alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           6,006
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,934
<ALLOWANCES>                                       432
<INVENTORY>                                      1,777
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                12,532
<PP&E>                                           5,752
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,357
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  15,163
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,903
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            12
<OTHER-SE>                                       5,470
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    15,163
<SALES>                                          5,355
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 5,455
<CGS>                                            3,048
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   10,303
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  (189)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   273
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 292
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (8,272)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         7
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (8,279)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (8,279)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.72)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.72)
        


</TABLE>
LIBERTARIAN PARTY, et al. v. STATE, et al.

No. 479A09-1.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Jan. 12, 2011.

Kenneth A. Soo, Raleigh, for Libertarian Party of NC.

Robert M. Elliot, Winston-Salem, for American Civil Liberties.

Katherine Lewis Parker, Raleigh, for NC Green Party.

Alexander McC. Peters, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State Board of Elections.

Adam S. Mitchell, Raleigh.

Karen E. Long, Special Deputy Attorney Geneal, for State Board of Elections.

Jason B. Kay.

Allison J. Riggs, for Southern Coalition for Social Justice, et al.

Christoper Brooks.

Irving Joyner, Durham, for Southern Coalition for Social Justice, et al.

Damon Circosta, for Southern Coalition for Social Justice, et al.

Robert Orr, Asheville.

**Opinion**

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 7th of January 2011 by Amicus (N.C. Institute for Constitutional Law) for Leave to Withdraw as Counsel:

> "Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference this the 12th of January 2011."
STATE of North Carolina v. Geraldine Lewis RAMOS.

No. 535A08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 11, 2008.

Catherine F. Jordan, Assistant Attorney General, C. Colon Willoughby, Jr., District Attorney, for State of NC.

Peter Wood, for Ramos.

Prior report: ___ N.C.App. ___, 668 S.E.2d 357.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by State of NC on the 5th day of December 2008 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:

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 11th day of December 2008."
GRIFFITH v. HOVIS, et al.

No. 257P15-1.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Sept. 24, 2015.

Joseph Michael Griffith, pro se.

Kari R. Johnson, Assistant Attorney General, for Chaplain Hovis, et al.

**Opinion**

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 23rd of July 2015 by Plaintiff to Proceed In Forma Pauperis:

> "Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 24th of September 2015."

Jackson, J. recused.
STATE of North Carolina v. Lewis Benjamin YOUNG.

No. 96P08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 26, 2008.

Paul F. Herzog, Fayetteville, for Young.

Karen Long, Assistant Attorney General, Ben David, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the conditional petition filed on the 17th day of March 2008 by State of NC in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Dismissed as Moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 26th day of August 2008."
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 177 (Wednesday, September 14, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 54370]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-18178]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


List of Institutions of Higher Education Ineligible for Federal 
Funds

AGENCY: Department of Defense.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This document is published to identify institutions of higher 
education that are ineligible for contracts and grants by reason of a 
determination by the Secretary of Defense that the institution 
prohibits or in effect prevents military recruiter access to the 
campus, students on campus or student directory information. It also 
implements the requirements set forth in section 983 of title 10, 
United States Code, and 32 CFR Part 216. The institution of higher 
education so identified is:

New York Law School, New York, New York

ADDRESSES: Director for Accession Policy, Office of the Under Secretary 
of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, 4000 Defense Pentagon, 
Washington, DC 20301-4000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Commander Ronda Syring, (703) 695-
5529.

    Dated: September 8, 2005.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 05-18178 Filed 9-13-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M
VALLEY TRANSP., INC. v. NORTH CAROLINA DEPT. OF CRIME CONTROL & PUBLIC SAFETY, DIV. OF STATE HIGHWAY PATROL, MOTOR CARRIER ENFORCEMENT SECTION.

No. COA08-909.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed February 3, 2009.

Certification Date February 23, 2009.

Appeal from Wake (07CVS12921).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
STATE v. HUGHES.

No. COA07-1227.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed April 1, 2008.

Certification Date April 21, 2008.

