alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

KEVIN JAMES KOHUTE, §

§

Plaintiff, §

§

versus § CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:24-CV-22

§

KAITLYN BRAQUET, §

§

Defendant. §

ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE

JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiff Kevin James Kohute, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil

rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Kaitlyn Braquet.

The court referred this matter to the Honorable Zack Hawthorn, United States Magistrate

Judge, at Beaumont, Texas, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this court. 

On May 1, 2024, the magistrate judge recommended dismissing the action pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(e) as frivolous and for failure to state a claim. To date, the parties have not filed

objections to the report and recommendation.

The court received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States

Magistrate Judge pursuant to such referral, along with the record, pleadings and all available

evidence. After careful review, the court finds that the findings of fact and conclusions of law of

the United States Magistrate Judge are correct. 

Accordingly, the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the magistrate judge are

correct, and the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge (#7) is

Case 1:24-cv-00022-MAC-ZJH Document 10 Filed 06/03/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 28
ADOPTED. A final judgment will be entered in accordance with the magistrate judge’s

recommendation.

2

________________________________________

MARCIA A. CRONE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE SIGNED at Beaumont, Texas, this 3rd day of June, 2024.

Case 1:24-cv-00022-MAC-ZJH Document 10 Filed 06/03/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 29
John HANKINS, et al., Petitioners v. Barry SEIFMAN, et al.

No. 19-480

Supreme Court of the United States.

November 12, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
EXHIBIT 99.6

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Eldorado Gold Corporation (the Company) on Form 40-F/A for the period ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Paul N. Wright, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Date:   November 10, 2008
        
        By:
        
        /s/ Paul N. Wright
Paul N. WrightChief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)




A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Eldorado Gold Corporation and will be retained by Eldorado Gold Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 113 (Monday, June 13, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 35787]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-12619]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2022-D-0362]


Blood Pressure and Pulse Donor Eligibility Requirements: 
Compliance Policy; Draft Guidance for Industry; Correction

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of availability; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is correcting 
a notice that appeared in the Federal Register of Tuesday, May 24, 
2022. The document announced the availability of a draft guidance 
entitled ``Blood Pressure and Pulse Donor Eligibility Requirements: 
Compliance Policy; Draft Guidance for Industry.'' The draft guidance 
document was published with incorrect information of a comment period 
due date. This document corrects that error.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Myrna Hanna, Center for Biologics 
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New 
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-
402-7911.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of May 24, 2022 (87 
FR 31567), in FR Doc. 2022-11118, on page 31567, the following 
correction is made:
    1. On page 3156, in the first column, the DATES caption is 
corrected to read:

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the draft 
guidance by July 25, 2022, to ensure that the Agency considers your 
comment on this draft guidance before it begins work on the final 
version of the guidance.

    Dated: June 3, 2022.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-12619 Filed 6-10-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


C\_2018228EN.01003401.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 29.6.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 228/34 |

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.8896 — Macquarie Group/The Goldman Sachs Group/HES International)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2018/C 228/07)

1.

On 22 June 2018, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [(1)](#ntr1-C_2018228EN.01003401-E0001).

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | Macquarie Group Limited (‘Macquarie’, Australia), |

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | Goldman Sachs Group (‘Goldman Sachs’, United States), |

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | HES International BV (‘HES’, Netherlands). |

Macquarie and Goldman Sachs acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of HES.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

—   for Macquarie: global provider of banking, financial, advisory, investment and fund management services,

—   for Goldman Sachs: global investment banking, securities and investment management firm,

—   for HES: operates and develops dry, liquid and break bulk terminals in North West Europe, providing transhipment, storage, blending and processing services for dry and liquid bulk.

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

4.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.8896 — Macquarie Group/The Goldman Sachs Group/HES International

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

| |
| --- |
| Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu |
| Fax +32 22964301 |
| Postal address: |
| European Commission |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

---

[(1)](#ntc1-C_2018228EN.01003401-E0001)  [OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOL_2004_024_R_TOC) (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

---
**EXHIBIT 10.74**

 

**COMMERCIAL GUARANTY**

Reference is made to that certain Promissory Note dated as of March 31,2006 (the “*Note*”) made by EarthBiofuels, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“*Maker*”), tothe order of Southern Biofuels, LLC, a Mississippi limited liability company (“*Payee*”), in the principal amount of$1,100,000 (the “*Principal Amount*”).  Capitalized terms used but not otherwisedefined herein shall have the meanings prescribed to them in the Note.

