alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE 

CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING 

EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR. 

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA 

In The Supreme Court 

Nicanor Perez Rodriguez, Petitioner, 

v. 

State of South Carolina, Respondent. 

Appellate Case No. 2011-198031 

Appeal From Greenville County 

John C. Few, Trial Judge 

G. Edward Welmaker, Post-Conviction Relief Judge 

Memorandum Opinion No. 2013-MO-023 

Submitted August 7, 2013 – Filed August 14, 2013 

DISMISSED 

Deputy Chief Appellate Defender Wanda H. Carter, of 

South Carolina Commission on Indigent Defense, 

Division of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for 

Petitioner. 

Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney 

General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney 

General Salley W. Elliott, and Assistant Attorney 

General Karen Christine Ratigan, all of Columbia, for 

Respondent. 
PER CURIAM: Petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari from the denial of his 

application for post-conviction relief (PCR). 

The petition is denied on petitioner's Question II. Because there is sufficient 

evidence to support the PCR judge's finding that petitioner did not knowingly and 

intelligently waive his right to a direct appeal, we grant certiorari on petitioner's 

Question I, dispense with further briefing, and proceed with a review of the direct 

appeal issue pursuant to Davis v. State, 288 S.C. 290, 342 S.E.2d 60 (1986). 

Petitioner's direct appeal issue is dismissed pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, 

after review pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Counsel's 

motion to be relieved is granted. 

DISMISSED. 

TOAL, C.J., PLEICONES, BEATTY, KITTREDGE and HEARN, JJ., 

concur.
Exhibit 10.1


 





 


May 7, 2016


 


Dr. James A. Hayward

President & CEO

Applied DNA Sciences, Inc.

50 Health Sciences Drive

Stony Brook, New York 11790


 


Re: Salary Adjustment.


 


Dear Jim:


 


As per your request, this letter is your official notification
that effective May 7,2016, your salary will be adjusted. Your new annual salary will be $300,000.00 which is payable bi-weekly
at a rate of $11,538.46. This adjustment will appear in your May 20, 2016 paycheck. All normal deductions such as federal, state,
social security and Medicare will continue.


 


Regards,


 


/s/ Lawrence C. Kick


 


Lawrence C. Kick, MA, SPHR, SHRM-SCP

Executive Director, Human Resources

Applied DNA Sciences, Inc.


 


cc: Human Resources


 


50
Health Sciences Drive —
Stony Brook, NY 11790 —
tel 631 240.8800 —
fax 631 240.8900
**Exhibit 99.1**

 

**CHIEF EXECUTIVEOFFICER CERTIFICATION**

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

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANTTO**

**SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

 

R. Jack DeCrane, as ChiefExecutive Officer of DeCrane Holdings Co., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”),hereby certifies that:

 

(1)          The Company’s periodic report on Form 10-K for theperiod ended December 31, 2002 (the “Form 10-K”) fully complies with therequirements of Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, asamended; and

 

(2)          The information contained in the Form 10-K fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 
| April 15, 2003 | By:    | /s/  R. Jack DeCrane |
|----------------|--------|---------------------------|
|           | Name:  | R. Jack DeCrane           |
|           | Title: | Chief Executive Officer   |

 

 

**A signed original of this writtenstatement required by Section 906 has been provided to DeCrane Holdings Co. andwill be retained by DeCrane Holdings Co. and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.**

 

**This certification is being submittedto the Securities and Exchange Commission solely for the purpose of complyingwith Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code.  This certification shall not to be deemed“filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, asamended (the “Exchange Act”), or otherwise subject to the liability of thatsection.  This certification does notconstitute a part of Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K accompanying thiscertification and to which it is an exhibit.**

 

----
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Agriculture

###### Agricultural Research Service

# AGENCY:

Agricultural Research Service, USDA.

# ACTION:

Notice of intent.

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given that the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, intends to grant to Triple “F,” Inc. of Des Moines, Iowa, an exclusive license to U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 09/611,615, “COBY Products and a Process for Their Manufacture,” filed on July 7, 2000. Notice of Availability for U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 09/611,615 was published in the                         **Federal Register**                         on March 13, 2001.                    

# DATES:

Comments must be received on or before August 27, 2001.

