alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### The Honorable Donald E. O'Brien, United S tates District Judge 1 

### for the Northern District of Iowa. ___________ No. 96-2020

___________ Harold O. Postma, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Northern District of Iowa. Mike Van Otterloo, Sheriff, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: May 10, 1996 Filed: May 16, 1996

___________ Before BEAM, LOKEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Ha roldPostma, an Iowa inmate, appeals the district court's orde r 1 dismissing without prejudice his 28 U.S.C. § 225 4 petition, for failing to exhaust state remedies. We agree that Postma has currently available, non
futile remedies in state court, and accordingly, the district court' s dismissal was correct. See Iowa Code Ann. §§ 822.2, 822.3 (West 1994) ; Smittie v. Lockhart , 843 F.2d 295, 296 (8th Cir. 1988). We deny Postma's motion for release. SeeFed. R. App. P. 23(b); Martin v. Solem , 801 F.2d 324, 329 (8th Cir. 1986). Affirmed. See8th Cir. R. 47A(a).

### -2- A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
<PAGE>

                                   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 Quarterly Report of Universal Automotive Industries, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q/A (Amendment No. 1) for the period ended March 31,
2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), we, Arvin Scott, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and
Robert W. Zimmer, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each 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 our 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 operations of the Company.

/s/ Arvin Scott
---------------

Name:  Arvin Scott
Title:  Chief Executive Officer
Date:  December 23, 2004

/s/ Robert W. Zimmer
--------------------

Name: Robert W. Zimmer
Title:  Chief Financial Officer
Date:  December 23, 2004

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
# CE2004078EN.01071601.xml

| 27.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 78/716 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 78/716

---

(2004/C 78 E/0764)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1450/03

by María Sornosa Martínez (PSE) to the Commission

(16 April 2003)

Subject:   Need for urgent intervention — plan to extend the port of Altea (Spain)

Subject:

For more than a year now, numerous complaints and parliamentary questions have been submitted to the Commission concerning the plan to extend the port of Altea (Spain) with a view to creating a yachting facility and its implications for the coastline of Alicante province, which is already under severe pressure from development projects.

The author of this question is grateful for the Commission's joint reply to her questions P-0769/03 and E-0775/03 (1), in which it states that it is awaiting information from the Spanish authorities. However, the project to expand the port has now passed through the various procedures laid down in law, and the work could soon be completed.

1

Does the Commission not consider the information provided by the complainants and detailed in the university reports cited in the above-mentioned questions to be sufficient justification for calling on the Spanish government to suspend the project until the Commission has completed its investigations?

Does the Commission not believe that the matter calls for urgent intervention on its part, in view of the potential environment impact of the completion of this project?

Does the Commission not believe that, as a matter of priority, action must be taken to prevent any further deterioration of the coastline of Alicante province, in view of the present condition of its irreplaceable posidonia meadows?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(23 May 2003)

(23 May 2003)

The Commission is not empowered to enjoin Member States to suspend a project which is the subject of an enquiry. However, within the framework of the procedural rules it must observe, the Commission has promptly taken all steps to ensure that Community law is complied with in this case.

Correspondence has been exchanged between the Commission and the Spanish authorities and the project was also discussed at a bilateral meeting in Madrid at the beginning of April this year. The Commission is now examining the Spanish authorities' reply. A decision will shortly be adopted on the appropriate action to be taken.

It should also be noted that the Commission is making every effort to ensure the conservation of the posidonia meadows as a priority habitat of Community importance, protected under Council Directive 92/43/EEC (2) of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild flora and fauna.

2

---

(1)  OJ C 268 E, 7.11.2003, p. 132.

1

(2)  OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

2

---
<PAGE>

                                   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 Quarterly Report of Universal Automotive Industries, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q/A (Amendment No. 1) for the period ended June 30,
2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), we, Arvin Scott, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and
Robert W. Zimmer, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each 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 our knowledge:

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

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

/s/ Arvin Scott
--------------------------------

Name: Arvin Scott
Title: Chief Executive Officer
Date: December 23, 2004

/s/ Robert W. Zimmer
--------------------------------

Name: Robert W. Zimmer
Title: Chief Financial Officer
Date: December 23, 2004

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

______________________________

No. 06-08-00016-CR

______________________________

FRANKLIN JACKSON, II, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

 

On Appeal from the 124th Judicial District Court

Gregg County, Texas

Trial Court No. 33443-B

 

Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Moseley
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Franklin Jackson, II, has appealed from his plea of "true" to the allegations contained in the

State's motion to revoke his community supervision. Jackson was sentenced by the trial court to

twelve months' confinement.

