alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2020077EN.01000801.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 (Eighth Chamber) of 21 January 2020 — European Parliament v Erik Josefsson

(Case C-506/18 P) (1)

(Appeal - Civil service - Temporary staff - European Parliament - Termination of the contract - Agreement intended to resolve the dispute between the parties - Appeal which has become devoid of purpose - No need to adjudicate)

(2020/C 77/10)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: European Parliament (represented by: I. Ní Riagáin Düro and V. Montebello-Demogeot and by J. Steele, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings: Erik Josefsson (represented by: T. Bontinck, A. Guillerme and M. Forgeois, avocats)

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no need to adjudicate on the appeal. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no need to adjudicate on the appeal.

| 2. | The European Parliament and Mr Erik Josefsson shall bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The European Parliament and Mr Erik Josefsson shall bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 445, 10.12.2018.

---
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-13-00384-CR

Wallace Best

v.

The State of Texas

§

§

§

§

§

From Criminal District Court No. 1

of Tarrant County (1320232D)

October 17, 2013

Per Curiam

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

the appeal should be dismissed. It is ordered that the appeal is dismissed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

PER CURIAM
Exhibit 31.1

              Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to
                      Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act

I, Stephanie Wood, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Cinnabar Ventures
     Inc.;

2.   Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

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

4.   I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
     procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the
     registrant 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 a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of
          this quarterly report (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.   I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the registrant's
     auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or
     persons performing the equivalent functions):

     a.   all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
          controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
          record, process, summarize and report financial data and have
          identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in
          internal controls; and
     b.   any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
          employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
          controls; and

6.   I have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not 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.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
10th day of January, 2008.


/s/ Stephanie Wood
-------------------------------
Chief Executive Officer
AEGIS SEF | 2829 Technology Forest Boulevard, Suite 260 | The Woodlands, Texas 77381

Chapter 1054

Natural Gas Basis Swap - Transco St 30 (Z1) - Platts Inside FERC

DESCRIPTION

A monthly cash settled swap based upon the mathematical result of subtracting the price of the 

NYMEX Henry Hub Natural Gas futures contract, as defined in Floating Price B, from 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 Transco St 30 

(Z1) published price for the corresponding contract month.

FLOATING PRICE B

The Floating Price for each contract month will be equal to the NYMEX Henry Hub Natural Gas 

futures contract final settlement price for the corresponding contract month on the last trading 

day for that contract month.

CONTRACT UNIT AND VALUE

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

contract quantity 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.
S06A2101.

#### GARNETT v. MURRAY.

(639 SE2d 475)

Thompson, Justice.

On August 17, 2005, Ruby M. Garnett filed a mandamus petition against Brian C. Murray to compel Murray to issue an income deduction order to garnish the wages of Garnett’s ex-husband who was allegedly in arrears on his child support obligation. Murray had previously been employed by Maximus, Inc., which had contracted with the State of Georgia to provide child support enforcement services between July 1, 2003, and September 30, 2005.

Murray filed an answer and a motion to dismiss the petition on October 18, 2005, pointing out, inter alia, that he no longer works for Maximus, Inc., and is not in a position to perform the act that Garnett *507wants him to perform.1 On June 22, 2006, Murray filed a supplemental brief in support of his motion.2 Following a hearing on July 13, 2006, the court granted Murray’s motion to dismiss and dismissed the petition for mandamus with prejudice.

Decided January 8, 2007.

Ruby M. Garnett, *pro se.*

*Balch & Bingham, Michelle M. Rothenberg-Williams, MalissaA. Kaufold-Wiggins,*for appellee.

1. Relying upon Uniform Superior Court Rule 6.2,3 Garnett asserts the court erred in ruling on Murray’s motion to dismiss without allowing her a sufficient period of time to respond to Murray’s supplemental brief. This assertion is without merit. The supplemental brief was not a motion; it was filed in support of Murray’s motion to dismiss which was filed more than eight months before the hearing. Additionally, a trial judge has the discretion to shorten the period of time to respond to a motion to dismiss in a civil case. See *Kidd v. Unger,*207 Ga. App. 109, 110 (2) (427 SE2d 82) (1993). More importantly, Garnett has not shown how she was harmed by the alleged error. “As the record stands in this case, judgment for [Murray] is demanded. [Garnett] make[s] no claim that there would have been any addition to the record or that [additional time to respond to the supplemental brief] would have changed the state of the record in *anyway” Premium Distrib. Co. v. National Distrib. Co.,*157 Ga. App. 666, 670 (2) (278 SE2d 468) (1981).

2. The remaining enumerations of error are not supported by argument or citation of authority and are deemed abandoned. Rule 22, Rules of the Supreme Court of Georgia.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*

1

 See *Sauls v. Winters,*215 Ga. 515, 517 (111 SE2d 41) (1959) (petition for mandamus is inappropriate unless the defendant is in a position to perform the act the petitioner seeks to have performed).

2

 The brief was captioned “Supplemental Brief in Support of Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative for Summary Judgment Upon Plaintiffs Petition for Mandamus.”

3

 This rule provides:

> Unless otherwise ordered by the judge, each party opposing a motion shall serve and file a response, reply memorandum, affidavits, or other responsive material not later than 30 days after service of the motion.
#### COX v. DINE-A-MATE, INC.

