alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

July 16, 2003

Before

Hon. KENNETH F. RIPPLE, Circuit Judge

Hon. DIANE P. WOOD, Circuit Judge

Hon. TERENCE T. EVANS, Circuit Judge

Nos. 02-1662 & 02-1949

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

MICHAEL BERKLEY and

VAL JEAN HILLMAN,

Defendants-Appellants.

Appeal from the United States

District Court for the

Northern District of Illinois,

Eastern Division.

No. 00 CR 31

Charles R. Norgle, Sr., Judge.

ON REHEARING

Michael Berkley’s motion to correct our opinion ofJune 20, 2003, is GRANTED. Accordingly, the

fourth paragraph of the opinion is amended to read:

Hillman and MichaelBerkley, a loan processorfor UMG, were charged along

with six others in a seven-count indictment. After their six cohorts pleaded guilty,

Hillman and Berkley went to trial. A jury found Hillman guilty on three counts of

wire fraud affecting a financial institution in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2 and 1343.

The jury also found Berkley guilty on one of two similar counts. The district court

sentenced both men to 27 months imprisonment and ordered them to pay hundreds

of thousands of dollars in restitution. Hillman and Berkley appeal their convictions,

essentially challenging the sufficiency of the evidence. Because Hillman failed to

lodge a motion for a judgment of acquittal at the close of all the evidence or within

7 days after the adverse verdict, he must show plain error to prevail. See United

States v. Taylor, 226 F.3d 593, 596 (7th Cir. 2000). Therefore, we will reverse his

conviction only if we find a manifest miscarriage of justice. Berkley’s conviction is

subject to the usual standard of review. We will reverse his conviction only if “the

record contains no evidence, regardless of how it is weighed, upon which a rational

trier offact could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” United States v. Starks, 309

F.3d 1017, 1021 (7th Cir. 2002).

With the granting of this motion, the petition for rehearing is DENIED.
OFFICE OF RECOVERY SERVICES, Petitioner v. John R. LATHAM

No. 19-539

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 13, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Utah denied.
Christopher EVERSON, Petitioner, v. Theresa LANTZ, et al.

No. 19-6537

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 13, 2020

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

            COMMISSION DECISION         

of 7 May 2004         

on the scheme of aid which Spain intends to grant to certain olive oil producer organisations

(notified under document number C(2004) 1630)

(Only the Spanish text is authentic)

(2004/834/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular the first paragraph of Article 88(2) thereof,

Having given the parties concerned notice to submit their comments pursuant to that Article (1), and having regard to those comments,

Whereas:

I.   PROCEDURE

II.   DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE AID

III.   COMMENTS BY SPAIN

IV.   COMMENTS BY THE INTERESTED PARTIES

V.   ASSESSMENT OF THE AID

Article 87(1) of the Treaty

Conclusion

VI.   CONCLUSIONS

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The scheme of State aid which Spain intends to grant to olive oil producer organisations under the draft regional decree notified does not constitute aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty.

Implementation of the aid is accordingly authorised.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the Kingdom of Spain.

Done at Brussels, 7 May 2004.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER            

Member of the Commission

----

(1)OJ C 222, 18.9.2002, p. 18.

(2)  See footnote 1.

(3)OJ 172, 30.9.1966, p. 3025/66. Regulation last amended by the 2003 Act of Accession.

(4)OJ L 91, 31.3.2001, p. 44.

(5)OJ L 293, 31.10.1998, p. 50. Regulation last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1780/2003 (OJ L 260, 11.10.2003, p. 6).

(6)OJ L 208, 3.8.1984, p. 3. Regulation last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1639/98. (OJ L 210, 28.7.1998, p. 38).

(7)OJ C 28, 1.2.2000, p. 2.

(8)  [1995] ECR II-1675.

(9)  [1979] ECR 2161.

(10)  Within the meaning of Article 20d of Regulation No 136/1966/EEC.

(1)  Map of State aids for regional purposes for 2000-06 (State aid No N 773/99, SG 2000 D/103727.cor).

(11)  Not yet published.

