alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2010101EN.01000601.xml

| 20.4.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 101/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.4.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 101/6

---

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

(Text with EEA relevance)

2010/C 101/02

| Date of adoption of the decision | 17.11.2009 |
| --- | --- |
| Reference number of State Aid | N 627/09 |
| Member State | Netherlands |
| Region | — |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | ING Group N.V. |
| Legal basis | — |
| Type of measure | Individual aid |
| Objective | Aid to remedy serious disturbances in the economy |
| Form of aid | Guarantee |
| Budget | — |
| Intensity | — |
| Duration (period) | — |
| Economic sectors | Financial intermediation |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Koninkrijk der Nederlanden |
| Other information | Revocation of the extension of opening of the procedure from 15 September 2009 on impaired assets measure and prolongation of temporary approval |

Date of adoption of the decision

17.11.2009

Reference number of State Aid

N 627/09

Member State

Netherlands

Region

—

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

ING Group N.V.

Legal basis

—

Type of measure

Individual aid

Objective

Aid to remedy serious disturbances in the economy

Form of aid

Guarantee

Budget

—

Intensity

—

Duration (period)

—

Economic sectors

Financial intermediation

Name and address of the granting authority

Koninkrijk der Nederlanden

Other information

Revocation of the extension of opening of the procedure from 15 September 2009 on impaired assets measure and prolongation of temporary approval

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/state_aids/state_aids_texts_en.htm

---
EXHIBIT
32.2





CHIMERA
INVESTMENT CORPORATION


1211
AVENUE OF THE AMERICAS


SUITE
2902


NEW YORK,
NEW YORK 10036







CERTIFICATION




PURSUANT
TO SECTION 906 OF THE




SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002, 10 U.S.C. SECTION 1350




In
connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Chimera Investment
Corporation (the “Company”) for the period ended September 30, 2009 to be filed
with Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the
“Report”), I, A. Alexandra Denahan, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary of the
Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, 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
      at the dates of, and for the periods covered by, the
    Report.




It is not
intended that this statement be deemed to be filed for purposes of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.







/s/ A. Alexandra
Denahan


A. Alexandra Denahan


Chief Financial Officer


November 6, 2009




60
Exhibit 32







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 Annual Report of Online Holdings, Inc. a Nevada corporation (the Company), on Form 10-KSB for the annual period ending December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Dennis Lairamore, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350), 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 (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 result of operations of the Company.











/s/Dennis Lairamore

Dennis Lairamore

Chief Executive Officer and

Chief Financial Officer

Date: March 30, 2005
Order entered August 26, 2014

In The



## Court of Appeals

**Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

No. 05

- 14

- 00464

- CV

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, Appellant

V.

ERICA KAY JACKSON, Appellee

On Appeal from the 354th District Court

Hunt County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 79,917



### O RDER

We GRANT appellee’s August 25, 2014 second motion for an extension of time to file a

brief. Appellee shall file her brief on or before September 15, 2014 . We caution appellee that

no further extension of time will be grant ed absent extraordinary circumstances.

/s/ ADA BROWN

JUSTICE
EXHIBIT 10.2
                                                                    ------------


                             CITYFED FINANCIAL CORP.

                                      PROXY

                                 AUGUST 15, 2005


The undersigned hereby appoints Stephen L. Ranzini proxy, with full power of
substitution, to vote all shares of stock (the "Shares") of CityFed Financial
Corp. (the "Company") which the undersigned is entitled to vote at any annual or
special meeting of stockholders of the Company or pursuant to any consent by
stockholders in lieu of an annual or special meeting, in each case until the
expiration of this proxy, subject to the following conditions:

     1. This proxy is granted solely with respect to matters required to be
taken to effect a reorganization of the Company.

     2. On each matter for which the Shares are voted pursuant to this proxy,
Mr. Ranzini shall vote the shares consistent with the vote cast by the majority
of remaining outstanding shares of voting stock of the Company on such matter.

This proxy shall expire and be of no further force and effect on September 30,
2006.



                                         Signature: /s/ Peter R. Kellogg
                                                    --------------------------
                                                    Peter R. Kellogg

                                         Date: August 24, 2005
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-21179

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

FREDI MAURICIO CONTRERAS,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-01-CR-314-1

- - - - - - - - - -

February 20, 2003

Before WIENER, EMILIO M. GARZA, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Fredi Mauricio Contreras was convicted of illegal reentry

into the United States after deportation, in violation of

8 U.S.C. § 1326. He appeals the district court’s interpretation

of U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C) at his resentencing. He argues that

his prior felony conviction for possession of heroin did not

merit the eight-level adjustment provided in § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C) for

an aggravated felony, and that he should have received only the

four-level adjustment provided in § 2L1.2(b)(1)(D) for “any other
No. 01-21179

-2-

felony.” Contreras’s arguments regarding the definitions of

“drug trafficking offense” and “aggravated felony” were recently

rejected by this court in United States v. Caicedo-Cuero, 

312 F.3d 697, 706-11 (5th Cir. 2002). The district court did

not err in assessing an eight-level adjustment, pursuant to

§ 2L1.2(b)(1)(C), to Contreras’s sentencing guideline

calculation. Id.

