alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
STATE v. Nicholas Nathaniel CAULEY.

No. 331P01-4.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 10, 2015.

Amy C. Kunstling, Assistant Attorney General, for State of N.C.

Nicholas Nathaniel Cauley, Swan Quarter, for Cauley, Nicholas Nathaniel.

Frank R. Parrish, District Attorney, for State of N.C.

**Opinion**

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 15th of April 2015 by Defendant to Appoint Counsel:

> "Motion Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 10th of June 2015."
STATE v. Eugene Johnny WILLIAMS.

No. 506A07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 9, 2008.

Staples Hughes, Appellate Defender, Ann B. Petersen, Chapel Hill, for Williams.

William B. Crumpler, Raleigh, Edward W. Grannis, Jr., District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 8th day of December 2008 by Defendant for Extension of Time to File Brief:

"Motion Allowed. Defendant (Williams) shall have up to and including the 8th day of January 2009 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court. By order of the Court in conference this the 9th day of December 2008."
# CE2004065EN.01005302.xml

| 13.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 65/53 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 65/53

---

(2004/C 65 E/053)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1187/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(1 April 2003)

Subject:   Use of funds from the FIFG by the municipality of Carrara

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 Carrara, urgently need to use European funds to support structural measures in the sector of fisheries, acquaculture and the processing and marketing of the relevant products,

can the Commission state:

| 1. | whether the municipality of Carrara has submitted projects for the FIFG? |
| --- | --- |

1.

whether the municipality of Carrara has submitted projects for the FIFG?

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

2.

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

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

3.

whether this funding has been used?

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-1412

OTIS O. EDWARDS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

TRS STAFFING SOLUTIONS, INCORPORATED; FLUOR ENTERPRISES, INC.,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Walter D. Kelley, District

Judge. (2:06-cv-00166-WDK-TEM)

Submitted: August 14, 2008 Decided: August 19, 2008

Before MICHAEL, Circuit Judge, and WILKINS and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Otis O. Edwards, Appellant Pro Se. Ruth L. Goodboe, MCGUIREWOODS,

LLP, Norfolk, Virginia; Robert Craig Wood, MCGUIREWOODS, LLP,

Charlottesville, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Otis O. Edwards appeals the district court’s order

dismissing his employment discrimination action for failure to

comply with discovery orders. We have reviewed the record and find

no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated

by the district court. Edwards v. TRS Staffing Solutions, Inc.,

No. 2:06-cv-00166-WDK-TEM (E.D. Va. filed Mar. 21,008; entered

Mar. 24, 2008). We dispense with oral argument because the facts

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
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 Freedom Resources Enterprises, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB/A for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Neil Christiansen, Chief Executive Officer and Chief 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, that to the best of 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: January 19, 2006

/s/ Neil Christiansen

Neil Christiansen

Chief Executive Officer

Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit 23.1**
**CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENTAUDITORS**
     We consent to the incorporation by reference inthe Registration Statements (Forms S-8 Nos. 333-51411and 333-72886) pertaining to the 1997 Incentive Stock Plan and2001 Restricted Stock Plan of GameTech International, Inc. ofour report dated December 15, 2003, with respect to theconsolidated financial statements of GameTech International,Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the yearended October 31, 2003.
  /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP    
Reno, NevadaJanuary 28, 2004
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine Special Emphasis Panel, Clinical Science.                    

*Date:*                         October 20-21, 2005.                    

*Time:*                         8 a.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         Bethesda Park Hotel, 8400 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Jeanette M. Hosseini, Scientific Review Administrator, National Center For Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 6707 Democracy Blvd., Suite 401, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-594-9096.                    

Dated: September 6, 2005.

Anthony M. Coelho, Jr., 

Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 05-18171  Filed 9-13-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
Amendment to Warrant Agreement



 Exhibit 4.6 
 AMENDMENT TO WARRANT AGREEMENT 
 This Amendment to Warrant Agreement (the
“Agreement”) is made as of April 2008 by and between SVB Financial Group (“Holder”) and Peregrine Semiconductor Corporation, a Delaware corporation (“Company”). 

RECITALS 
 A.
Company issued to Silicon Valley Bank (“SVB”) a Warrant to Purchase Stock, dated June 18, 2003, together with all schedules and exhibits thereto (the “Warrant Agreement”). Pursuant to the terms and conditions in the Warrant
Agreement, SVB transferred its interest in the Warrant Agreement to SVB Financial Group (formerly Silicon Valley Bancshares). 