----
**Exhibit      32.1**

**CERTIFICATION      OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. ss.      1350**

**(SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)**

|   | (1) | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                The Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;                and |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2) | The                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the                Registrant. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                                             |   |   |   |
|------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|
| /s/              Song              Jinan                         |   |   |        |
| Song JinanPresident and Chief Executive OfficerFebruary 12, 2008 |   |   |        |

----
SMITH BARNEY CONCERT ALLOCATION SERIES INC.
on behalf of 
GLOBAL PORTFOLIO
(the "FUND")

Supplement dated December 2, 1997
		to
Prospectus dated May 30, 1997

For Nebraska Investors:

CLASS Y SHARES OF THE FUND
ARE NOT AVAILABLE FOR PURCHASE
BY RESIDENTS OF NEBRASKA


FD 0         3/98
Ben W. BANE, Petitioner v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-5960

Supreme Court of the United States.

November 12, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
Exhibit 4.1


 


THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON


NEW YORK’S FIRST BANK-FOUNDED 1784 BY ALEXANDER HAMILTON


 


 


2 HANSON PLACE, 12TH FLOOR, BROOKLYN,
N.Y. 11217


 


 


 


July 19, 2019


 


Hennion & Walsh, Inc.


2001 Route 46, Waterview Plaza


Parsippany, New Jersey 07054


 


Smart Trust 436 (the “Fund”)


 


Dear Sirs:


The Bank of New York
Mellon is acting as trustee for the Fund, consisting of the unit investment trusts (the “Trusts”) included in
the Registration Statement relating to the Fund. We enclosed a list of the securities to be deposited in the Trusts on the date
hereof. The prices indicated therein reflect our evaluation of such securities as of close of business on July 18, 2019, in accordance
with the valuation method set forth in the applicable Standard Terms and Conditions of Trust and Trust Agreements. We consent to
the reference to The Bank of New York Mellon as the party performing the evaluations of the Trust securities in the Registration
Statement (No. 333-231055) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission with respect to the registration of the sale of the
Units of the Trusts and to the filing of this consent as an exhibit thereto.


 


Very truly yours,


 


/s/ GERARDO CIPRIANO_________________


Gerardo Cipriano


Vice President
Christian K. NARKIEWICZ-LAINE, Petitioner, v. Kevin C. DOYLE, et al.

No. 19-620

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 13, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

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

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, R. Andrew Eckert, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of SumTotal Systems, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



/s/ R. ANDREW ECKERTR. Andrew EckertPresident, Chief Executive Officer and DirectorDate: August 12, 2004




I, Neil J.
Laird, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of SumTotal Systems, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2004 fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



/s/ NEIL J. LAIRDNeil J. LairdSenior Vice President and Chief Financial OfficerDate: August 12, 2004
# Official Journal C 157/2016

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 157 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 593 May 2016 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 157

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 593 May 2016

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | Council |
| 2016/C 157/1 | Notice for the attention of persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP and Council Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria | 1 |
| | European Commission |
| 2016/C 157/2 | Euro exchange rates | 2 |
| | NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES |
| 2016/C 157/3 | Information to be provided pursuant to Article 5(2) — Establishment of a European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) (Regulation (EC) No 1082/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 ( OJ L 210, 31.7.2006, p. 19 )) | 3 |

Notice No

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

Council

2016/C 157/1

Notice for the attention of persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP and Council Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria

1

European Commission

2016/C 157/2

Euro exchange rates

2

NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES

2016/C 157/3

Information to be provided pursuant to Article 5(2) — Establishment of a European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) (Regulation (EC) No 1082/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 ( OJ L 210, 31.7.2006, p. 19 ))

(Regulation (EC) No 1082/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 ( OJ L 210, 31.7.2006, p. 19 ))

3

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
Exhibit 10.5

FORM OF INCENTIVE STOCK OPTION NOTICE

[RECIPIENT
NAME]
[RECIPIENT ADDRESS]

This
Option Notice (the "Notice") dated as of [GRANT DATE] (the "Grant Date") is being sent to you by Virgin Media Inc. (including any successor company,
the "Company"). As you are presently serving as an employee of Virgin Media Inc. or one of its subsidiary corporations, in recognition of your services and pursuant to the Virgin
Media Inc. 2006 Stock Incentive Plan (the "Plan"), the Company has granted you the Option provided for in this Notice. This Option is subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the Plan,
which is incorporated herein by reference, and defined terms used but not defined in this Notice shall have the meaning set forth in the Plan.