THIS IS A “CONTINUING GUARANTY” UNDER WHICH GUARANTEE THE FULL ANDPUNCTUAL PAYMENT, PERFORMANCE AND SATISFACTION OF ALL OF THE INDEBTEDNESS ANDOBLIGATIONS INCURRED BY EARTH BIOFUELS WITH RESPECT TO THE NOTE.

The undersigned hereby guarantees the prompt payment of all amounts dueunder the Note.  The undersigned alsoguarantees the prompt payment of any interest that may accrue on the Note.

The undersigned waives any requirement of notice of default or of anyof the other matters referred to in this guaranty (this “*Guaranty*”),any requirement of diligence on the part of Payee or any holder of the Note,and all counterclaims, set-offs, abatements and defenses whatsoever against thePayee or any holder of the Note.

This Guaranty is in no way contingent upon any attempt to collect fromthe Maker or to enforce or proceed against any security or collateral given tosecure the Note.

The validity and enforceability of this Guaranty shall be unaffected byany transfer, assignment or endorsement of the Note, any indulgence or waivergranted with respect to any payment due thereunder or any remedy provided fortherein or in any document referred to therein (including the release of anycollateral) or any other thing that might reduce or vary the risk of the Makeror operate as a discharge of the Maker as a matter of law.

This Guaranty shall be enforceable by any holder of the Note, and eachsuch holder shall have the full benefit of this Guaranty without notice to theundersigned upon or after endorsement.

----

 

The undersigned agrees to pay upon demand all of Payee’s costs andexpenses, including Payee’s attorneys’ fees and Payee’s legal expenses,incurred in connection with the enforcement of this Guaranty. If there is alawsuit, Guarantor agrees upon Payee’s request to submit to the jurisdiction ofthe courts of Rankin County, State of Mississippi.

This Guaranty constitutes a guarantee of payment and collection.

This Guaranty shall not terminate until all the obligations under theNote have been fully and completely satisfied.

THIS GUARANTY SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED AND INTERPRETED INACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, WITHOUT REGARD TO THECONFLICTS OF LAWS PRINCIPLES THEREOF.
| Dated: March 31, 2006 |   | /s/ Dennis McLaughlin |
|-----------------------|--------|-----------------------|
|                  |   | Dennis McLaughlin     |

 

----
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

KENNETH HASEL WANDER, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

JOHN M. McHUGH, 

Defendant. 

ORDER 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) Civil Case No. 10-1190 (RJL) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

For the reasons set forth in the Memorandum Opinion entered this date, it is this 

f ~fJuly, 2012, hereby 

ORDERED that defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [Dkt. #11] is 

GRANTED; it is further 

ORDERED that plaintiffs Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment [Dkt. #17] is 

DENIED; it is further 

SO ORDERED. 

United States District Judge
#### Robert Boyle et al., Plaintiffs, *v.*Pogs Construction Corp., Defendant.

Supreme Court, Special Term, Suffolk County,

March 15, 1973.

*308
      *Siben & Siben*for plaintiffs. *Sol Horenstein*for defendant.

Leoít D. Lazer, J.

Plaintiffs, vendees under a contract for the purchase of a new home to be constructed by the defendant, have instituted an action for specific performance, alleging breach of contract. Defendant has served a 30-day notice upon plaintiffs to vacate other premises owned by the defendant and made available to them as purchasers pending delivery of the new home. Plaintiffs have responded by moving in the specific performance action to stay and enjoin the builder from taking further steps to evict them from their temporary home. Both parties alleged that the other is in breach of the underlying contract of conveyance. The threshold issue on this motion is whether the court may enjoin the threatened eviction proceeding.

It is a well-settled principle that the danger of impending judicial proceedings is not an injury justifying an injunction *(Wolfe*v. *Burke,*56 N. Y. 115) and our Department has reversed a preliminary injunction granted to a tenant on facts which could have served as a defense to a summary proceeding *(Geed*v. *Braunsdorf,*277 App. Div. 1001; see, also, *Kienle*v. *Gretsch Realty Co., 133*App. Div. 391; *Einhorn*v. *Perma Realty Corp.,*207 Misc. 1123).

