alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
STATE v. Eugene Johnny WILLIAMS.

No. 506A07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 23, 2008.

Daniel Shatz, Assistant Appellate Defender, for Williams.

Robert Montgomery, Special Deputy Attorney General, Calvin Colyer, Assistant District Attorney, Edward W. Grannis, Jr., District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 21st day of April 2008 by Defendant for Extension of Time to Prepare Proposed Record on Appeal:

"Motion Allowed. Defendant shall have up to and including the 23rd day of June 2008 to serve his/her proposed record upon the district attorney. The parties shall then proceed to settle and file the record on appeal pursuant to the provisions of Appellate Rules 11 and 12. By order of the Court in conference this the 23rd day of April 2008."
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3386 

To prohibit the use of certain interrogation techniques and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 31, 2008 

Mr. BOND (for himself, Mr. HATCH, Mr. CHAMBLISS, Mr. WARNER, and Mr. 

BURR) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Select Committee on Intelligence 

A BILL 

To prohibit the use of certain interrogation techniques and 

for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Limitations on Interro5 gation Techniques Act of 2008’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON THE USE OF CERTAIN INTERRO7 GATION TECHNIQUES. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—No individual in the custody or 

9 under the effective control of personnel of an element of 

10 the intelligence community or instrumentality of an eleVerDate Aug 31 2005 19:52 Aug 02, 2008 Jkt 069200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S3386.IS S3386

rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
2 

•S 3386 IS

1 ment of the intelligence community, regardless of nation2 ality or physical location of the individual or personnel, 

3 shall be subject to the following interrogation techniques— 

4 (1) forcing the individual to be naked, perform 

5 sexual acts, or pose in a sexual manner; 

6 (2) placing hoods or sacks over the head of the 

7 individual or using duct tape over the individual’s 

8 eyes; 

9 (3) applying beatings, electric shock, burns, or 

10 similar forms of physical pain; 

11 (4) using the technique known as 

12 waterboarding; 

13 (5) using military working dogs; 

14 (6) inducing hypothermia or heat injury; 

15 (7) conducting mock executions; or 

16 (8) depriving the individual of adequate food, 

17 water or medical care. 

18 (b) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

19 (1) INSTRUMENTALITY.—The term ‘‘instrumen20 tality’’, with respect to an element of the intelligence 

21 community, means a contractor or subcontractor at 

22 any tier of the element of the intelligence commu23 nity. 

24 (2) INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY.—The term 

25 ‘‘intelligence community’’ has the meaning given 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
3 

•S 3386 IS

1 that term in section 3(4) of the National Security 

2 Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 401a(4)). 

Æ 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

                                  CERTIFICATION
                 Pursuant to 18 United States Code 'SS' 1350

     The undersigned hereby certifies that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for
the quarter ended September 30, 2003 of The General Chemical Group Inc. (the
"Company") filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in such
report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.


                                    /s/ John M. Kehoe, Jr.
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                    John M. Kehoe, Jr.
                                    President and Chief Executive Officer

November 14, 2003

     A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to The General Chemical Group Inc. and will be retained by it and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# C_2023121EN.01001701.xml

| 3.4.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 121/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 121/17

---

Action brought on 21 February 2023 — Ofree v EUIPO — Gamigo (gamindo)

(Case T-91/23)

(2023/C 121/23)

Language in which the application was lodged: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Ofree Srl (Treviso, Italy) (represented by: L. Sergi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Gamigo AG (Hamburg, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: Application for EU figurative mark gamindo — Application for registration No 18 105 987

Proceedings before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 10 January 2023 in Case R 632/2022-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

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

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO and the intervener to pay the costs incurred by the applicant for the purpose of the present proceedings before the Court and for the purpose of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO and the intervener to pay the costs incurred by the applicant for the purpose of the present proceedings before the Court and for the purpose of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO.

Pleas 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;

| — | Infringement of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of Article 41(2)(c) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and of the second paragraph of Article 296 TFEU. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of Article 41(2)(c) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and of the second paragraph of Article 296 TFEU.

---
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Johann Garcia, Appellant.

[800 NYS2d 842]

Judgment Supreme Court, Bronx County (Steven Lloyd Barrett, J.), rendered December 15, 1999, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of murder in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 25 years to life and 7V2 to 15 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant failed to preserve his challenge to the court’s justification charge and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would conclude that the charge fully explained the objective and subjective aspects of the justification defense *(see People v Goetz,*68 NY2d 96 [1986]), and that the language challenged by defendant, when viewed in context of the entire charge and the evidence presented at trial, could not have misled the jury as to the People’s burden of proof. Similarly, we conclude counsel’s failure to object to the language challenged on appeal did not deprive him of effective assistance under either the federal or state standards *(see People v Benevento,*91 NY2d 708, 713-714 [1998]; *People v Hobot,*84 NY2d 1021, 1024 [1995]; *see also Strickland v Washington,*466 US 668 [1984]).