# ADDRESSES:

Send comments to: USDA, ARS, Office of Technology Transfer, 5601 Sunnyside Avenue, Rm. 4-1158, Beltsville, Maryland 20705-5131.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

June Blalock of the Office of Technology Transfer at the Beltsville address given above; telephone: 301-504-5257.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Federal Government's patent rights in this invention are assigned to the United States of America, as represented by the Secretary of Agriculture. It is in the public interest to so license this invention as Triple “F,” Inc. has submitted a complete and sufficient application for a license. The prospective exclusive license will be royalty-bearing and will comply with the terms and conditions of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. The prospective exclusive license may be granted unless, within sixty (60) days from the date of this published Notice, the Agricultural Research Service receives written evidence and argument which establishes that the grant of the license would not be consistent with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7.

Michael D. Ruff,

Assistant Administrator.

[FR Doc. 01-16129 Filed 6-26-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-03-P
```

[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 126 (Friday, June 29, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 34715]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-16375]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force Caulerpa taxifolia Prevention 
Committee

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces a workshop sponsored by the Aquatic 
Nuisance Species (ANS) Task Force Caulerpa taxifolia Prevention 
Committee. The workshop topics are identified in the Supplementary 
Information.

DATES: The Caulerpa taxifolia Prevention Committee will meet from 8:00 
a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Tuesday, July 10, 2001, and 8:00 a.m. to noon on 
Wednesday, July 11, 2001.

ADDRESSES: The Caulerpa taxifolia Prevention Committee workshop will be 
held at the Holiday Inn-San Diego Bayside, 4875 North Harbor Drive, San 
Diego, CA 92106-2394.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sandra M. Keppner, Caulerpa taxifolia 
Prevention Committee Chairperson, at 716-691-5456 ext 23 or by e-mail 
at [email protected]; or Sharon Gross, Executive Secretary, 
Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force at 703-358-2308 or by e-mail at 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App. I), this notice announces a 
workshop of the Aquatic Nuisance Species Caulerpa taxifolia Prevention 
Committee. The Task Force was established by the Nonindigenous Aquatic 
Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 (16 U.S.C. 4701-4741). 
Topics to be addressed at the Caulerpa taxifolia Prevention Committee 
workshop include: the problems, costs, and lessons learned in regional 
efforts to manage invasive marine algal species; an overview of the 
coordinated response approach in California including a review of 
control and eradication efforts planned; an overview of efforts to 
engage California in ANS management planning: and a working review of 
an action plan including the draft comprehensive national prevention 
program developed by the Committee.
    Minutes of the meeting will be maintained by the Executive 
Secretary, Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force, Suite 810, 4401 North 
Fairfax Drive, Arlington, Virginia 22203-1622. Minutes for the meeting 
will be available at these locations for public inspection during 
regular business hours, Monday through Friday.

    Dated: June 25, 2001.
Cathleen I. Short,
Co-Chair, Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force, Assistant Director--
Fisheries and Habitat Conservation.
[FR Doc. 01-16375 Filed 6-28-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-M
```
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER  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 Golden Spirit EnterprisesLtd.(the "Company") on Form 10-KSBfor the period ending December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),



I,Robert Klein, Director  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 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 Report fairly presents, in all  material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this amended certification as of the 15th day of April 2008.



/s/  Robert Klein

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

Robert Klein

President/Director
# C_2011226EN.01000701.xml

| 30.7.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 226/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.7.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 226/7

---

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 9 June 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo (Spain)) — Campsa Estaciones de Servicio SA v Administración del Estado

(Case C-285/10) (1)

1

(Sixth VAT Directive - Articles 11A(1) and 27 - Taxable amount - Extension of the rules on application for private use to transactions between connected parties where prices are patently lower than open market prices)

2011/C 226/11

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Referring court

Tribunal Supremo

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Campsa Estaciones de Servicio SA

Applicant:

Defendant: Administración del Estado

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunal Supremo — Interpretation of Articles 6, 11 and 27 of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1) — Extension of rules on application of goods and services for private use to transactions between connected parties where the price is patently lower than the open market value

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment, must be interpreted as precluding a Member State from applying to transactions, such as those in the main proceedings, effected between connected parties having agreed a price which is patently lower than the open market price, a rule for determining the taxable amount other than the general rule laid down in Article 11A(1)(a) of that directive, by extending the scope of the rules for determining the taxable amount on the application of goods and services for private use by a taxable person, within the meaning of Articles 5(6) and 6(2) of that directive, when the procedure provided for in Article 27 of that directive to obtain authorisation for such derogation from that general rule has not been followed by that Member State.

---

(1)  OJ C 246, 11.9.2010.

