alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Michelle LaRock, Appellant.

[801 NYS2d 442]

Appeal from a judgment of the Ontario County Court (Frederick G. Reed, J.), rendered February 7, 2003. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of grand larceny in the fourth degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

*1368Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting her after a jury trial of grand larceny in the fourth degree (Penal Law § 155.30 [1]). Contrary to defendant’s contentions, the evidence is legally sufficient to support the conviction and the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence *(see generally People v Bleakley,*69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Although defendant is correct that the People did not present evidence establishing that she removed items from the store at issue, the store’s loss prevention manager testified that he observed defendant and a companion quickly place several items into a shopping cart and then proceed to the rear of the store. At that time, he observed them place some of the items in a cardboard box that was near an emergency exit. Suspecting that the pair would “break out” of the emergency exit, load a vehicle and leave the premises, the loss prevention manager exited the store and drove his personal vehicle to the rear of the store. He then observed a vehicle with its trunk open, near the emergency exit. When the driver of that vehicle saw that the loss prevention manager was watching him, he drove to the side of the store, where defendant and her companion were waiting. Neither defendant nor her companion had any merchandise with them. When defendant and her companion approached the vehicle, the loss prevention manager drove up to the bumper of the vehicle. The driver of the vehicle then drove away, leaving behind defendant and her companion. “[A] taking of property in the self-service store context can be established by evidence that a customer exercised control over merchandise wholly inconsistent with the store’s continued rights” *(People v Olivo,*52 NY2d 309, 321 [1981]), “irrespective of whether the property actually was removed from the premises” *(People v Banks,*294 AD2d 935, 936 [2002], *lv denied*98 NY2d 672 [2002]). Defendant failed to preserve her remaining contention for our review *(see*CPL 470.05 [2]) and, in any event, that contention is without merit. Present—Hurlbutt, J.P., Scudder, Smith, Pine and Hayes, JJ.
NORMAN v. NORTH CAROLINA DEPT. OF TRANSP.

No. COA07-894.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed May 6, 2008.

Certification Date May 27, 2008.

Appeal from NC Industrial Commission (TA-12343).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
MORGAN v. MILLENNIUM STAFFING.

No. 533P07-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 11, 2008.

Katherine M. Morgan, Pro Se.

Kelli A. Burns, for Millennium Staffing, et al.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 21st day of April 2008 by Defendants for Sanctions:

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference this the 11th day of June 2008."
Exhibit 99.1


                CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 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 Monterey Bay Bancorp,  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q for the period  ending March 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, C.
Edward Holden, Chief 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
     respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


                                        Monterey Bay Bancorp, Inc.




Date:    May 12, 2003                   By:      /s/ C. Edward Holden
                                                 --------------------
                                                 C. Edward Holden
                                                 Chief Executive Officer



A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Monterey Bay Bancorp,  Inc. and will be retained by Monterey Bay
Bancorp,  Inc. and furnished to the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission or its
staff upon request.
**Exhibit 99.1**

 

**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 theQuarterly Report of Crown Pacific Partners, L.P. (the “Partnership”) on Form10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Peter W. Stott,Director, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Partnership, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities 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 Partnership.

 
| /s/ Peter W. Stott                                                             |   |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Peter W. Stott                                                                 |
| Director, President and  Chief Executive Officer  Crown Pacific Partners, L.P. |
| August 14, 2002                                                                |

 

This certification is madesolely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and not for any otherpurpose.

 

----
STATE v. WILDER.

No. COA08-90.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed July 15, 2008.

Certification Date August 4, 2008.

Appeal from Guilford (06CRS74904).

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 892/2014Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 892/2014 of 14 August 2014 establishing the standard import values for determining            the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 892/2014                     

# of 14 August 2014

# establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural                           markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation)(1),                        

Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application                           of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors(2), and in particular Article 136(1) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations,                              the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products                              and periods stipulated in Annex XVI, Part A thereto.

(2)The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU)                              No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its                              publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

The standard import values referred to in Article 136 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are fixed in the Annex to                     this Regulation.                  

# Article 2U.K.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*.                  

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 14 August 2014.

