alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Filed by Bowne Pure Compliance





Exhibit 10.79




(STAMP)



2008 VIII 7 10:06




FLAGA GmbH

Flaga Straße 1, 2100 Leobendorf

FN 185471b im Firmenbuch des Landesgerichtes Korneuburg




Raiffeisen Zentralbank Österreich AG

att. Mr. Peter Straubinger

Am Stadtpark 9

1030 WIEN




271



Bratislava, June 10, 2008




Account No. 1-00.640.763/100; 550-70.678.248/004; 550-70.678.248/100 /Amendment
Offer



Ladies und Gentlemen,



reference is made to the debit balances, which are currently shown on our aforementioned accounts
held with your bank (hereinafter collectively the “Accounts”), and the underlying legal
relationship between our company and your bank. We hereby offer you to amend the aforementioned
legal relationship (hereinafter the “Legal Relationship”) as follows:



QUOTE




The Applicable Margin for any possible debit balances on the Account
No. 1-00.640.763/100 according to the Legal Relationship shall be 60.00 (sixty point zero) basis points per annum.



Any debit balances which are currently shown on the Accounts will be repaid to the Bank not later
than July 24, 2009. The aforementioned Legal Relationship will end with the repayment. All
possible securities under and in connection with the aforementioned Legal Relationship shall
remain in full force and effect.



UNQUOTE




Apart from the amendments offered herein, the aforementioned Legal Relationship shall remain
unchanged.



If you accept the present Amendment Offer, we shall pay you a one-time management fee in the amount
of EUR 3.250,__ __.


 


 









 





You can accept the present offer on or before August 29, 2008 by debiting the aforementioned
management fee to our account No. 1-00.640.763/100 held with you. We hereby irrevocably authorize
you to make such debit on our behalf and for our account. Your acceptance
of the present offer will come into full force and effect by virtue of such debit only,
irrespective of whether and when we may be informed about your acceptance.



Kind regards,




FLAGA GmbH








The Guarantor hereby fully agrees to and accepts the terms and conditions of this
Amendment Offer.



Date:                     




	 	 	 	 	 
	By:

	 	
	 	 
	 

	 	UGI	 	 
	 

	 	Robert W. Krick	 	 
	 

	 	Vice President, Treasurer
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

NO. CAAP-19-0000608

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

DOREEN R. McKERNAN and MICHAEL S. McKERNAN,

Plaintiffs-Appellees, v.

THE ASSOCIATION OF APARTMENT OWNERS OF

KAMAOLE SANDS, Defendant-Appellant,

and

JOHN DOES 1-100; JANE DOES 1-100;

DOE PARTNERSHIPS 1-100; DOE CORPORATIONS 1-100;

and DOE ENTITIES 1-100, Defendants

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT

(CIVIL NO. 18-1-0493(1))

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

(By: Leonard, Presiding Judge, Wadsworth and McCullen, JJ.)

Upon consideration of Defendant-Appellant the

Association of Apartment Owners of Kamaole Sands' Motion for

Reconsideration filed herein on August 18, 2022 (Motion for

Reconsideration), and the records and files herein, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that said Motion for

Reconsideration is denied.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, September 13, 2022.

/s/ Katherine G. Leonard

Presiding Judge

/s/ Clyde J. Wadsworth

Associate Judge

/s/ Sonja M.P. McCullen

Associate Judge

Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-19-0000608

13-SEP-2022

01:37 PM

Dkt. 61 ODMR
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6297

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus MARK ALEXIS, a/k/a Al, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (CR-93-64, CA-98-1407-2) Submitted: October 21, 1999 Decided: October 26, 1999 Before WIDENER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mark Alexis, Appellant Pro Se. Laura Marie Everhart, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 1999). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and findno reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Alexis , Nos. CR-93-64; CA-98-1407-2 (E.D. Va. Jan. 6, 1999). We dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
# Official Journal L 64/4 Ma

| | ISSN 1725-2555 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 64 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 494 March 2006 |

ISSN 1725-2555

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 64

English edition

Legislation

Volume 494 March 2006

---

| Contents | | I   Acts whose publication is obligatory | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | * | Regulation (EC) No 336/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 February 2006 on the implementation of the International Safety Management Code within the Community and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 3051/95 (1) | 1 |
| | * | Directive 2006/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 February 2006 concerning the management of bathing water quality and repealing Directive 76/160/EEC | 37 |
| | * | Directive 2006/11/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 February 2006 on pollution caused by certain dangerous substances discharged into the aquatic environment of the Community (Codified version) (1) | 52 |