Appeal from the Stokes (06CRS50859).

Cases Reported Without Published Opinion. No error.
STATE of North Carolina v. Terry GILMORE.

No. 45P07-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 11, 2008.

Terry Gilmore, Pro Se.

Robert J. Blum, Special Deputy Attorney General, Locke Bell, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 31st day of March 2008 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, 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 11th day of June 2008."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 23rd day of May 2008 in this matter for a writ of certiorari, 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 11th day of June 2008."
STATE v. STOVALL.

No. COA08-678.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed December 2, 2008.

Certification Date December 22, 2008.

Appeal from Iredell (07CRS3277, 07CRS3278, 07CRS3279, 07CRS3280, 07CRS3281).

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-13-00452-CV

Andrea R. Biller, Appellant

v.

NNN Met Center 15 5, LLC; NNN Met Center 15 6, LLC; NNN Met Center 15 7, LLC;

NNN Met Center 15 8, LLC; NNN Met Center 15 10, LLC; NNN Met Center 15 11, LLC;

NNN Met Center 15 16, LLC; NNN Met Center 15 18, LLC; NNN Met Center 15 19, LLC;

NNN Met Center 15 21, LLC; NNN Met Center 15 22, LLC; NNN Met Center 15 23, LLC;

NNN Met Center 15 25, LLC; NNN Met Center 15 26, LLC; NNN Met Center 15 27, LLC;

NNN Met Center 15 28, LLC; NNN Met Center 15 29, LLC; NNN Met Center 15 30, LLC;

NNN Met Center 15 31, LLC; NNN Met Center 15 32, LLC; NNN Met Center 15 33, LLC;

NNN Met Center 15 35, LLC; NNN Met Center 15 36, LLC; NNN Met Center 15 38, LLC;

NNN Met Center 15 39, LLC; NNN 1 & 2 Met Center TIC; 

and Lexington Insurance Company, Appellees

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 201ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. D-1-GN-12-001271, HONORABLE AMY CLARK MEACHUM, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellees filed a status report in this abated appeal requesting that we continue the

abatement of this appeal until October 6, 2014, while the parties finalize a settlement agreement. 

Appellant does not oppose this request. We abate the appeal until October 6, 2014. All appellate

deadlines will be tolled during the period of abatement. The parties shall submit either a motion to

reinstate, a motion to dismiss, or a joint status report concerning the status of settlement negotiations

no later than October 6, 2014.
_____________________________________________

J. Woodfin Jones, Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Pemberton and Field

Abated

Filed: August 8, 2014

2
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 13.2

                           INNOVA, S. DE R.L. DE C.V.

              SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Carlos Ferreiro Rivas, the Chief Financial Officer of Innova, S. de R.L. de
C.V. (the "Company"), hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

1.    The Company's annual report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended
      December 31, 2004, to which this statement is filed as an exhibit (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 operation of the Company.

Date: June 13, 2005

                                                      /s/ Carlos Ferreiro Rivas
                                                      -------------------------
                                                      Carlos Ferreiro Rivas
                                                      Chief Financial Officer
# C_2023104EN.01004301.xml

| 20.3.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 104/43 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.3.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 104/43

---

Action brought on 8 February 2023 — W.B. Studio v EUIPO — E.Land Italy (BF BELFE)

(Case T-54/23)

(2023/C 104/64)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: W.B. Studio Sas di Wivian Bodini & C. (Milano, Italy) (represented by: V. Piccarreta and G. Romanelli, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: E.Land Italy Srl (Milano, Italy)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

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

Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark BF BELFE — European Union trade mark No 139 840

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 30 November 2022 in Case R 870/2021-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Partially annul the contested decision to the extent it upheld the decision of the Cancellation Division and, consequently, declare the revocation of the trade mark at issue; |
| --- | --- |

—

Partially annul the contested decision to the extent it upheld the decision of the Cancellation Division and, consequently, declare the revocation of the trade mark at issue;

| — | Order the defendant to bear the costs of the present proceedings, including the costs deriving from the proceedings before the Cancellation Division and the First Board of Appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to bear the costs of the present proceedings, including the costs deriving from the proceedings before the Cancellation Division and the First Board of Appeal.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of article 58(1)(a) in conjunction with article 18 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of article 58(1)(a) in conjunction with article 18 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Infringement of article 19 of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of article 19 of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625.