No. 284P98

Case below: 129 N.C.App.773

Petition by defendants for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 3 December 1998.
---

EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the  Amended Quarterly Report of All American Gold Corp.,  formerly Osprey Ventures, Inc.  (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q/A for the second quarter ended November 30, 2010,  as filed with the Securities and Exchange date hereof (the “Amended Quarterly  Report”), I, Brent Welke, 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:

|1. | the Amended Quarterly 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 Amended Quarterly  Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and  results of operations of the Company.

Date: January 20, 2010

/s/ Brent Welke

Brent WelkeChief Financial Officer

---
# C_2020137EN.01004202.xml

| 27.4.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 137/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.4.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 137/42

---

Order of the President of the Ninth Chamber of the Court of 21 November 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Sicilville Srl v Comune di Brescia, intervening party: Consorzio Stabile A.L.P.I. s.c.a.r.l.

(Case C-324/18) (1)

(2020/C 137/59)

Language of the case: Italian

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

---

(1)  OJ C 285, 13.8.2018.

---
Exhibit
31.2


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.







Vemics,
Inc.
                      (Registrant)Date:
      February 22, 2010
                    By:
                    /s/ Craig
      StoutCraig
      StoutChief
      Financial Officer(Principal
      Accounting Officer)
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-11012

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ANDREW KENT CLARK,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:10-CR-27-1

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and STEWART and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Andrew Kent Clark

has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders

v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th

Cir. 2011). Clark has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and

the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s

assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review.

Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

June 21, 2011

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

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.

Case: 10-11012 Document: 00511515370 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/21/2011
No. 10-11012

excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED.

See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

2

Case: 10-11012 Document: 00511515370 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/21/2011
S06A1596.

#### BOYD v. ST. LAWRENCE.

(637 SE2d 687)

Sears, Chief Justice.

In this pre-trial habeas action, the appellant, Dick Boyd, contended that he was entitled to be released from custody because he had not been taken before a “judicial officer authorized to receive an affidavit and issue a warrant”1 within 48 hours of his warrantless arrest as required by OCGA § 17-4-62. Boyd, however, was indicted shortly after he brought his habeas action, thus rendering moot any question regarding whether he should have been brought before a *301neutral factfinder2 3under OCGA § 17-4-62.3 Accordingly, the trial court properly denied his petition for habeas relief.

Decided November 20, 2006.

Dick L. Boyd, *pro se.*

*Emily E. Garrard, R. Jonathan Hart,*for appellee.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*

1

 OCGA§ 17-4-62.

2

*Dean v. State,*250 Ga. 77, 81 (295 SE2d 306) (1982) (purpose of OCGA § 17-4-62 is simply “to insure that the arrest and continuing detention of an accused is reviewed by a neutral factfinder”).

3

 See *Ross v. Lemacks,*264 Ga. 839 (452 SE2d 109) (1995) (although OCGA § 17-4-26 provides that a defendant must be released from custody if not provided a commitment hearing within 72 hours of his arrest pursuant to a warrant, a defendant’s indictment moots question of whether he should have been brought before a judicial officer within 72 hours).
Exhibit32





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





The
undersigned have executed this certification in connection with the filing with
the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form
10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2008. The undersigned hereby certify that
to our 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.








Dated:   May
22,
2008                          /s/ Fred
Zolla


Fred Zolla


President and Chief Executive
Officer


(Principal
Executive Officer)














Dated:   May
22,
2008                         
/s/ Tom
Owens


Tom Owens


Chief
Financial Officer


(Principal Accounting
Officer)
Case 1:07-cv-05564-AKH Document 14-3 Filed 08/23/2007 Page 1 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05564-AKH Document 14-3 Filed 08/23/2007 Page 2 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05564-AKH Document 14-3 Filed 08/23/2007 Page 3 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05564-AKH Document 14-3 Filed 08/23/2007 Page 4 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05564-AKH Document 14-3 Filed 08/23/2007 Page 5 of 5
#### Tazewell Delaney et al., Appellants, v John Weston et al., Respondents.

Submitted November 23, 2009;

decided February 23, 2010

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the Appellate Division order does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution. The parties’ stipulation, being conditional, does not finally determine the counterclaims for purposes of this Court’s jurisdiction.
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
RULE 13a-14(b) UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
AND 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 GameStop Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-K/A for the
period ending January 29, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), I, R. Richard Fontaine, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of
the Company, certify, to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. Section 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/ R. Richard FontaineR. Richard FontaineChairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
GameStop Corp.
September 2, 2005 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form
within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided
to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
CERTIFICATIONS
 
 I, Bill Liao , Chief Executive 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 m ade, 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/___Bill Liao_______
 (Signature)
 Chief Executive Officer
f1012g0910a1ex10i_gsp2.htm


Exhibit 10.1


 


 


Description of Verbal Management Consulting Agreement Between GSP-2, Inc. and Peter Goldstein












On September 3, 2010 Mr. Goldstein, the President and sole director of the Company, verbally agreed to provide funding to cover the costs of investigating and analyzing business combinations for the next 12 months and beyond, until the Company is engaged in business activities that provide cash flow sufficient to cover the costs of investigating and analyzing business combinations. We currently have no written contractual agreements in place with Mr. Goldstein to provide such funding. During the next 12 months, Mr. Goldstein has agreed to cover costs including, but not limited to, the filing of Exchange Act reports, and consummating an acquisition. At this time we do not have the funds to pay for these filings and do not have any written agreement to raise funds to cover these expenses. However, we believe we will be able to meet these costs with funds provided by Mr. Goldstein. At such time that the Company has the ability to cover the costs of investigating and analyzing business combinations with cash flow from operations, Mr. Goldstein will no longer be obligated to cover such costs.