1

---
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markm an Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

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

_________________________________________ Clerk June 25, 2012

t0618 

# Order

June 25, 2012

144782

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 144782

COA: 300320

Berrien CC: 2010

- 001666

- FC

DONNELL DEFRANCE WILLIAMS,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 17, 2012

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
                                                                                           Exhibit 11.1

                                     COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE

<CAPTION>
                                                             Three Months                   Nine Months
                                                         Ended September 30,           Ended September 30,
                                                      ------------------------      ------------------------
                                                         1998           1997           1998           1997
                                                      ---------      ---------      ---------      ---------
                                                           (Dollars in thousands except earnings per share)

<S>                                                   <C>            <C>            <C>            <C>

DILUTED:

Average common shares outstanding                     5,224,495      3,852,280      5,166,479      3,470,030

Average common stock equivalents of
   warrants and options outstanding
   based on  the treasury stock method
   using market price                                   267,089        374,965        371,668        326,638
                                                      ---------      ---------      ---------      ---------

Weighted average diluted shares outstanding           5,491,584      4,227,245      5,538,147      3,796,668

Net income                                               $1,207           $838         $2,911         $2,139

Diluted earning per common share                          $0.22          $0.20          $0.53          $0.56

Basic earning per common share                            $0.23          $0.22          $0.56          $0.62



</TABLE>
# C_2009205EN.01002801.xml

| 29.8.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 205/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.8.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 205/28

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour constitutionnelle (Belgium) lodged on 29 June 2009 — Association Belge des Consommateurs Test-Achats ASBL, Yann van Vugt, Charles Basselier v Conseil des ministres

(Case C-236/09)

2009/C 205/47

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Referring court

Cour constitutionnelle

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Association Belge des Consommateurs Test-Achats ASBL, Yann van Vugt, Charles Basselier

Applicants:

Defendant: Conseil des ministres

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Is Article 5(2) of Council Directive 2004/113/EC of 13 December 2004 implementing the principle of equal treatment between men and women in the access to and supply of goods and services (1) compatible with Article 6(2) of the Treaty on European Union, and more specifically with the principle of equality and non-discrimination guaranteed by that provision? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is Article 5(2) of Council Directive 2004/113/EC of 13 December 2004 implementing the principle of equal treatment between men and women in the access to and supply of goods and services (1) compatible with Article 6(2) of the Treaty on European Union, and more specifically with the principle of equality and non-discrimination guaranteed by that provision?

1

| 2. | If the answer to the first question is negative, is Article 5(2) of the Directive also incompatible with Article 6(2) of the Treaty on European Union if its application is restricted to life assurance contracts? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the answer to the first question is negative, is Article 5(2) of the Directive also incompatible with Article 6(2) of the Treaty on European Union if its application is restricted to life assurance contracts?

---

(1)  OJ L 373, p. 37.

1

---
Ernest KEISTER, et al., petitioners, v. PPL CORPORATION, et al.

No. 16-1465.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         362,018
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  6,223,887
<ALLOWANCES>                                   490,573
<INVENTORY>                                    2,325,958
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               8,935,695
<PP&E>                                         3,346,425
<DEPRECIATION>                                 845,868
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 26,735,858
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          12,455,670
<BONDS>                                        3,963,911
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    5
<COMMON>                                       3,730
<OTHER-SE>                                     7,682,542
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   26,735,858
<SALES>                                        41,208,493
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               41,208,493
<CGS>                                          30,664,804
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  7,911,401
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               854,480
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               198,241
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             740,371
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                1,042,018
<INCOME-TAX>                                   370,380
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            671,638
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   671,638
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0.06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.05



</TABLE>
# C_2011080EN.01000601.xml

| 12.3.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 80/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.3.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 80/6

---

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 13 January 2011 — Media-Saturn-Holding GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case C-92/10 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Community trade mark - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Mark consisting of an advertising slogan and composed of elements individually devoid of any distinctive character - Figurative sign ‘BEST BUY’)

2011/C 80/09

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Media-Saturn-Holding GmbH (represented by: E. Warnke, Rechtsanwalt)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Schneider)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 15 December 2009 in Case T-476/08 Media-Saturn v OHIM (BEST BUY) in which the General Court dismissed the action against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM, of 28 August 2008, dismissing the appeal against the examiner’s decision which refused the registration of the figurative sign ‘BEST BUY’ as a Community trade mark for goods and services in Classes 1, 2, 5 to 12, 14 to 17, 20 to 22, 27, 28, 35, 37, 38 and 40 to 42 — distinctive character of a mark consisting of an advertising slogan and composed of elements individually devoid of any distinctive character

Media-Saturn

OHIM (BEST BUY)

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders Media-Saturn-Holding GmbH to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Media-Saturn-Holding GmbH to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 113, 01.05.2010

1

---