---
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

#### **CERTIFICATIONS OFPERIODIC REPORT**

#### ** **

I, John R. Serino,President and Chief Executive Officer of Encision Inc. (the “Company”),certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 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, 2004 (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 11, 2005

 
|   | /s/ John R. Serino                     |   |
|--------|----------------------------------------|--------|
|   |                                   |
|   | John R. Serino                         |
|   | President and Chief  Executive Officer |

 

 

I, Marcia McHaffie,Controller and Principal Accounting Officer of Encision Inc. (the “Company”),certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 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, 2004 (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 11, 2005

 
|   | /s/ Marcia McHaffie                          |   |
|--------|----------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |                                         |
|   | Marcia McHaffie                              |
|   | Controller and  Principal Accounting Officer |

 

----
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 6 

To enhance the security of the United States by reducing the dependence 

of the United States on foreign and unsustainable energy sources and 

the risks of global warming, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 4, 2007 

Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. BINGAMAN, Mrs. BOXER, Mr. SCHUMER, Mr. 

LIEBERMAN, Mr. LAUTENBERG, Ms. CANTWELL, Mr. LEAHY, Ms. 

STABENOW, Mr. WEBB, Mr. SALAZAR, and Mr. MENENDEZ) introduced 

the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee 

on Finance 

A BILL 

To enhance the security of the United States by reducing 

the dependence of the United States on foreign and 

unsustainable energy sources and the risks of global 

warming, 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 ‘‘National Energy and 

5 Environmental Security Act of 2007’’. 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC75 with BILLS
2 

•S 6 IS

1 SEC. 2. SENSE OF CONGRESS. 

2 It is the sense of Congress that Congress should 

3 enact, and the President should sign, legislation to en4 hance the security of the United States by reducing the 

5 dependence of the United States on foreign and 

6 unsustainable energy sources and the risks of global 

7 warming by— 

8 (1) requiring reductions in emissions of green9 house gases; 

10 (2) diversifying and expanding the use of se11 cure, efficient, and environmentally-friendly energy 

12 supplies and technologies; 

13 (3) reducing the burdens on consumers of rising 

14 energy prices; 

15 (4) eliminating tax giveaways to large energy 

16 companies; and 

17 (5) preventing energy price gouging, profit18 eering, and market manipulation. 

Æ 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC75 with BILLS
# CE2004065EN.01006801.xml

| 13.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 65/68 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 65/68

---

(2004/C 65 E/076)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1220/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(2 April 2003)

Subject:   Use of funds under the Framework for action on sustainable urban development in the European Union by the municipality of Prato

Subject:

In September 2002, the monitoring committee of the Italian Ministry for Economic Affairs issued a report on the spending of EU funds.

The report reveals the alarming slowness and inefficiency with which EU funds are allocated to projects by some regional authorities.

The grave concerns about the inadequate use of European funds by local authorities have frequently been echoed by the Commission.

Bearing in mind that some local authorities, such as the municipality of Prato, urgently need to use European funds to promote sustainable urban development,

can the Commission state:

| 1. | whether the municipality of Prato has submitted projects for the Framework for action on sustainable urban development in the European Union? |
| --- | --- |

1.

whether the municipality of Prato has submitted projects for the Framework for action on sustainable urban development in the European Union?

| 2. | whether the municipality of Prato has secured funding for these projects? |
| --- | --- |

2.

whether the municipality of Prato has secured funding for these projects?

| 3. | whether this funding has been used? |
| --- | --- |

3.

whether this funding has been used?

---
Exhibit






Exhibit 10.68


FIRST AMENDMENT TO


WP GLIMCHER INC.