Plaintiffs may raise defendant’s alleged breach of contract as an equitable defense if a .summary proceeding is instituted (Beal Property Actions and Proceedings Law, § 743); move to consolidate such a proceeding with this action (CPLB 602, subd [b]); or they may seek a stay in the forum in which the summary proceeding is actually commenced (CPLB 2201). They may not obtain here the extraordinary remedy of a preliminary injunction *(Meda Int.*v. *Salzman,*24 A D 2d 710).

*First Nat. Stores*v. *Yellowstone Shopping Center*(28 A D 2d 873), cited by plaintiffs, was modified by the Court of Appeals, which reversed so much of the order of the Appellate Division as preserved the lease and enjoined the landlord from instituting summary proceedings to evict the tenant (21 N Y 2d 630),

The stay is vacated and the motion is denied.
# C_2018235EN.01000801.xml

| 6.7.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 235/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.7.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 235/8

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.8963 — Eurocar/Bonaldi)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2018/C 235/09)

1.

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| — | Eurocar Italia srl (‘Eurocar’), controlled by Volkswagen (‘VW’, Germany), |
| --- | --- |

—

Eurocar Italia srl (‘Eurocar’), controlled by Volkswagen (‘VW’, Germany),

| — | Bonaldi Motori SpA and Bonaldi Tech S.p.A. (‘Bonaldi’, Italy) |
| --- | --- |

—

Bonaldi Motori SpA and Bonaldi Tech S.p.A. (‘Bonaldi’, Italy)

Eurocar acquires, within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation, sole control over the whole of Bonaldi.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

2.

| — | Eurocar is active in the retail distribution of new and used passenger cars and light commercial vehicles (as well as OEM spare parts) of the VW Group brands in Italy, and related repair activities. The main regional focus is Friuli Venezia Giulia in North-Eastern Italy and Tuscany in Central Italy. |
| --- | --- |

—

Eurocar is active in the retail distribution of new and used passenger cars and light commercial vehicles (as well as OEM spare parts) of the VW Group brands in Italy, and related repair activities. The main regional focus is Friuli Venezia Giulia in North-Eastern Italy and Tuscany in Central Italy.

| — | Bonaldi is active in the retail distribution of new and used passenger cars and light commercial vehicles of the brands of the Volkswagen Group in Italy, related repair activities and sale of OEM spare parts. The main regional focus is Lombardia in North-Western Italy. |
| --- | --- |

—

Bonaldi is active in the retail distribution of new and used passenger cars and light commercial vehicles of the brands of the Volkswagen Group in Italy, related repair activities and sale of OEM spare parts. The main regional focus is Lombardia in North-Western Italy.

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

4.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.8963 — Eurocar/Bonaldi

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

| E-mail: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu |
| --- |
| Fax: +32 22964301 |
| Postal address: |
| European Commission |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

E-mail: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax: +32 22964301

Postal address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

1

---
Willie ROBERSON, Petitioner, v. ILLINOIS.

No. 19M139.

Supreme Court of the United States.

June 1, 2020

Motion to direct the Clerk to file a petition for writ of certiorari out of time denied.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I,
Peter R. Huntsman, certify that:

1.     I
have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Huntsman LLC for the six months ended June 30, 2004;

2.     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 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 registrant as of and for the periods presented in this report;

4.     The
registrant's other certifying officers 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 registrant and have:



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



|Date: August 16, 2004 |  |                                                              
|--------------------- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------
|                      |  | /s/PETER R. HUNTSMANPeter R. Huntsman Chief Executive Officer

---



QuickLinks
EXHIBIT 11.1

                                MONROC, INC

       STATEMENT REGARDING COMPUTATION OF NET EARNINGS (LOSS) PER SHARE

                                            Years Ended December 31,

                                            1996       1995       1994  


Weighted average number of 
  common shares outstanding
  during the period (1)                  4,467,000   2,835,063   2,611,521