*For the Commission,*                            

*On behalf of the President,*                            

Jerzy Plewa                            

*Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development*                            

## ANNEXU.K.Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.                           

2

OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 168 (Wednesday, August 31, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 51848]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-17311]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employee Benefits Security Administration


Advisory Council on Employee Welfare and Pension Benefit Plans 
Working Group on Communications to Retirement Plane Participants; 
Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to the authority contained in Section 512 of the Employee 
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. 1142, the 
Working Group assigned by the Advisory Council on Employee Welfare and 
Pension Benefit Plans to study the issue of communications to 
retirement plan participants will hold an open public meeting on 
September 23, 2005.
    The session will take place in Room S 4215 B-C, U.S. Department of 
Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. The purpose 
of the open meeting, which will run from 8:30 a.m. to approximately 4 
p.m., with a one hour break for lunch, is for Working Group members to 
hear testimony from invited witnesses. The Working Group will inquire 
whether plan participants understand their rights and benefits under 
retirement plans and if existing required communication tools are 
accomplishing the original goal of full disclosure.
    Organizations or members of the public wishing to submit a written 
statement pertaining to the topic may do so by submitting 25 copies on 
or before September 14, 2055 to Larry Good, Executive Secretary, ERISA 
Advisory Council, U.S. Department of Labor, Suite N-5623, 200 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. Statements also may be 
submitted electronically to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6e0901010a40020f1c1c172e0a010240090118"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="1c7b73737832707d6e6e655c787370327b736a">[email protected]</span></a>. Statements received on 
or before September 14, 2005 will be included in the record of the 
meeting. Individuals or representatives of organizations wishing to 
address the Working Group should forward their requests to the 
Executive Secretary or telephone (202) 693-8668. Oral presentations 
will be limited to 20 minutes, time permitting, but an extended 
statement may be submitted for the record. Individuals with 
disabilities who need special accommodations should contact Larry Good 
by September 14 at the address indicated.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 25th day of August, 2005.
Ann L. Combs,
Assistant Secretary, Employee Benefits Security Administration.
[FR Doc. 05-17311 Filed 8-30-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-29-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.6

Mr. W. Jeffrey Camp                                    February 26, 1998
Senior Manager
Coopers & Lybrand LLP
1100 Camparrile Building
1155 Peachtree Street
Atlanta, Georgia  30309

Dear Jeff:

The following summarizes what Tekgraf (the Company) has agreed to offer as it
relates to your employment.

* The Company agrees to employ you for the position of Chief Financial Officer,
  which is an executive officer of the Company.

* Your annual base salary will be at least $125,000 and will be reviewed at
  least annually along with the other executive officers of the company.  You
  are also eligible to participate in any bonus plan, profit sharing plan, stock
  option plan, and any other compensation programs for executive officers based
  on your performance.  Additionally, you will be entitled to participate in any
  and all medical and health benefit programs offered to executive officers.

* On the first day of your employment, you will be granted incentive stock
  options pursuant to the Company's Stock Option Plan to purchase 45,000 shares
  of the Company's Class A Common Stock at an exercise price equal to $3.00 per
  share.  The shares will vest as follows:  15,000 shares immediately, and
  15,000 shares on each of the first and second anniversaries of your
  employment.

* Should there be a change-in-control of the Company, all options granted vest
  immediately and the Company will also be obligated to you for six months of
  your then current salary payable in cash on the date the transaction is
  closed.

* The Company can fire you at any time.  However, the Company must give you 6
  month's written notice, or at least keep you on the payroll at your then
  current salary for 6 month's after receipt of written notice, provided
  however, that you have not committed a criminal act against the Company.

If you agree with the above, please sign and return to me.

Sincerely,



/s/ Phillip C. Aginsky                            /s/ W. Jeffrey Camp  2/26/98
Phillip C. Aginsky                                ------------------------------
Chief Executive Officer and Chairman              W. Jeffrey Camp       Date
of the Board of Directors



                                       2
DEASON v. OWENS-ILLINOIS, INC.

No. COA07-1159.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed August 19, 2008.

Certification Date September 8, 2008.

Appeal from NC Industrial Commission (I.C. NO. 192506).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
* P ursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the Court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 98-30060 Summary Calendar

_____________________
NOEL N. DAUTERIVE,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

MAGNOLIA MARKETING COMPANY, INC.,

Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana

(97-CV-233-D)

_________________________________________________________________ August 20, 1998

Before KING, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Noel N. Dauterive appeals the adverse summary judgment on his

Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) claim against his former employer,

Magnolia Marketing Company, Inc. Dauterive contends there are

material fact issues regarding his job performance and whether he

was discharged for requesting leave under the FMLA.

The district court concluded that Dauterive could not

establish a prima facie case of discrimination because he produced

insufficient evidence to create a material fact issue regarding (1)

whether there was a causal connection between his request for FMLA- 2 -

leave and his termination, and (2) whether he was meeting

Magnolia’s legitimate expectations. Alternatively, the district

court concluded that, even if Dauterive had established such a

case, he failed to offer competent evidence to show that Magnolia’s

articulated reason for di scharging him — poor performance — was

pretextual, and that its true reason was because Dauterive had

requested FMLA leave.