For the first time on appeal, Contreras argues that

8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is unconstitutional because it treats a

prior conviction for an aggravated felony as a mere sentencing

factor and not an element of the offense. He contends that the

unconstitutionality of the statute is not remedied by treating

the prior aggravated felony as an element of the offense and

including it in the indictment. Contreras concedes that his

argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States,

523 U.S. 224 (1998), but he seeks to preserve the issue for

Supreme Court review in light of the decision in Apprendi v. New

Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000). Apprendi did not overrule

Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi, 530 U.S. at 489-90; see also

United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000). 

Accordingly, this argument lacks merit. 

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 99.7   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS   We hereby consent to the
use and reference to our name and reports evaluating a portion of EnCana
Corporations petroleum and natural gas reserves as of December 31, 2005, and
the information derived from our reports, as described or incorporated by
reference in: (i) EnCana Corporations Annual Report on Form 40-F for the year
ended December 31, 2005; (ii) EnCana Corporations and EnCana Holdings Finance
Corp.s registration statement on Form F-9 (File No. 333-113732); (iii) EnCana
Corporations registration statement on Form F-9 (File No. 333-118737); and
(iv) EnCana Corporations registration statements on Form S-8 (File Nos.
333-124218, 333-13956 and 333-85598), filed with the United States Securities
and Exchange Commission pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended.  NETHERLAND, SEWELL
  & ASSOCIATES, INC.By:
  /s/ Frederic D. SewellFrederic D. SewellChairman and Chief
  Executive Officer  Dallas, Texas February 17, 2006  Please be advised that
  the digital document you are viewing is provided by Netherland, Sewell &
  Associates Inc. (NSAI) as a convenience to our clients. The digital document
  is intended to be substantively the same as the original signed document
  maintained by NSAI. The digital document is subject to the parameters,
  limitations, and conditions stated in the original document. In the event of
  any differences between the digital document and the original document, the
  original document shall control and supersede the digital document.
CERTIFICATIONS
 
 I, Steven D. Fellows , Chief Financial Officer certify that;
 
 A.    I have reviewed this annual report on Form10-KSB of Wrestle-Plex Sports Entertainment Group, Ltd.;
 
 B.   Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement 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 with respect to the period covered by this annual
 report;
 
 C.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the
 financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;
 
 
 Date: September 5, 2003
 
 /s/ Steven D. Fellows
AEGIS SEF | 2829 Technology Forest Boulevard, Suite 260 | The Woodlands, Texas 77381

Chapter 1102

Natural Gas Fixed Swap - REX Zone 3 - Platts Inside FERC

DESCRIPTION

A monthly cash settled swap based upon the monthly price published by Platts Inside FERC for 

the location specified in Floating Price A.

FLOATING PRICE A

The Floating Price for each contract month will be equal to the Platts Inside FERC REX Zone 3

published price for the corresponding contract month.

CONTRACT UNIT AND VALUE

The contract unit shall be MMBtus (million British thermal units). Each contract shall be valued 

as the contract quantity in MMBtus multiplied by the settlement price.

LISTING CYCLE

Up to 120 consecutive monthly contract periods

PRICES AND FLUCTUATIONS

Prices shall be quoted in U.S. dollars and cents per MMBtu. The minimum price fluctuation shall 

be $0.001 per MMBtu. The minimum price increment will be $0.0001. There shall be no 

maximum price fluctuation.

TERMINATION OF TRADING

Posting of transactions shall cease on the last business day prior to the contract month.

FINAL SETTLEMENT

Delivery under the contract shall be by cash settlement. Final settlement, following termination 

of posting for a contract month, will be based on the Floating Price. The final settlement price 

will be the Floating Price calculated for each contract month.
# C_2019280EN.01003201.xml

| 19.8.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 280/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.8.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 280/32

---

Order of the President of the Court of 3 April 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesverwaltungsgericht Steiermark — Austria) — Mijo Meštrović v Bezirkshauptmannschaft Murtal, in the presence of: Finanzpolizei

(Case C-50/18) (1)

(2019/C 280/44)

Language of the case: German

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 259, 23.7.2018.

---
Exhibit 12.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, Gérard Mestrallet, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of SUEZ;

2.

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement 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 with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.

The companys other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the company and have:

a.

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,  to ensure that material information relating to the company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b.

[Reserved];

c.

Evaluated the effectiveness of the companys disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

d.

Disclosed in this report any change in the companys internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the companys internal control over financial reporting; and;

5.

The companys other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the companys auditors and the audit committee of the companys board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a.

All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the companys ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b.

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the companys internal control over financial reporting.