B. Company and Holder wish to amend the Expiration Date of the Warrant Agreement.  

NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: 
 1. The Expiration Date is June 18, 2015. 
 2. This Agreement amends certain
terms of the Warrant Agreement. Company confirms that, except as amended by this Agreement, the Warrant Agreement remains in full force and effect. Unless otherwise defined, all terms capitalized in this Agreement shall have the meanings assigned in
the Warrant Agreement. This Agreement, together with the Warrant Agreement, constitutes the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all prior agreements and negotiations. 

3. This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and all of which shall
constitute one and the same instrument. 
 4. Time is of the essence for the performance of all obligations set forth in this
Agreement. 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above. 

 

									
	COMPANY:	 		 	HOLDER:
			
	PEREGRINE SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION	 		 	SVB FINANCIAL GROUP
					
	By:	 	/s/ Phil Chapman	 		 	By:	 	/s/ Fred Kreppel
	Name:	 	Phil Chapman	 		 	Name:	 	Fred Kreppel
	Title:	 	CFO	 		 	Title:	 	Senior Relationship Manager
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-10888

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

LYNN SMIRL

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:07-CR-3-16

Before GARZA, CLEMENT, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Lynn Smirl has moved for leave to

withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S.

738 (1967). Smirl has filed a response. The record is insufficiently developed to

allow consideration at this time of Smirl’s claim of ineffective assistance of

counsel; such claims generally “cannot be resolved on direct appeal when [they

have] not been raised before the district court since no opportunity existed to

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

August 20, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 07-10888

2

develop the record on the merits of the allegations.” United States v. Cantwell,

470 F.3d 1087, 1091 (5th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks and citation

omitted). Our independent review of the record, counsel’s brief, and Smirl’s

response discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s

motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, his motion for the appointment of

substitute counsel is DENIED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities

herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
Exhibit
      8.1




**Subsidiaries
      of Industrias Bachoco S.A.B. de C.V.**




The
      following chart lists each of our subsidiaries which we owned, directly or
      indirectly, as of December 31, 2007, and April 30, 2008:




1. Acuícola
      Bachoco, S.A. de C.V.




2.   
      Aviser, S.A. de C.V.




3.   
      Bachoco, S.A. de C.V. (“BSACV”)




4.   
      Bachoco Comercial, S.A. de C.V.




5.   
      Campi Alimentos, S.A. de C.V.




6.   
      Huevo y Derivados, S.A. de C.V.




7.   
      Operadora de Servicios de Personal, S.A. de C.V.




8.   
      Pecuarius Laboratorios, S.A. de C.V.




9.   
      Secba, S.A. de C.V.




10. 
      Sepetec, S. A. de C.V.




11. 
      Servicios de Personal Administrativo, S.A. de C.V.




12. 
      Induba Pavos, S.A de C.V.




Each
      of
      the Subsidiaries listed is incorporated under the laws of
      México.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-28-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-27-1997
<CASH>                                           5,475
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   33,046
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,636
<INVENTORY>                                     64,334
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               107,430
<PP&E>                                          29,279
<DEPRECIATION>                                   9,275
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 128,640
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           58,767
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            57
<OTHER-SE>                                      65,224
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   128,640
<SALES>                                         99,442
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                99,442
<CGS>                                           77,327
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   77,327
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   100
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,301
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,928
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,184
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                744
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       744
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.13
        

</TABLE>
STATE v. CAVINESS.

No. COA08-212.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed December 16, 2008.

Certification Date January 5, 2009.

Appeal from Guilford (07CRS24696, 07CRS24697, 07CRS77676, 07CRS77677).

Case reported without published opinion. No Error.
EXHIBIT 23.1**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in theRegistration Statements on Forms S-3 (Nos. 333-86842-01 and333-68283-01) and Forms S-8 (Nos. 333-42015,333-78779, 333-90042 and 333-100214-01) ofAMB Property, L.P. of our report datedFebruary 28, 2005 relating to the financial statements,financial statement schedule, management’s assessment ofthe effectiveness of internal control over financial reportingand the effectiveness of internal control over financialreporting, which appears in this Form 10-K.PricewaterhouseCoopers LLPSan Francisco, CaliforniaMarch 14, 2005
**EXHIBIT** **32**





**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 Clickable Enterprises, Inc. (the “Company”)
      on Form 10-KSB for the period ended March 31, 2007 as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
      each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below,
      hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his 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 results of
      operation of the Company.




Date:September
                14, 2007
              
              By:
              /s/
                Guy
                PipoloName:
              Guy
                PipoloTitle:
              Chief
                  Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer
                (Principal
                  Financial Officer)




A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
      authentications, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
      in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
      by Section 906, has been provided to Clickable Enterprises, Inc. and will be
      retained by Clickable Enterprises, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
      Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
POTTLE, et al. v. LINK, et al.