TRANSITION AND CONSULTING AGREEMENT 




This First Amendment (this “Amendment”) dated June 20, 2016 to the Transition and Consulting Agreement (the “Agreement”) by and between WP Glimcher Inc., an Indiana corporation (the “Company”), and Mark Ordan (“Ordan”) dated May 31, 2015 is hereby adopted by Ordan and the Company pursuant to Section 16 of the Agreement as follows:




		
	1.
	Amendment. 




		
	a.
	Section 4(a) of the Agreement is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows:




“(a)    The Consulting Period may be terminated by Ordan or the Company at any time and for any reason (or no reason) by providing the other party with not less than 30 days’ advance written notice of such termination.” 




3.    Effect of this Amendment.  Except where conflicting or inconsistent with the express terms or manifest intent of this Amendment, all provisions of the Agreement as in effect prior to this Amendment shall remain in full force and effect.  Wherever there is a conflict or inconsistency between any of the provisions in this Amendment and the Agreement, the provisions of this Amendment shall be deemed to govern and control.  


4.    Execution in Counterparts and by Facsimile.  This Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which when so executed and delivered shall be deemed to be an original and all of which when taken together shall constitute one and the same Agreement.  A facsimile execution copy of this Amendment shall be binding and have the same force and effect as the original of this Amendment.
[Signatures on following page.]






1








IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment as of the date first written above.


	
		
	 
	

WP GLIMCHER INC.


By:   /s/ Robert P. Demchak         
Name:  Robert P. Demchak     
Title:  Executive Vice President, General Counsel & Corporate Secretary



	 
	 

	 
	

MARK ORDAN


/s/ Mark S. Ordan_______________________










1
# CE2004078EN.01009301.xml

| 27.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 78/93 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 78/93

---

(2004/C 78 E/0093)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2216/03

by Marco Pannella (NI), Maurizio Turco (NI), Marco Cappato (NI), Benedetto Della Vedova (NI), Gianfranco Dell'Alba (NI) and Olivier Dupuis (NI) to the Commission

(2 July 2003)

Subject:   Arrest of twelve members of an evangelical church in China

Subject:

Twelve members of an evangelical church have been arrested and eight of them are liable to be detained in labour camps if the court finds them guilty of ‘disseminating feudal superstitions’. The church is not recognised by the Beijing authorities and has been out of operation since 6 June 2003, after Chinese police broke into four private houses where religious ceremonies were being held. The authorities responsible for supervision of religious organisations have justified the arrests on the grounds that the accused were ‘visiting villages twice a week, spreading superstitious beliefs there and requesting donations from already impoverished local inhabitants’.

The persons arrested are liable to be sent to labour camps merely for manifesting their religion through teaching, practice, worship and observance, in accordance with Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The Commission:

| — | Does it have more detailed information on the fate of these twelve Chinese citizens? |
| --- | --- |

—

Does it have more detailed information on the fate of these twelve Chinese citizens?

| — | How will it monitor their trial and safeguard their right to a defence? |
| --- | --- |

—

How will it monitor their trial and safeguard their right to a defence?

| — | Will it convey a message to the Beijing authorities strongly condemning this incident, stressing that it is totally contrary to the principles enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to make the full enjoyment of the right to religious freedom subject to state authorisation and to prevent religious ceremonies from being conducted in private homes? |
| --- | --- |

—

Will it convey a message to the Beijing authorities strongly condemning this incident, stressing that it is totally contrary to the principles enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to make the full enjoyment of the right to religious freedom subject to state authorisation and to prevent religious ceremonies from being conducted in private homes?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(31 July 2003)

(31 July 2003)

The Commission has no further details on the situation of the 12 members of the Evangelical Church and will endeavour to obtain information. Through the EU-China bilateral dialogue on human rights the EU regularly raises the issue of freedom of religion and faith and will certainly address the matter of these citizens arrested for practising their faith. Should a trial be held, the EU will consider the most appropriate means to monitor it and ensure that it takes place in satisfactory conditions.

---