Date: June 26, 2006

| |  | /s/ Gérard Mestrallet                    
| |  | -----------------------------------------
| |  | Gérard Mestrallet
Chief Executive Officer
Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCWC-29581 24-JAN-2013 02:54 PM
SCWC-29581 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI ' I

STATE OF HAWAI ' I, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee,

vs. DARIA BRUCE, Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant.

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS (ICA NO. 29581; CR. NO. 06-1-0018) ORDER REJECTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, McKenna, and Pollack JJ.) Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant Daria Bruce’s application for writ of certiorari, filed December 28, 2012, is hereby rejected. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai ' i, January 24, 2013. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald Michael Jay Green for the petitioner /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr. Tracy Murakami for the respondent /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
G. THOMAS PORTEOUS, JR., United ) States DistrictJudge for the Eastern ) District ofLouisiana, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Case No. 09-2131 (RJL) ) ALAN I. BARON, Special Counsel, ) ImpeachmentTaskForce, Committee on ) the Judiciary, United States House of ) Representatives, 

### etal., ) ) Defendants. )

ORDER

# ~ Forthe reasons set forth in the Memorandum Opinion entered this

# 2. day of August, 2010, it is hereby ORDERED that the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [#7] is GRANTED; it is furtherORDERED that PlaintiffG. Thomas Porteous, Jr.'s Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction [#2] is DENIED; and it is further ORDERED that the case is DISMISSED for lack ofsubject matterjurisdiction. SO ORDERED.
Exhibit 99.3  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 Annual Report of EnCana
Corporation (the Company) on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31,
2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the Report), I, Randall K. Eresman, President & Chief Executive
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 results of operations of the Company.   By:
  /s/ Randall K. EresmanRandall K. EresmanPresident & Chief Executive Officer  February 17,
2006
Exhibit31.2


CERTIFICATION





I, Craig
Stout, certify that:





1. I have
reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Vemics, Inc.;





2. Based
on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement 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
with respect to the period covered by this report;





3. Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;





4. The
small business issuer's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and
have:





a.  designed
such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information
relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made
known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this quarterly report is being prepared;





b.
 evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and
procedures as of the end of the period (the “Evaluation Date”); and





c.  
presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the
Evaluation Date;





5. The
small business issuer's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation, of internal control over financial reporting, to the
small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business
issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):





a. all
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and





b. any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal control over
financial reporting.





6.  The
registrant’s other certifying officer and I have indicated in this quarterly
report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or in other
factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date
of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.





/s/ Craig
Stout


Craig
Stout


Chief
Financial Officer


(Principal
Accounting Officer)


Date:
November 19,
2008
Abatement Order filed March 27, 2012. 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-12-00165-CV

____________

HARDAM S. AZAD, INDIVIDUALLY AND D/B/A 5 MILLION SQUARE FEET 

COMPANIES, Appellant

V.

MIRCO, INC. AND COMMERCIAL ROOF CONSULTANTS & CLAIMS 

MANAGEMENT, L.L.C., Appellees

On Appeal from the 80th District Court 

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2009-65685

ABATEMENT ORDER

We have determined that this case is appropriate for referral to mediation, an 

alternative dispute resolution process. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 

154.021—.073. Mediation is a forum in which an impartial person, the mediator, 

facilitates communication between parties to promote reconciliation or settlement. Id. §

154.023(a). Any communication relating to the subject matter of the appeal made by a 

participant in the mediation proceeding is confidential. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code 

§ 154.053. After mediation, the parties shall advise the court whether the case settled, or

whether any further negotiation efforts are planned. 
2

The court ORDERS the appeal ABATED for a period of sixty days and refers the 

underlying dispute to mediation. Any party may file a written objection to this order with 

the clerk of this court within 10 days of the date of this order. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. 

Code § 154.022. If this court finds that there is a reasonable basis for the objection, the 

objection shall be sustained and the appeal reinstated on this court’s active docket. See id.

The court ORDERS that the mediation be held within 60 days of the date of this 

order. The court ORDERS that all parties or their representatives with full settlement 

authority shall attend the mediation process, with their counsel of record. The court

FURTHER ORDERS that within 48 hours of completion of the mediation, the parties 

shall advise the court in writing whether the case settled.

If mediation fully resolves the issues in the case, the court ORDERS the parties to 

file a motion to dismiss the appeal, other dispositive motion, or a motion for additional 

time to file the dispositive motion, within 10 days of the conclusion of the mediation. 

The court ORDERS the appellate timetable in this case suspended for 60 days from 

the date of this order.

The appeal is ABATED, treated as a closed case, and removed from this court's 

active docket for a period of sixty days. The appeal will be reinstated on this court's active 

docket after sixty days. Any party may file a motion stating grounds for reinstating the 

appeal before the end of the sixty-day period. Any party may also file a motion to dismiss 

the appeal or other dispositive motion at any time. Any party may file a motion to extend 

the abatement period for completion of mediation or to finalize a settlement. 

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Frost, Brown, and Christopher.