), and Boatatopia Sub Co., a Nevada corporation (“SUB
CO”), collectively the Parties, on this 24th day of November, 2009.





As a result of input from Columbian counsel, Columbian accountants, US tax counsel, and US securities counsel, the Parties have restructured the nature of the transactions as described in the original Agreement, to reflect the most efficient manner to resolving technical legal and accounting issues with the intent of retaining the original
material terms of the Agreement. Therefore, the original Agreement and any addendums are hereby terminated as of November 24th, 2009.





IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have duly executed this Addendum as of the day and year first above written.






	
Gold Resource Partners, LLC
	  	
Boatatopia Sub Co.

	
A Nevada limited liability company
	  	
a Nevada Corporation

	  	  	  
	
By: /S/ Paul Dias
	  	
By: /S/ Dan Van Ness

	
     Paul Dias, Managing Member
	  	
     Dan Van Ness, President

	  	  	  
	
Minatura Gold
	  	  
	
A Nevada Corporation
	  	  
	  	  	  
	
By: /S/ Paul Dias
	  	  
	
     Paul Dias, CEO