Contents

I   Acts whose publication is obligatory

page

*

Regulation (EC) No 336/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 February 2006 on the implementation of the International Safety Management Code within the Community and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 3051/95 (1)

1

*

Directive 2006/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 February 2006 concerning the management of bathing water quality and repealing Directive 76/160/EEC

37

*

Directive 2006/11/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 February 2006 on pollution caused by certain dangerous substances discharged into the aquatic environment of the Community (Codified version) (1)

52

| | | II   Acts whose publication is not obligatory |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | | European Parliament and Council |
| | * | Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 February 2006 on further European cooperation in quality assurance in higher education | 60 |

II   Acts whose publication is not obligatory

European Parliament and Council

*

Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 February 2006 on further European cooperation in quality assurance in higher education

60

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
#### MILLER BREWING CO., Respondent, v. CITY OF ROCHESTER, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

July 30, 1896.)

Action by the Miller Brewing Company against the city of Rochester.

No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-50057

Summary Calendar

CARLOS DAVID DOMINGUEZ,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant-Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 3:17-CV-5

Before KING, ELROD, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Carlos David Dominguez appeals the district court’s denial of his petition 

for a writ of error coram nobis. Dominguez has completed his 110-month term 

of imprisonment but is still serving a 10-year term of supervised release.

At all times, this court must be assured of its jurisdiction and the district 

court’s jurisdiction. United States v. Key, 205 F.3d 773, 774 (5th Cir. 2000). 

Because Dominguez is subject to an unexpired term of supervised release, he 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

January 4, 2018

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 17-50057 Document: 00514294582 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/04/2018
No. 17-50057

2

is “in custody” and ineligible for coram nobis relief. See United States v. Hatten, 

167 F.3d 884, 887 n.6 (5th Cir. 1999). We therefore affirm on the alternative 

ground that the district court lacked jurisdiction to consider Dominguez’s 

petition. See United States v. Early, 27 F.3d 140, 142 (5th Cir. 1994).

AFFIRMED.

 Case: 17-50057 Document: 00514294582 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/04/2018
1 - ORDER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

KELLY J. RICHARDSON, and JAMES

POWELL, personally and as next friend for

I.R., a minor, and S.P., a minor, 

No 3:14-cv-01027-ST

Plaintiffs,

ORDER

v.

EMILIE SCHUBERT, in her individual 

capacity, GINGER VAN WINKLE, in 

her individual capacity, ERIN WIRTZ, 

in her individual capacity, JENNIE SMITH, 

in her individual capacity, KRISTIN LEMON,

in her individual capacity, CARLOS CRUTCH,

in his individual capacity, LINDSEY VERNOOY, 

in her individual capacity, DANIELLE SANTILI-DAY, 

in her individual capacity, 

Defendants.

HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge:

Magistrate Judge Stewart issued a Findings and Recommendation [84] on June 5, 2015, 

in which she recommends that this Court deny in part and grant in part the motion for summary 

judgment filed by Defendants Wirtz, Smith, Lemon, Crutch, Vernooy, and Santili-Day, 

Case 3:14-cv-01027-YY Document 98 Filed 08/03/15 Page 1 of 2
2 - ORDER

(collectively, “Oregon Defendants”). The matter is now before me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 

636(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b).

When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge's Findings & 

Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the 

Magistrate Judge's report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Dawson v. Marshall, 561 F.3d 930, 932 (9th 

Cir. 2009); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc).

I have carefully considered Plaintiffs’ and Oregon Defendants’ objections and conclude 

there is no basis to modify the Findings & Recommendation. I have also reviewed the pertinent 

portions of the record de novo and find no other errors in the Magistrate Judge's Findings & 

Recommendation. 

CONCLUSION 

The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Stewart’s Findings & Recommendation [84].

Accordingly, Oregon Defendants’ Amended Motion for Summary Judgment [58] is denied as to 

the Fourteenth Amendment claim based on Defendant Wirtz’s and Defendant Smith’s 

prosecutorial conduct which resulted in issuance of the initial protective order by the Oregon 

court on June 26, 2012. The Motion is otherwise granted. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this __________ day of ___________________ , 201_____.

____________________________________ 

MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ

United States District Judge

Case 3:14-cv-01027-YY Document 98 Filed 08/03/15 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

__________ _____________________________ )

GULED HASSAN DURAN, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. ) Civil Action No. 16

- 2358 (RBW)

)

JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR.

, et al.

, )

)

Respondents. )

_______________________________________)

ORDER

Upon consideration of the Respondents’ Motion to Supplement Their Factual Return,

ECF No. 159

, it is hereby

ORDERED that the Respondents’ Motion to Supplement Their Factual Return, ECF No.

