alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 105 (Thursday, May 31, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 29566]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-13601]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER01-1559-000]

PPL Wallingford Energy, LLC; Notice of Issuance of Order

May 24, 2001.

    PPL Wallingford Energy, LLC (PPL Wallingford) submitted for filing 
a rate schedule under which PPL Wallingford will engage in wholesale 
electric power and energy transactions at market-based rates. PPL 
Wallingford also requested waiver of various Commission regulations. In 
particular, PPL Wallingford requested that the Commission grant blanket 
approval under 18 CFR part 34 of all future issuances of securities and 
assumptions of liability by PPL Wallingford.
    On May 10, 2001, pursuant to delegated authority, the Director, 
Division of Corporate Applications, Office of Markets, Tariffs and 
Rates, granted requests for blanket approval under part 34, subject to 
the following.
    Within thirty days of the date of the order, any person desiring to 
be heard or to protest the blanket approval of issuance of securities 
or assumptions of liability by PPL Wallingford should file a motion to 
intervene or protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 
and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 
385.211 and 385.214).
    Absent a request to be heard in opposition within this period, PPL 
Wallingford is authorized to issue securities and assume obligations or 
liabilities as a guarantor, indorser, surety, or otherwise in respect 
of any security of another person; provided that such issuance or 
assumption is for some lawful object within the corporate purposes of 
the applicant, and compatible within the public interest, and is 
reasonably necessary or appropriate for such purposes.
    The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that 
neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by 
continued approval of PPL Wallingsford's issuances of securities or 
assumptions of liability.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing motions to 
intervene or protests, as set forth above, is June 11, 2001.
    Copies of the full text of the Order are available from the 
Commission's Public Reference Branch, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Internet at 
http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for 
assistance). Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed 
electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's web site 
at http://www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm.

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-13601 Filed 5-30-01; 8:45am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
```
**Exhibit      32 **

|   |   | /s/                Alexander U. Conrad                                                                                                   |   |   |
|--------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|
|   |   | Alexander                U. Conrad                                                                                                                 |   |   |
|   |   | Interim                Chief Executive Officer                                                                                                     |   |   |
|   |   | Dated:                April 28, 2006                                                                                                               |   |   |
|   |   |   /s/                Michael C. Dunn                               |   |   |
|   |   | Michael                C. Dunn                                                                                                                     |   |   |
|   |   | Chief                Financial Officer                                                                                                             |   |   |
|   |   | Dated:                April 28, 2006                                                                                                               |   |   |

----
Exhibit 32.3








CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Anthony J. Branca, Chief Financial Officer of ICON Capital Corp., the Manager of the Registrant, in connection with the Annual Report of ICON Income Fund Nine, LLC (the “LLC”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Annual Report”) certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





1.
The Annual Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





2.
The information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the LLC.







Date: March 25, 2011





/s/Anthony J. Branca__


Anthony J. Branca


Chief Financial Officer


ICON Capital Corp.


Manager of ICON Income Fund Nine, LLC
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Billy Louis CLARKE, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 05-4866.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 19, 2006.

Decided: June 8, 2006.

Michael Morchower, Morchower, Luxton *&*Whaley, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant. Paul J. McNulty, United States Attorney, Charles E. James, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before WILKINSON and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Billy Louis Clarke appeals his conviction of one count of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of cocaine powder, in violation of 21 U.S.C. *341§§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(l)(B)(ii), 846 (2000), and one count of attempted possession with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of cocaine powder, in violation of § 841(b)(l)(B)(ii) (2000).

On appeal, Clarke’s only claim is that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury’s conviction. In reviewing a claim of insufficient evidence, “[t]he verdict of a jury must be sustained if there is substantial evidence, taking the view most favorable to the Government, to support it.” *Glasser v. United States,*315 U.S. 60, 80, 62 S.Ct. 457, 86 L.Ed. 680 (1942). “We have defined ‘substantial evidence’ as ‘evidence that a reasonable finder of fact could accept as adequate and sufficient to support a conclusion of a defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.’ ” *United States v. Alerre,*430 F.3d 681, 693 (4th Cir.2005) (quoting *United States v. Burgos,*94 F.3d 849, 862 (4th Cir.1996) (en banc)). We “must consider circumstantial as well as direct evidence, and allow the government the benefit of all reasonable inferences from the facts proven to those sought to be established.” *United States v. Tresvant,*677 F.2d 1018, 1021 (4th Cir. 1982). This court “may not weigh the evidence or review the credibility of the witnesses.” *United States v. Wilson,*118 F.3d 228, 234 (4th Cir.1997). With these standards in mind, we have reviewed the record and conclude that the evidence at trial was sufficient to support the jury’s verdict.