No. 27PA08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 5, 2008.

Ryal W. Tayloe, Wilmington, Cheryl A. Marteney, New Bern, for Pottle, et al.

G. Grady Richardson, Jr., Elizabeth Brooks Scherer, Raleigh, for Link and Willetts.

David S. Pokela, Greensboro, for Duke Energy Carolinas.

Matthew D. Rhoad, Andrea B. Short, Raleigh, for CP & L, et al.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 3rd day of September 2008 by Defendant for Extension of Time to File Brief:

"Motion Allowed. Defendant (Link and Willetts) shall have up to and including the 8th day of October 2008 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court. By order of the Court in conference this the 5th day of September 2008."
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-31302

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

AUBREY DAVIS

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 2:04-CR-366-1

Before PRADO, OWEN, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Aubrey Davis has moved for leave to

withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S.

738 (1967). Davis has filed a response. The record is insufficiently developed to

allow consideration at this time of Davis’s claims of ineffective assistance of

counsel; such claims generally “cannot be resolved on direct appeal when [they

have] not been raised before the district court since no opportunity existed to

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

April 16, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 06-31302

2

develop the record on the merits of the allegations.” See United States v.

Cantwell, 470 F.3d 1087, 1091 (5th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks and

citation omitted). Our independent review of the record, counsel’s brief, and

Davis’s response discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, the

motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further

responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

Davis’s motion to withdraw the Anders brief and appoint new counsel is

DENIED.
STATE v. ROBINSON.

No. COA07-1274.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed August 5, 2008.

Certification Date August 25, 2008.

Appeal from Duplin (06CRS3305, 06CRS50096).

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
# CE2004065EN.01005801.xml

| 13.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 65/58 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 65/58

---

(2004/C 65 E/059)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0946/03

by Jorge Hernández Mollar (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(26 March 2003)

Subject:   EU contribution to building the Málaga Picasso Museum

Subject:

The Málaga authorities are hoping to emulate the Guggenheim Museum's contribution to Bilbao's modernisation and economic revitalisation, with the future Picasso Museum acting as a flagship for development and modernisation.

The fact that Málaga is hoping to repeat Bilbao's Guggenheim success means that all administrative levels should be making the maximum possible contribution to ensure that the new museum becomes a genuine flagship for Málaga as a modern city with more to offer than just sunshine and beaches.

What contribution is the Commission making to the building of the Málaga Picasso Museum, and how does it assess this project in terms of its contribution to the cultural wealth of the EU as a whole?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(25 April 2003)

(25 April 2003)

The Commission would like to draw the Honourable Member's attention to the fact that it did not contribute to the building of the Malaga Picasso Museum.

---
# Council Decision (EU) 2015/1989Show full title

Council Decision (EU) 2015/1989 of 26 October 2015 on the signing, on behalf of the European Union, of the Agreement continuing            the International Science and Technology Center         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Council Decision (EU) 2015/1989                     

# of 26 October 2015

# on the signing, on behalf of the European Union, of the Agreement continuing the International Science and Technology Center

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 31(1) and Article 37 thereof,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 180 and Article 218(5) thereof,

Having regard to the joint proposal of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and of                           the European Commission,                        

Whereas:

(1)On 21 October 2013, the Council authorised the Commission and the High Representative to open negotiations for the establishment                              of an Agreement continuing the International Science and Technology Center between the European Union and the European Atomic                              Energy Community (‘Euratom’), acting as one Party, Georgia, Japan, the Kingdom of Norway, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Republic                              of Armenia, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Republic of Korea, the Republic of Tajikistan, and the United States of America                              (‘the Agreement’).

(2)Those negotiations have been successfully completed and the Agreement was initialled on 22 June 2015.

(3)The conclusion of the Agreement is subject to a separate procedure as regards matters falling within the competence of Euratom.

(4)The Agreement should be signed on behalf of the Union.

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

# Article 1U.K.

The signing on behalf of the Union of the Agreement continuing the International Science and Technology Center is hereby authorised,                     subject to the conclusion of the said Agreement(1).                  

# Article 2U.K.

The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the person(s) empowered to sign the Agreement on behalf of                     the Union.                  

# Article 3U.K.

This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

Done at Brussels, 26 October 2015.

*For the Council*                            

*The President*                            

F. Mogherini                            

1

The text of the Agreement will be published together with the decision on its conclusion.