alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 3 (Thursday, January 4, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 783-784]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-164]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP01-193-000]


Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in 
FERC Gas Tariff

December 28, 2000.
    Take notice that on December 21, 2000, Eastern Shore Natural Gas 
Company (ESNG), tendered for filing

[[Page 784]]

certain revised tariff sheets in the above captioned docket as part of 
its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1, that bear a proposed 
effective date of January 1, 2001.
    The purpose of this instant filing is to track rate changes 
attributable to storage services purchased from Columbia Gas 
Transmission Corporation (Columbia) under its Rate Schedules FSS and 
SST. The costs of the above referenced storage service comprise that 
rates and charges payable under ESNG's respective Rate Schedule CFSS. 
This tracking filing is being made pursuant to Section 3 of ESNG's Rate 
Schedule CFSS.
    In addition to the above referenced tracking charges this instant 
filing also reflects the December 15, 2000 tracking rate charges 
attributable to storage services purchased from Transcontinental Gas 
Pipe Line Corporation (Transco) under its Rate Schedules GSS and LSS. 
The costs of the above referenced storage service comprise the rates 
and charges payable under ESNG's respective Rate Schedules GSS and LSS. 
This tracking filing is being made pursuant to Section 3 of ESNG's Rate 
Schedules GSS and LSS.
    ESNG states that copies of the filing have been served upon its 
jurisdictional customers and interested State Commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington DC 20426, in 
accordance with sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in 
accordance with section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance). 
Comments and protests 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.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-164 Filed 1-3-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-07-M
Delaney E. SMITH, Jr., petitioner, v. LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, et al.

No. 17-407.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 20, 2018.

Petition for rehearing denied.
EX-10.15



 Exhibit 10.15 

Power of Attorney 
 I,
Weifeng Luo, a Chinese citizen with Chinese Identification Card No.440103198603043011, and a holder of 10% of the entire registered capital in Guangzhou Cornerstone Capital Management Co., Ltd., (the “Cornerstone Capital”) (the
“My Shareholding”), hereby irrevocably authorize Guangzhou Cornerstone Corporate Consulting Co., Ltd. (the “WFOE”) to exercise the following rights relating to My Shareholding during the term of this Power of
Attorney: 
 The WFOE is hereby authorized to act on behalf of myself as my exclusive agent and attorney with respect to all matters
concerning My Shareholding, including without limitation to: 1) attend shareholders’ meetings of Cornerstone Capital; 2) exercise all the shareholder’s rights and shareholder’s voting rights I am entitled to under the laws of China
and Cornerstone Capital’s Articles of Association, including but not limited to the sale or transfer or pledge or disposition of My Shareholding in part or in whole; and 3) designate and appoint on behalf of myself the legal representative, the
executive director and/or director, supervisor, the chief executive officer and other senior management members of Cornerstone Capital. 

Without limiting the generality of the powers granted hereunder, the WFOE shall have the power and authority under this Power of Attorney to
execute the Transfer Contracts stipulated in Exclusive Option Agreement, to which I am required to be a party, on behalf of myself, and to effect the terms of the Share Pledge Agreement and Exclusive Option Agreement, both dated the date hereof, to
which I am a party. 
 All the actions associated with My Shareholding conducted by the WFOE shall be deemed as my own actions, and all the
documents related to My Shareholding executed by the WFOE shall be deemed to be executed by me. I hereby acknowledge and ratify those actions and/or documents by the WFOE. 

The WFOE is entitled to re-authorize or assign its rights related to the aforesaid matters to any
other person or entity at its own discretion and without giving prior notice to me or obtaining my consent. 
 This Power of Attorney is
coupled with an interest and shall be irrevocable and continuously valid from the date of execution of this Power of Attorney, so long as I am a shareholder of Cornerstone Capital. 

During the term of this Power of Attorney, I hereby waive all the rights associated with My Shareholding, which have been authorized to WFOE
through this Power of Attorney, and shall not exercise such rights by myself. 
 This Power of Attorney is written in Chinese and English;
in case there is any conflict between the Chinese version and the English version, the Chinese version shall prevail. 

  
 1 

Strictly Confidential 








 
			
	Weifeng Luo
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Weifeng Luo

		
	Date:	 	October 12, 2017


  

			
	Mingqi Huang
		
	Witness:	 	 /s/ Mingqi Huang

		
	Date:	 	October 12, 2017


  
 2 

Strictly Confidential
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: In re Health Care Services, Inc. d/b/a Groves Security Solutions and 

All Occupants of 829 Yale Street, Houston, TX

Appellate case number: 01-21-00030-CV

Trial court case number: 1150005

Trial court: County Court at Law No. 1 of Harris County

Relator, Health Care Services, Inc. d/b/a Groves Security Solutions and All Occupants of 

829 Yale Street, Houston, TX, has filed an emergency motion for temporary relief asking this 

Court to stay trial court proceedings while their original proceeding is pending in this Court. See 

TEX. R. APP. P. 52.10. We deny relator’s request for emergency temporary relief. 