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Friedman, J.P., Marlow, Gonzalez and Catterson, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         127,882
<SECURITIES>                                   71,400
<RECEIVABLES>                                  254,438
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    509,731
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               2,186,228
<PP&E>                                         2,687,693
<DEPRECIATION>                                 1,121,884
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 11,547,495
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          7,258,519
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       9,661
<OTHER-SE>                                     2,914,422
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   11,547,495
<SALES>                                        1,446,197
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               2,923,086
<CGS>                                          1,125,186
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  1,546,740
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               4,366,545
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             764,181
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,754,380)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,754,380)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  (.39)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.39)



</TABLE>
PARHAM v. PARHAM.

No. COA06-1597.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed October 2, 2007.

Certification Date October 22, 2007.

Appeal from Transylvania (03CVD231).

Case Reported Without Published Opinion. Dismissed.
Thomas W. HILL v. Garford Tony HILL, Jewel Anne Hill, D. Samuel Neill, Boyd B. Massagee, Jr., M.M. Hunt, J.P. Hunt, Barbara H. Garrison, William L. Garrison, Ervin W. Bazzle, Cincinnati Ins. Co., Estate of Sadie C. Hill.

No. 138P07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 3, 2007.

William E. Loose, Asheville, for Thomas W. Hill.

Thomas W. Hill, Pro Se.

W. Scott Jones, Asheville, for Garford Hill, et al.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Plaintiff on the 30th day of April 2007 for Writ of Supersedeas of the judgment of the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 3rd day of May 2007."
EXHIBIT 32

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERAND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICERALL-AMERICAN SPORTPARK, INC.PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of All-American SportPark, Inc. for the quarter ended June 30, 2009:

(1) 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 All-American SportPark, Inc.

Dated:August 12, 2009

/s/ Ronald S. BoretaRonald S. BoretaChief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer) andPrincipal Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to All-American SportPark, Inc. and will be retained by All -American SportPark, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission upon request.

1

---
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS OF PERIODIC REPORT**

 

 

I, James A. Bowman, President and Chief Executive Officer of EncisionInc. (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to the best of my knowledge:

 

•                  theQuarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarterly period endedDecember 31, 2003 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or78o(d)); and

 

•                  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

 
| Dated: | February 13, 2004 |   |                                  |
|--------|-------------------|--------|---------------------------------------|
|   |              |   |                                  |
|   |              |   |                                  |
|   |              |   | /s/ James A. Bowman                   |   |
|   |              |   |                                  |   |
|   |              |   | James A. Bowman                       |
|   |              |   | President and Chief Executive Officer |

 

 

I, Marcia McHaffie, Controller and Principal Accounting Officer ofEncision Inc. (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to the best of myknowledge:

 

•                  theQuarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarterly period endedDecember 31, 2003 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or78o(d)); and

 

•                  theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| Dated: | February 13, 2004. |   |                                        |
|--------|--------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|
|   |               |   |                                        |
|   |               |   |                                        |
|   |               |   | /s/ Marcia McHaffie                         |   |
|   |               |   |                                        |   |
|   |               |   | Marcia McHaffie                             |
|   |               |   | Controller and Principal Accounting Officer |

 

1

----
- 931 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

303 Nebraska Reports

STATE v. McGINN

Cite as 303 Neb. 931

State of Nebraska, appellee, v. 

Danny J. McGinn, appellant.

___ N.W.2d ___

Filed August 23, 2019. No. S-18-744.

supplemental opinion

Appeal from the District Court for Holt County, Mark D. 

Kozisek, Judge, on appeal thereto from the County Court for 

Holt County, Kale B. Burdick, Judge. Former opinion modified. Motion for rehearing overruled.

Forrest F. Peetz, of Peetz Law, P.C., L.L.O., for appellant.

Douglas J. Peterson, Attorney General, and Nathan A. Liss, 

for appellee.

Heavican, C.J., Miller‐Lerman, Cassel, Stacy, Funke, 

Papik, and Freudenberg, JJ.

Per Curiam.

This case is before us on a motion for rehearing filed by the 

appellee, State of Nebraska, concerning our opinion in State v. 

McGinn.

1

 We overrule the motion, but we modify the opinion 

as follows:

In the analysis section, we withdraw the last paragraph2 and 

substitute the following:

1 State v. McGinn, ante p. 224, 928 N.W.2d 391 (2019).

2 Id. at 234, 928 N.W.2d at 398.

Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library

www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/

11/15/2019 09:07 AM CST
- 932 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

303 Nebraska Reports

STATE v. McGINN

Cite as 303 Neb. 931

In this matter, because we consider all evidence admitted by the trial court, erroneously or not, we consider the 

breath test in our double jeopardy analysis. Considering 

the breath test, the evidence was sufficient to sustain 

a guilty verdict for a violation of § 60-6,196(1)(c) as 

charged. As such, double jeopardy does not forbid a 

remand for a new trial. Therefore, in consideration of 

all of the above, we reverse the district court’s decision 

affirming the county court’s conviction and remand the 

cause to the district court with directions to remand the 

matter to the county court for a new trial.