Net Earnings (Loss)                    $(1,367,679) $1,355,651  $  283,582

Net Earnings (Loss) Per Share          $     (0.31) $     0.48  $     0.11


(1) Weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period is
    based upon the relative number of days which shares of common stock are
    outstanding.
Juan Pablo REVELO SALCEDO, Petitioner v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-5453

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
To the Shareholders and Board of Trustees of
Greenwich Street Series Fund:

In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements
of Intermediate High Grade Portfolio, Appreciation Portfolio and
Total Return Portfolio of Greenwich Street Series Fund (the
"Fund") for the year ended December 31, 1997, we considered its
internal control, including control activities for safeguarding
securities, in order to determine our auditing procedures for the
purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial statements and
to comply with the requirements of Form N-SAR, not to provide
assurance on the internal control.

The management of the Fund is responsible for establishing and
maintaining internal control.  In fulfilling this responsibility,
estimates and judgments by management are required to assess the
expected benefits and related costs of controls.  Generally,
controls that are relevant to an audit pertain to the entity's
objective of preparing financial statements for external purposes
that are fairly presented in conformity with generally accepted
accounting principles. Those controls include the safeguarding of
assets against unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition.

Because of inherent limitations in internal control, errors or
irregularities may occur and not be detected.  Also, projection
of any evaluation of internal control to future periods is
subject to the risk that it may become inadequate because of
changes in conditions or that the effectiveness of the design and
operation may deteriorate.

Our consideration of the internal control would not necessarily
disclose all matters in the internal control that might be
material weaknesses under standards established by the American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants.  A material weakness
is a condition in which the design or operation of one or more of
the internal control components does not reduce to a relatively
low level the risk that errors or irregularities in amounts that
would be material in relation to the financial statements being
audited may occur and not be detected within a timely period by
employees in the normal course of performing their assigned
functions.  However, we noted no matters involving the internal
control and its operation, including controls for safeguarding
securities that we consider to be material weaknesses as defined
above.

This report is intended solely for the information and use of
management, the Board of Trustees of the Fund, and the Securities
and Exchange Commission.




February 10, 1998
CONSULTING GROUP CAPITAL MARKETS FUNDS (the "Fund")
Supplement dated March 25, 1997 to the Prospectus dated December 31, 
1996

	On March 4, 1997 the Fund's Board of Trustees approved the 
following:

  An amendment to the Fund's investment policies to permit Standish 
Ayer & Wood, Inc. and National Asset Management Inc., investment 
advisers (collectively, the "Advisors") to Intermediate Fixed Income 
Investments and Long-Term Bond Investments, respectively 
(collectively referred to as  "Portfolios" and individually as 
"Portfolio") to invest in Asset-Backed Securities ("ABSs").  ABSs are 
well established and have become increasingly prevalent in the fixed 
income market. ABSs may enhance a Portfolio's performance; however, 
their use involves certain risks that may not be found in other 
mutual fund investments.   Both Advisors are only authorized to 
invest in those ABSs that have received a AAA rating from both 
Moody's and Standard & Poor's and may only invest up to 5% of the 
Portfolio's net assets in this type of security. 

  A new investment advisory agreement for a portion of the assets of 
Small Capitalization Growth Investments ("Small Cap") between Berger 
Associates, Inc. ("Berger Associates"), as replacement adviser to 
Pilgrim Baxter & Associates, Inc. ("PBA") and Smith Barney Mutual 
Funds Management Inc. The new advisory agreement will be identical in 
all material respects to the agreement with PBA except that Berger 
Associates will be receiving 0.50% for its services that is computed 
daily and paid monthly based on the value of the average net assets 
of the Portfolio subject to the shareholders approving an increase in 
the management fee payable to SBMFM.  Berger Associates was founded 
in 1973 and currently manages $3.7 billion in assets.  Shareholders 
of this Portfolio will soon be receive detailed information 
concerning Berger Associates.

  A change of the investment strategy of Boston Structured Advisers 
("BSA"), investment adviser to a portion of the assets of Large 
Capitalization Growth Investments from an "enhanced index" manager to 
a pure index manager.  This change in investment strategy will result 
in BSA's fees being decreased.   

FD
Carolyn R. DAWSON, Petitioner, v. BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, et al.

No. 19-8171.

Supreme Court of the United States.

May 18, 2020

Case below, 797 Fed.Appx. 816.

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