1.Grant of Option.The Company hereby irrevocably grants to you, as of the Grant Date,
an option to purchase up to [NUMBER] shares of the Company's Common Stock at a price of $[EXERCISE PRICE] per share (the "Option"). This Option is
intended to qualify as an Incentive Stock Option under U.S. tax laws and the Company will treat it as such to the extent permitted by applicable law.

2.Vesting.This Option shall vest [TERMS OF VESTING].

3.Exercise Period.Except as set forth in paragraph 2, the Option shall stop vesting
immediately upon the termination of your employment and any portion of the Option that is not vested at the time of termination of your employment shall immediately be forfeited and cancelled. Your
right to exercise that portion of the Option that is vested at the time of your termination shall terminate on the earlier of the following dates: (a) three months after the termination of your
employment other than for Cause; (b) one year after your termination resulting from your retirement, disability or death; (c) the date on which your employment is terminated for Cause;
or (d) [FINAL MATURITY DATE].

4.Manner of Exercise.This Option may be exercised by delivery to the Company of a
written notice signed by the person entitled to exercise the Option, specifying the number of shares which such person wishes to purchase, together with a certified or bank check or cash (or such
other manner of payment as permitted by the Plan) for the aggregate option price for that number of shares and any required withholding (including a payment sufficient to indemnify the Company or any
subsidiary of the Company in full against any and all liability to account for any tax or duty payable and arising by reason of the exercise of the Option).

5.Transferability.Neither this Option nor any interest in this Option may be
transferred other than by will or the laws of descent or distribution, and this Option may be exercised during your lifetime only by you or your guardian or legal representative.

| |  | VIRGIN MEDIA INC.
| |  | -----------------
| |  | By:              
| |  | Name:            
| |  | Title:           

---



QuickLinks
November 13, 2014



### JUDGMENT


## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

GLENN LLOYD KINGHAM , Appellant

NO. 14

- 14

- 00549

- CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appel lee

________________________________ This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. The record indicates that the appeal should be DISMISSED. The Court orders the appeal DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion.

We further order appellant pay all costs expended in the appeal.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
Independent Auditors' Report


The Board of Directors of
Intermediate Muni Fund, Inc.:

In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements of the
Intermediate Muni Fund, Inc.(the "Fund") for the year ended December 31, 2000,
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 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 accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America. Those controls include the
safeguarding of assets against unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition.

Because of inherent limitations in internal control, error or fraud 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 internal control would not necessarily disclose all
matters in 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 misstatements caused by error or fraud 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 internal control and its operation, including controls for
safeguarding securities, that we consider to be material weaknesses as defined
above as of December 31, 2000.

This report is intended solely for the information and use of management, the
Board of Directors of the Fund, and the Securities and Exchange Commission and
is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these
specified parties.


February 9, 2001
ENERGY HOLDINGS INTERNATIONAL, INC. 10-Q/A



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 Energy Holdings International, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q/A for the quarterly period ended
September 30, 2014 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, John
Adair, Chairman of the Board and Principal Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



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 aspects, the financial condition and results of operations
of the Company.



Date:  February 2, 2015



|/s/ John Adair                                   
|-------------------------------------------------
|John Adair                                       
|Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
|                                                 
|
Mario BENITEZ-PINEDA, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-5303

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
# C_2022482EN.01000701.xml

| 19.12.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 482/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.12.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 482/7

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Pistoia (Italy) lodged on 23 September 2022 — QX v Agos Ducato S.p.A.

(Case C-610/22)

(2022/C 482/10)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale di Pistoia

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: QX

Defendant: Agos Ducato S.p.A.