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: ______/s/ Sherry Radack________________________________

 Acting individually Acting for the Court

Date: __January 15, 2021____
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN RE

GTG SOLUTIONS, INC.,

Relator.

§

§

§

No. 08-20-00182-CV

AN ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

IN MANDAMUS

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus against 

the Honorable John L. Pool of the 109th District Court of Winkler County, and concludes that 

Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus should be denied. We therefore deny the petition for writ 

of mandamus, in accordance with the opinion of this Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 25TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2021.

JEFF ALLEY, Justice

Before Rodriguez, C.J., Palafox, and Alley, JJ.
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

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 PW Eagle, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Scott Long, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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 ofoperations of the Company. 

Dated: May 10, 2007
Khaled AL FAWWAZ, aka Abu Omar, aka Khaled Abdul Khaled Abdul Rahman Hamad al Fawwaz, aka Hamad, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-6859.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 26, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.

Justice SOTOMAYOR took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
1Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

For the Fifth Circuit

No. 96-30383

Summary Calendar

MARY FRANCES WILSON, INDIVIDUALLY AND

ON BEHALF OF THE ESTATE OF BILLY E. WILSON; 

DENNIS WILSON; HEDY WILSON HERTZOG,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

THE GROW GROUP, et al,

Defendants,

THE GROW GROUP INCORPORATED; GROWCO INCORPORATED;

NATIONAL AEROSOL PRODUCTS,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Eastern District of Louisiana

(94-CV-307-R)

September 11, 1996

Before SMITH, DUHÉ, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:1
2

Plaintiffs, the widow and children of Billy Wilson, appeal

the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the

Defendants in their suit claiming Billy Wilson’s death was caused

by Defendants’ chemicals. 

The Plaintiffs first argue that the district court prematurely

considered and decided defendants’ motion for summary judgment.

The Plaintiffs contend that the district court’s action was an

abuse of discretion in light of the Plaintiff’s last minute

discovery that their medical expert would not testify in their

behalf. The Plaintiffs assert that without this witness’s

testimony, they could not prove causation, a central element in

their prima facie case against the Defendants. Accordingly, the

Plaintiffs sought a continuance, which the district court denied.

The Plaintiffs then argue that the district court abused its

discretion in failing to grant a continuance.

We have reviewed the record and briefs and AFFIRM the district

court’s grant of summary judgment for the defendants. See The

Estate of Billy Wilson, et al v. The Grow Group, Inc. et al, No.

94-CV-307-R (E.D. La. Oct. 13, 1995). The district court granted

judgment because Plaintiffs failed to show that a genuine issue

exists as to whether the deceased was ever exposed to defendant’s

product, not for lack of proof of medical causation. The Plaintiffs

cannot rely on the mere allegations in their pleadings to defeat

the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. See Celotex v.

Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 324 (1986). Moreover, the Plaintiffs cannot
3

rely on an unsworn affidavit to raise a fact issue precluding

summary judgment. See Nissho-Iwai American Corp. v. Kline, 845

F.2d 1300, 1302 (5th Cir. 1988).

AFFIRMED.
Dean Robert JACOBS, petitioner, v. David B. LONG, Warden.

No. 16-9592.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 126 (Friday, June 29, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 34713]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-16395]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of the Secretary


Delaware & Lehigh Heritage Corridor Commission Meeting

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Department of the Interior.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces an upcoming meeting of the Delaware & 
Lehigh National Heritage Corridor Commission. Notice of this meeting is 
required under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463).

Meeting Date and Time: Friday, July 13, 2001; Time 1:30 p.m. to 4:00 
p.m.

ADDRESSES: Luckenbach Mill, Historic Bethlehem Industrial Quarters, 459 
Old York Road, Bethlehem, PA 18018.
    The agenda for the meeting will focus on implementation of the 
Management Action Plan for the Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage 
Corridor and State Heritage Park. The Commission was established to 
assist the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and its political subdivisions 
in planning and implementing an integrated strategy for protecting and 
promoting cultural, historic and natural resources. The Commission 
reports to the Secretary of the Interior and to Congress.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Delaware & Lehigh National Heritage 
Corridor Commission was established by Public Law 100-692, November 18, 
1988 and extended through Public Law 105-355, November 13, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: C. Allen Sachse, Executive Director, 
Delaware & Lehigh National Heritage Corridor Commission, 10 E. Church 
Street, Room A-208, Bethlehem, PA 18018, (610) 861-9345.