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. 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.*
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 104 (Wednesday, May 30, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 29374]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-13555]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary


Aviation Proceedings, Agreements Filed During the Week Ending May 
18, 2001.

    The following Agreements were filed with the Department of 
Transportation under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 412 and 414. Answers 
may be filed within 21 days after the filing of the application.
    Docket Number: OST-2001-9673
    Date Filed: May 14, 2001
    Parties: Members of the International Air Transport Association
    Subject: PTC2 EUR 0377 dated May 11, 2001, TC2 Within Europe 
Expedited Resolution 002tt, PTC2 EUR 0378 dated May 11, 2001, TC2 
Within Europe Expedited Resolution 002mm, PTC2 EUR 0379 dated May 11, 
2001, TC2 Within Europe Expedited Resolution 002o, Intended effective 
dates: September 1, September 15, September 17, 2001
    Docket Number: OST-2001-9674
    Date Filed: May 14, 2001
    Parties: Members of the International Air Transport Association
    Subject: PTC2 EUR 0380 dated May 11, 2001, TC2 Within Europe 
Expedited Resolution 002p, PTC2 EUR 0381 dated May 11, 2001, TC2 Within 
Europe Expedited Resolution 002v, Intended effective dates: October 1, 
November 1, 2001.

    Docket Number: OST-2001-9712
    Date Filed: May 17, 2001
    Parties: Members of the International Air Transport Association
    Subject: PTC COMP 0808 dated May 18, 2001, Mail Vote 125--
Resolution 010b, TC2/TC23 Special Passenger Amending Resolution from 
Germany, Intended effective date: June 1, 2001.

Dorothy Y. Beard
Federal Register Liaison.
[FR Doc. 01-13555 Filed 5-29-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-62-P
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Reginald Rabb, Appellant.

Submitted February 8, 2010;

decided February 11, 2010

Motion for assignment of counsel granted and Richard M. Greenberg, Esq., Office of the Appellate Defender, 11 Park Place, Suite 1601, New York, NY 10007 assigned as counsel to the appellant on the appeal herein.
Order entered December 8, 2017

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-17-00756-CR

CONNOR LEE CORALLI, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 6

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 006-84506-2015

ORDER

We REINSTATE this appeal.

When appellant failed to make arrangements to pay for the reporter’s record, we abated 

the appeal for a hearing to determine whether appellant desired to prosecute the appeal or if he 

had been denied the reporter’s record because of ineffective counsel, indigence, or for any other 

reason. On November 16, 2017, we received the trial court’s findings of fact. We ADOPT the 

trial court’s finding that (1) appellant did not appear at the trial court’s November 16, 2017

hearing but appellate counsel did; (2) counsel informed the trial court he spoke with appellant in 

October 2017; (3) at that time, appellant did not want to pursue the appeal; (4) appellant told 

counsel he had access to a computer and would sign the motion to dismiss his appeal; (5) 
appellant has not corresponded with counsel or responded to his calls or emails since that time; 

and (6) appellant has abandoned the appeal.

We ORDER this appeal submitted without the reporter’s record and brief as of the date 

of this order to a panel consisting of Justices Lang, Brown, and Whitehill. See TEX. R. APP. P. 

37.3(c), 38.8(b)(4). An opinion will issue in due course. 

/s/ LANA MYERS 

JUSTICE
# C_2020077EN.01000802.xml

| 9.3.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 77/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.3.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 77/8

---

Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 21 January 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Tributário de Lisboa — Portugal) — State of Canada v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

(Case C-613/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Restrictions on the free movement of capital to or from a third country - Direct taxation - Tax on the revenue of legal persons - Profits distributed by companies resident in the territory of Portugal - Reduction in the tax base)

(2020/C 77/11)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal Tributário de Lisboa

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: State of Canada

Defendant: Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

Operative part of the order

Articles 63 and 65 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding the legislation of a Member State, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, under which the dividends distributed by a resident company are subject to a tax the effective rate of which is higher where those dividends are received by an entity resident in a third country which does not principally carry out activities of a commercial, industrial or agricultural nature than where such dividends are received by such an entity resident in that State. The situation is different only if the application of the tax convention signed on 14 June 1999 for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion with respect to taxes on income allows the effects of the difference in treatment under the legislation of that Member State to be completely neutralised, which it is for the referring court to ascertain.

---

(1)  OJ C 445, 10.12.2018.