159, is GRANTED

. It is further

ORDERED that the respondents’ Proposed Supplemental Factual Return is

ACCEPTED AS FILED as of December 1, 2023

. It is further

ORDERED that, on or before December 15, 2023, the respondent shall file a notice of

classified filing on the public docket reflecting that their Proposed Supplemental Factual Return

has been filed.

SO ORDERED this 11 th day of December , 20 2 3

.

REGGIE B. WALTON

United States District Judge
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
 Soybean/maize Germplasm, Pathology, and Genetics Research: Urbana, IL
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Midwest Area Urbana, Illinois Soybean/maize Germplasm, Pathology, and Genetics Research People & Locations







Lezlie  Furr
                        Soybean/maize Germplasm, Pathology, and Genetics Research

                        




                        
                        Program Support Assistant (Office Automation)
                        Phone: (217) 265-7717
                        
                        
                        Fax: (Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)


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
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

MEMORANDUM OPINION

N o. 04

- 22

- 00730

- CR

Dylan O ’ BRIANT

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 454th Judicial District Court

, Medina County, Texas

Trial Court No. 15

- 07

- 11740

- CR

Honorable Daniel J. Kindred , Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice

Liza A. Rodriguez , Justice

Lori I. Valenzuela , Justice

Delivered and Filed: April 26, 2023

DIS MISSED

Appellant has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal, stating that he no longer wishes to

pursue his appeal. The motion is granted, and this appeal is dismissed. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.2.

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH
#### PEOPLE, Respondents, v. DI RUZZA, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

October 4, 1907.)

Proceeding^ by the people of the state of New York against Lucca Di Ruzza.

No opinion. Judgment of conviction, and order of the County Court of Westchester county denying motion for new trial, affirmed.
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
 Cattle Fever Tick Research Unit: Kerrville, TX
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Plains Area Kerrville, Texas Knipling-Bushland U.S. Livestock Insects Research Laboratory Cattle Fever Tick Research Unit People & Locations







Luisdaniel  Sanchez
                        Cattle Fever Tick Research Unit

                        




                        
                        Animal Caretaker
                        Phone: (956) 205-7625
                        
                        
                        Fax: (Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)


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
Kathryn Tassinari, OSB # 80115 

Mark A. Manning, OSB # 00311 

HARDER, WELLS, BARON & MANNING, P.C. 

474 Willamette Street 

Eugene, OR 97401 

(541) 686-1969 

kathrynt50@comcast.net 

Of Attorneys for the Plaintiff 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON 

CHRISTOPHER A. NARRON, ) 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

COMMISSIONER, 

Social Security Administration , 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

~~~~ Defendant. ) ~-=-====-===~~~~ 

Case No. 6: 14-cv-00923-SI 

ORDER FOR PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY 

FEES PURSUANT TO EAJA 

Based upon the Stipulation of the parties, it is hereby ORDERED that attorney fees in the 

amount of $5,444.53 are hereby awarded to Plaintiff, pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act 

(EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412. Payment of this award shall be paid via check made payable to 

Plaintiff and mailed to Plaintiff's attorneys at Harder, Wells, Baron & Manning, P.C., 474 

Willamette Street, Eugene, Oregon 97401. Pursuant to Astrue v. Ratliff, the award shall be made 

payable to Plaintiff's attorney if the commissioner confirms that Plaintiff owes no debt to the 

government through the federal treasury offset program. There are no costs or expenses to be 

paid herein. ~ 

Datedthis dayofNovem ~ 

PRESENTED BY: 

s/ Kathryn Tassinari 

Harder, Wells, Baron & Manning, P.C. 

Of Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Michael H. Simon, U.S. District Judge 

Case 6:14-cv-00923-SI Document 27 Filed 11/09/15 Page 1 of 1
#### HOLDEN et al., Respondents, v. KUTSCHER, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

September 14, 1896.)

Action by William Holden and Charles Holden against Satie E. ICutscher.

No opinion. Motion denied, with costs.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1996
<CASH>                                       3,379,776
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               26,881,581
<ALLOWANCES>                                   787,175
<INVENTORY>                                 15,666,880
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            46,912,756
<PP&E>                                     159,239,608
<DEPRECIATION>                              80,529,962
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             131,169,442
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       23,688,852
<BONDS>                                     39,249,136
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     6,284,615
<OTHER-SE>                                  58,542,274
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               131,169,442
<SALES>                                    182,589,621
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           182,589,621
<CGS>                                      139,249,481
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              139,249,481
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               378,366
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,928,483
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             15,905,299
<INCOME-TAX>                                 6,252,682
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          9,652,617
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 9,652,617
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.52
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.52
        

</TABLE>