In the sole paragraph of the conclusion section, we withdraw 

the last sentence3 and substitute the following: “Accordingly, 

we reverse the district court’s decision affirming the county 

court’s conviction, but determine double jeopardy does not 

require dismissal of this action.”

The remainder of the opinion shall remain unmodified.

 Former opinion modified. 

 Motion for rehearing overruled.

3 Id.
### Court ofAppeals, State of Michigan 

### ORDER In re Application ofConsumers Energy Company to Increase Rates Docket No. 330675 ; 330745; 330797 LC No. 00-017735 Jane E . Markey Presiding Judge Amy Ronayne Krause Mark T. Boonstra

Judges The Court orders that the October 10, 2017 opinion is hereby AMENDED to correct a clerical error. The first sentence ofthe opinion, on pages 2-3, is corrected to read: In these consolidated appeals, appellants Association ofBusinesses Advocating Tariff Equity (ABATE) (Docket No. 330675), Residential Customer Group and Michelle Rison (Docket No. 330745), and the Attorney General (Docket No. 330797) claim appeals from a November 19, 2015 order ofthe Michigan Public Service Commission (PSC) approving a return on equity of 10.3% for appellee Consumers Energy Company and authorizing Consumers to continue its smart meter program. In all other respects , the October 10, 2017 opinion remains unchanged.

A true copy entered and certified by Jerome W. Zimmer Jr., Chief Clerk, on 

# O

C

T 13 

# 2017 Date
# C_2023271EN.01003701.xml

| 31.7.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 271/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.7.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 271/37

---

Order of the General Court of 14 June 2023 — D&G Laboratoires v EUIPO Holpindus (aleva NATURALS)

(Case T-28/23) (1)

(2023/C 271/52)

Language of the case: English

The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 104, 20.3.2023

---
# Continuation of U.S. Drug Interdiction Assistance to the

# Memorandum for the Secretary of State[and] the Secretary of Defense

Pursuant to the authority vested in me by section 1012 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2291-4), I hereby certify, with respect to Colombia, that (1) interdiction of aircraft reasonably suspected to be primarily engaged in illicit drug trafficking in that country's airspace is necessary because of the extraordinary threat posed by illicit drug trafficking to the national security of that country; and (2) that country has appropriate procedures in place to protect against innocent loss of life in the air and on the ground in connection with such interdiction, which shall at a minimum include effective means to identify and warn an aircraft before the use of force is directed against the aircraft. 

                    The Secretary of State is authorized and directed to publish this determination in the                     **Federal Register**                     and to notify the Congress of this determination.                 

[FR Doc. 05-17246

Billing code 4710-10-P
| (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 Trust. |

| /s/ Randall D. Holmes |                                  |
|-----------------------|---------------------------------------|
| Name:                 | Randall D. Holmes                     |   |
| Title:      | President and Chief Executive Officer |   |
|                  | (Principal Executive Officer)         |   |
|                  |                                  |   |
| Date:            | November 15, 2010                     |   |

| /s/ Jeffrey H. Strasberg |                                                 |
|--------------------------|------------------------------------------------------|
| Name:                    | Jeffrey H. Strasberg                                 |   |
| Title:         | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |   |
|                     | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)         |   |
|                     |                                                 |   |
| Date:               | November 15, 2010                                    |   |

----
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 Georgia-Carolina Bancshares,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof
(the "Report"), the undersigned, Patrick G. Blanchard, President and Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, and James M. Thomas, Chief Financial Officer,
do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of our
knowledge:

         (1)      The Report fully complies with the requirements of section
13(a) 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.

By:

         /s/ Patrick G. Blanchard
         -------------------------------------
         Patrick G. Blanchard
         President and Chief Executive Officer
         March 26, 2004

         /s/ James M. Thomas
         -------------------------------------
         James M. Thomas
         Chief Financial Officer
         March 26, 2004
Back to Index

Exhibit 32.2

**InKine Pharmaceutical Company, Inc.**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. § 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     In connection with the Quarterly Report of InKine Pharmaceutical Company, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert F. Apple, Chief Operating and Financial 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, based on my knowledge:

     (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 result of operations of the Company.

| Date: August 8, 2005 |   | ROBERT    F. APPLE     |   |
|----------------------|--------|------------------------|--------|
|                 |   | Robert    F. Apple     |   |
|                 |   | Chief    Operating and |   |
|                 |   | Financial    Officer   |   |

----