---
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 Liberty Alliance, Inc.,(the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Steven L. White, 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 to the best of 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.     April 4, 2008/s/ Steven L. WhiteSteven L. WhiteChief Executive OfficerChief Financial Officer          1
EXHIBIT 32.2  In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report of Alco Energy Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Bill Akrivos, in my capacities set forth below 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, 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 results of operations of the Company.   May 20, 2009 /s/ Bill Akrivos Bill Akrivos, President (as Principal Financial Officer)
<Page>


                                                                  Exhibit 23.1


                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

The Board of Directors
Heritage Property Investment Trust, Inc.:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement
(No. 333-97993) on Form S-8 of Heritage Property Investment Trust, Inc. and
subsidiaries (the Company) of our report dated January 31, 2003, except for
notes 11 and 16, as to which the date is March 3, 2003, with respect to the
consolidated balance sheets of the Company as of December 31, 2002 and 2001,
and the related consolidated statements of operations, changes in
shareholders' equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year
period ended December 31, 2002, which report appears in the December 31, 2002
annual report on Form 10-K of the Company.


/s/ KPMG LLP

Boston, Massachusetts
March 26, 2003
[923 NE2d 582, 896 NYS2d 299]

#### The People of the State of New York, Appellant, v Charles Zarate, Respondent.

Decided February 11, 2010

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Thomas J. Spota III, District Attorney,*Riverhead *(Thomas C. Costello*of counsel), for appellant.

*Bassett & Bassett, P.C.,*Central Islip *(Kerry Sloan Bassett*of counsel), for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed (s*ee People v Price,*14 NY3d 61 [2010] [decided today]).

*726Concur: Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones.
**Exhibit
      32.2**







Certification
      Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. §1350)







I,
      Michael A. Reisner, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
      (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) of ICON Capital Corp., the Manager
      of the Registrant in connection with the Annual Report of ICON Income Fund
      Nine,
      LLC (the “LLC”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Annual Report”)
      certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to
      the
      best of my knowledge:





1.  The
      Annual 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); and





2.  The
      information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      LLC.










*Date:
      April 13, 2007*







*/s/
      Michael A. Reisner*


Michael
      A. Reisner


Executive
      Vice President and Chief Financial Officer


(Principal
      Financial and Accounting Officer)


ICON
      Capital Corp.


Manager
      of ICON Income Fund Nine, LLC
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7720

WILLIAM F. ALLEN, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versusSTATE OF WEST VIRGINIA; KENNETH L. GORBY, Magistrate; FRAY QUEEN, JR., Magistrate; JAMES TERRANGO, Magistrate; PERRI JO DECHRISTOPHER, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney; JOHN W. HAWKINS, Deputy Sheriff; A. F. MARANO, Deputy Sheriff; SHAWN MORGAN; PAUL FURBEE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. William M. Kidd, Senior District Judge. (CA-98-156) Submitted: February 11, 1999 Decided: February 25, 1999 Before ERVIN, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William F. Allen, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:William F. Allen, Jr., appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint as frivolous under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (West Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Allen v. West Virginia , No. CA-98-156 (N.D.W. Va. Nov. 4, 1998). 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
# C_2017231EN.01004901.xml

| 17.7.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 231/49 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.7.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 231/49

---

Action brought on 15 May 2017 — Lion’s Head Global Partners v EUIPO — Lion Capital (LION’S HEAD global partners)

(Case T-310/17)

(2017/C 231/62)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Lion’s Head Global Partners LLP (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: R. Nöske, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Lion Capital LLP (London, United Kingdom)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: EU figurative mark including the word elements ‘LION’S HEAD global partners’ — International registration No 996 979

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Procedure before EUIPO

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 February 2017 in Case R 1477/2016-4

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 28 February 2017 (Case R 1477/2016-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Lion’s Head Global Partners LLP and Lion Capital LLP and reject the opposition; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 28 February 2017 (Case R 1477/2016-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Lion’s Head Global Partners LLP and Lion Capital LLP and reject the opposition;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Plea in law

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.

---
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

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

** **

In connection with the report on Form 10-Q of Sonnen Corporation forthe quarterly period ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Costas Takkas, do hereby certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

 

(1)  This report fully complies withthe requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934; and

(2)  The information contained in thisreport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition ofthe registrant at the end of the period covered by this report and results ofoperations of the registrant for the period covered by this report.

 

 

Date: May 16, 2011

 

 

/s/ Costas Takkas

Costas Takkas

Chief Financial Officer

 

 

This certification accompanies this report pursuant to §906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the registrant for the purposesof §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. This certificationshall not be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Actof 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended(whether made before or after the date of this report), irrespective of anygeneral incorporation language contained in such filing.

 

A signed original of this written statement required by §906 has beenprovided to the registrant and will be retained by the registrant and furnishedto the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

 

 

----
#### STEM v. RICHARDSON

No. 153PA98

Case below: 128 N.C.App. 754

Petition by defendants for writ of certiorari to review the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals allowed 8 October 1998.