Pursuant to our required de novo review of the record, we

AFFIRM for essentially th e reasons stated by the district court.

Dauterive v. Magnolia Marketing Co., Inc. , No. 97-0233 (E. D. La.

Dec. 15, 1997) (unpublished).

AFFIRMED
# **Exhibit 32.1**

#  

# **OFFICER’SCERTIFICATION**

#  

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,the Chief Executive Officer of Western Sizzlin Corporation (the “Company”),hereby certifies that the Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31,2009 and the financial statements contained therein, fully comply with therequirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934, and the information contained in the Form 10-Q and thefinancial statements thereto fairly present, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company as of March 31,2009, and the period then ended.

 
| /s/ Sardar Biglari |   | Date: May 6, 2009 |
|--------------------|--------|------------------------|

 

#
**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 accompanying Annual Report of Enviro Voraxial Technology, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Alberto DiBella, Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted        pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge, 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 fully presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

By:     /s/ Alberto DiBella                       Alberto DiBella                  Principal Financial Officer

April 16, 2009
# C_2023112EN.01004001.xml

| 27.3.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 112/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 112/40

---

Action brought on 7 February 2023 — Vinet Miłosz Jeleń v EUIPO — The Animal Store, Food and Accessories (WILD INSPIRED)

(Case T-47/23)

(2023/C 112/51)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Vinet Miłosz Jeleń (Mszalnica, Poland) (represented by: M. Bac-Matuszewska, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: The Animal Store, Food and Accessories, SL (Valencia, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union word mark WILD INSPIRED — Application for registration No 18 334 973

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 December 2022 in Case R 1299/2022-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements of NovaDel Pharma Inc. on previously filed Forms S-8 (File Nos. 333-148130, 333-42103 and 333-116665) and Forms S-3/S-3A (File Nos. 333-155345, 333-140054, 333-126489, 333-135902 and 333-134028) of our report dated March 30, 2009 on our audits of the balance sheets of NovaDel Pharma Inc. as of December 31, 2008 and 2007 and the        related statements of operations, changes in stockholders’ equity and cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, the five months ended December 31, 2006 and for the fiscal year ended July 31, 2006, which report is included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. 

 

 

|  

 

/s/ J.H. Cohn LLP

 

Roseland, New Jersey

March 30, 2009

 

 

  |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
D.S.B., IN RE

No. COA07-572

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed February 19, 2008.

Certification Date March 10, 2008.

Appeal from Caldwell (00JB128).

Decision without published opinion. Affirmed in part; Vacated in part; and remanded.
**EXHIBIT 3.1.2**

**CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT**

**TO**

**CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION**

**OF**

**AUSTINS STEAKS & SALOON, INC.**

The undersigned, Austins Steaks & Saloon, Inc.(the “Corporation”), organized and existing under and by virtue of the GeneralCorporation Law of the State of Delaware does hereby certify:

FIRST, that the Certificate of Incorporation of theCorporation was filed with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware onDecember 8, 1992.

SECOND, that it is advisable and in the bestinterest of the Corporation to amend the Certificate of Incorporation of theCorporation and that the Board of Directors of the Corporation and shareholdersowning greater than a majority of each class of outstanding stock of theCorporation adopted the following resolution setting forth the proposedAmendment to the Corporation’s Certificate of Incorporation:

RESOLVED,that it is advisable and in the best interest of the Corporation to amendArticle I. of the Certificate of Incorporation of the Corporation as follows:

**ARTICLE I.**

**Name**

The name of the Corporation shall be Western SizzlinCorporation.

THIRD, pursuant to Sections 242, 222, and 228 of theGeneral Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, the above Amendments weresubmitted to the Corporation’s shareholders and the shareholders duly consentedto and adopted the Amendment.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned hereby certifythat the facts above stated are true and that the execution hereof is theirvoluntary act and deed and  the voluntaryact and deed of Austins under penalties of perjury.

----

DATED this 30th day of September, 2003.
|        | AUSTINS STEAKS & SALOON,  INC. |                                     |
|--------|------------------------------------|------------------------------------------|
|   |                               |                                     |
|   |                               |                                     |
|   | By:                                | /s/James C.  Verney                      |   |
|   |                               | James C. Verney                          |   |
|   |                               | President &  Chief Executive Officer |   |
|        |                                    |                                          |  |  |

 
| ATTEST: |                                    |   |
|---------|-----------------------------------------|--------|
|    |                                    |   |
|    |                                    |   |
| By:     |   /s/Robyn B. Mabe, Secretary |   |
|    | Robyn B. Mabe, Secretary                |   |
|         |                                         |        |  |  |

 

----