Question referred

Does ensuring ‘that the provisions which [Member States] adopt in implementation of [Directive 87/202] (1)
  are not circumvented as a result of the way in which agreements are formulated’, as is required by Article 14(2) of that directive, concern only failure to state the APR in an agreement, or does it concern also incorrect statement of the APR in an agreement?

---

(1)  Council Directive 87/102/EEC of 22 December 1986 for the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning consumer credit (OJ 1987 L 42, p. 48).

1

---
# L_2013129EN.01S00301.xml

| 14.5.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 129/s3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.5.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 129/s3

---

NOTICE TO READERS

Council Regulation (EU) No 216/2013 of 7 March 2013 on the electronic publication of the Official Journal of the European Union

In accordance with Council Regulation (EU) No 216/2013 of 7 March 2013 on the electronic publication of the Official Journal of the European Union (OJ L 69, 13.3.2013, p. 1), as of 1 July 2013, only the electronic edition of the Official Journal shall be considered authentic and shall have legal effect.

Official Journal of the European Union

Where it is not possible to publish the electronic edition of the Official Journal due to unforeseen and exceptional circumstances, the printed edition shall be authentic and shall have legal effect in accordance with the terms and conditions set out in Article 3 of Regulation (EU) No 216/2013.

---
Cheri Marie HANSON, AS TRUSTEE FOR the Next of Kin of Andrew Derek LAYTON, Petitioner v. Daniel BEST, et al.

No. 18-1553

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
Albert RANDOLPH, Petitioner, v. TEXAS.

No. 18-9153

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 13, 2020

The petition for rehearing is denied.
First Amendment to Agreement



 EXHIBIT 10.56 
  
 FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT 
 REGARDING ASSETS 
  
 This
First Amendment to Agreement Regarding Assets (the “Amendment”) is entered into as of December 19, 2003, by and among Unified Western Grocers, Inc., a California corporation (“Unified”), AH Investors, LLC, a California limited
liability company (“AH”), and TDH Investors, LLC, a California limited liability company (“TDH”), who agree as follows: 
  
 1. Recitals. This Amendment is made with reference to the following facts and circumstances: 
  
 (a) Unified, AH and TDH are parties to that certain Agreement Regarding Assets, dated as of November 26, 2003 (the
“Agreement”). 
  
 (b) Unified, AH and TDH desire to
amend the Agreement as set forth in this Amendment. 
  
 2. Defined Terms.
Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined in this Amendment have the meanings given to them in the Agreement. 
  
 3. Amendment. Notwithstanding any provision of the Agreement to the contrary, fee title to the land to which a Lease relates and/or the right, title and interest
of the landlord of a Lease in and to that Lease may be acquired by an entity other than TDH, if, but only if, (a) the transaction in which such acquisition is proposed to be made is first approved in writing by Unified, which approval Unified agrees
not to unreasonably withhold, and (b) concurrently with the consummation of such acquisition, Unified is released from all liabilities and obligations under such Lease. 
  
 4. Agreement Remains in Effect. Except as amended by this Amendment, the Agreement remains unmodified and in full force and effect.

  
 The parties have caused this Amendment to be duly executed by
their respective duly authorized officers or agents as of the date first set forth above. 
  

											
	 UNIFIED WESTERN GROCERS,
 INC., a California corporation
	 	 	 	 AH INVESTORS, LLC,
 a California limited liability company

						
	 By:
	 	 /s/ Robert M. Ling, Jr.

 Robert M. Ling, Jr., Executive Vice
 President and Corporate Secretary
	 	 	 	 	 	By:	 	 Alamo Group VIII, LLC,
 a Delaware limited liability company

						
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 By:
	 	 /s/ Donald F. Gaube

  
 Donald F. Gaube, Managing Member

 (Print Name & Title)


  
 (Signatures Continue on the Next Page)

  

 1 









					
	 TDH INVESTORS, LLC,
 a California limited liability company

			
	 	 	 By:
	 	 Alamo Group VIII, LLC,
 a Delaware limited liability company

			
	 	 	 By:
	 	 /s/ Donald F. Gaube


	 	 	 	 	  
 Donald F. Gaube, Managing
Member

 (Print Name & Title)



  

 2