    Dated: June 25, 2001.
C. Allen Sachse,
Executive Director, Delaware & Lehigh National Heritage Corridor 
Commission.
[FR Doc. 01-16395 Filed 6-28-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-PE-M
<TABLE>

                                                       EXHIBIT 11



AMERICAN GAMING & ENTERTAINMENT, LTD.
COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS (LOSS) PER SHARE
PRIMARY AND FULLY-DILUTED


                           Three Months Ended           Six Months Ended                        
                                  June 30,                    June 30,
                               1997        1996           1997        1996
                               ____        ____           ____        ____

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

Weighted average number
 of shares for computation   12,532,102   12,532,102   12,532,102   12,532,102
                             ==========   ==========   ==========   ============

Net loss                    $(2,055,000) $(8,628,000) $(5,717,000) $(10,725,000)

Dividends and accretion
on preferred stock              467,000      467,000      933,000      875,000
                             ___________ ___________  ____________ _____________
Net loss for common 
stockholders                $(2,522,000) $(9,095,000) $(7,117,000) $(12,067,000)
                            ============ ============ ============ =============
Net loss per common 
share                            $(0.20)      $(0.73)      $(0.57)      $(0.96)
                                 =======      =======      =======      =======


</TABLE>
CFTC Market Surveillance 1 

Reconstruction of Full Limit Order Book: GBP/USD
Monty SULLIVAN, petitioner, v. Eddie WILSON, Warden, et al.

No. 16-9334.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

*113Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.
Charles Pete EYLE, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-7990.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 16, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
**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 Annual Report of ROO Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form
      10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Kaleil Isaza
      Tuzman, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
      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 and 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.





A
      signed
      original 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.




April
                1, 2008
            /s/
                Kaleil Isaza TuzmanKaleil
                Isaza TuzmanChief
                Executive Officer
**Exhibit32**

 

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

 

In connection with the Annual Report of PrimaryBusiness Systems, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31,2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), I, Patrick Matthews, Chief Executive Officer and ChiefFinancial 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)                                  TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                                  Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/ Patrick Matthews                                 |   |
|------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Patrick Matthews                                     |
| Chief Executive Officer  and Chief Financial Officer |
| March 30, 2005                                  |

 

----
In Re Leon BRADLEY, petitioner.

No. 16-1509.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for a writ of mandamus is denied.

Justice ALITO took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 122 (Monday, June 25, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 33669]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-15803]


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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


Notice of Proposed Information Collection Requests

AGENCY: Department of Education.

ACTION: Correction notice.

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

SUMMARY: On June 8, 2001, a 60-day notice inviting comment from the 
public was inadvertently published for the Applications for Grants 
under the Smaller Learning Communities Program in the Federal Register 
(66 FR 111) dated June 8, 2001. The Department will provide a public 
comment period once the Notice of Proposed Priority (NPP) is published. 
This will allow for sufficient time for the public to comment not only 
on the NPP but also on the information collection activity.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathy Axt at her internet address 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#410a203529386f0039350124256f262e37"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a7ecc6d3cfde89e6dfd3e7c2c389c0c8d1">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: June 19, 2001.
John Tressler,
Leader, Regulatory Information Management, Office of the Chief 
Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 01-15803 Filed 6-22-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-U


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
**Order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 3 April 2009 – UCAPT v Council**

**(Case T-96/09 R)**

Application for interim measures – Application for suspension of operation of a measure – Failure to comply with formal requirements – Inadmissibility

1.                     *Application for interim measures – Conditions for admissibility – Application – Formal requirements (Arts 242 EC and 243 EC;
Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2) and (3) (see paras 9-11)*

2.                     *Application for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Interim measures – Conditions for granting – Urgency
– Serious and irreparable damage – Burden of proof (Arts 242 EC and 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance,
Art. 104(2)) (see paras 14-15)*

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | APPLICATION for suspension of operation of Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 of 19 January 2009 establishing common rules for direct support schemes for farmers under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers, amending Regulations (EC) No 1290/2005, (EC) No 247/2006 and (EC) No 378/2007 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 (OJ 2009 L 30, p. 16). |

**Operative part**

1.      The application for interim measures is dismissed.

2.      The costs are reserved.
Darwin Keith BRIDGES, et al., petitioners, v. EMPIRE SCAFFOLD, LLC.

No. 17-1118.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 16, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
# C_2012343EN.01001202.xml

| 10.11.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 343/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.11.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 343/12

---

Judgment of the General Court of 26 September 2012 — Serrano Aranda v OHIM — Burg Groep (LE LANCIER)

(Case T-265/09) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark LE LANCIER - Earlier national word and figurative marks EL LANCERO - Relative grounds for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Opposition dismissed)

2012/C 343/16

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Enrique Serrano Aranda (Murcia, Spain) (represented: initially by J. Calderón Chavero and T. Villate Consonni, then J. Calderón Chavero, lawyers)

Applicant: Enrique

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented: initially by W. Verberg and S. Bonne, then S. Bonne, Agents)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Burg Groep BV (Bergen, Netherlands)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 27 March 2009 (Case R 366/2008-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Mr Enrique Serrano Aranda and Burg Groep BV.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Mr Enrique Serrano Aranda to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Enrique Serrano Aranda to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 205, 29.8.2009.

1

---