On appeal, Jackson contends that the court violated the prohibition against cruel and unusual

punishment by disregarding societal norms and sentencing him to incarceration rather than utilizing

other options, citing Kennedy v. Louisiana, ___ U.S. ___, 128 S.Ct. 2641 (2008). He contends this

violates the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 10 of the

Texas Constitution.

To preserve such complaint for appellate review, Jackson must have presented to the trial

court a timely request, objection, or motion that stated the specific grounds for the desired ruling,

or the complaint must be apparent from the context. See TEX. R. APP. P. 33.1(a)(1); Harrison v.

State, 187 S.W.3d 429, 433 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); Williams v. State, 191 S.W.3d 242, 262 (Tex.

App.—Austin 2006, no pet.) (claims of cruel and unusual punishment must be presented in timely

manner); Nicholas v. State, 56 S.W.3d 760, 768 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2001, pet. ref'd)

(failure to complain to trial court that sentences were cruel and unusual waived claim of error for

appellate review). We have reviewed the record of the trial proceeding. No relevant request,

objection, or motion was made. And, while this Court has held that a motion for new trial is an

appropriate way to preserve this type of claim for review (see Williamson v. State, 175 S.W.3d 522,
3

523–24 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2005, no pet.); Delacruz v. State, 167 S.W.3d 904 (Tex.

App.—Texarkana 2005, no pet.)), Jackson's motion for new trial did not contain an allegation that

the sentence was disproportionate to the offense or that it was cruel and unusual. He has not

preserved such an issue for appeal.

Therefore, we affirm the trial court's judgment.

Bailey C. Moseley

Justice

Date Submitted: August 28, 2008

Date Decided: August 29, 2008

Do Not Publish
STATE of North Carolina v. Calvin Sherwood WATTS.

No. 132A16.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 13, 2016.

John Keating Wiles, Raleigh, for Watts, Calvin Sherwood.

Laura E. Crumpler, Assistant Attorney General, for State of North Carolina.

Jon David, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

*748*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by State of NC on the 13th of April 2016 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 13th of April 2016."
fs1a5iiex10xxi_sochinalive.htm


Exhibit 10.21


 


 


 



Dec 20, 2009


 


 


 


Declaration


 


I am a shareholder of Yujiang Xianyue Livestock Limited, which is a subsidiary of Jiangxi Yingtan Huaxin Livestock Limited.  My tax liabilities incurred during time period from 2007 to 2009 will be solely burdened by me personally, and will have nothing to do with the company.


 


 


 


I hereby declare the above.


 


Declarer


 


 


 


(signature)
# CE2004065EN.01007001.xml

| 13.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 65/70 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 65/70

---

(2004/C 65 E/080)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1224/03

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 Frosinone

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 Frosinone, urgently need to use European funds to promote sustainable urban development,

can the Commission state:

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

1.

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

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

2.

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

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

3.

whether this funding has been used?

---
# C_2009129EN.01001201.xml

| 6.6.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 129/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.6.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 129/12

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 22 April 2009 — CESD-Communautaire v Commission

(Case T-286/05) (1)

1

(Public procurement - Declaration of a serious breach of contract - Article 93(1)(f) of Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 - Action for annulment - Error of law - Jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance - Legal interest in bringing proceedings - Admissibility - Misuse of powers - Manifest error of assessment - Statement of reasons - Right to a fair hearing)

2009/C 129/19

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Centre européen pour la statistique et le développement ASBL (CESD-Communautaire) (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: D. Grisay and D. Piccininno, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: F. Dintilhac and G. Wilms, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of the Commission’s letter of 18 May 2005 by which it informed the applicant that it had taken the decision to declare, as regards various contracts referred to, that there had been a serious breach of contract under Article 93(1)(f) of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (OJ 2002 L 248, p. 1)

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

dismisses the action;

| 2. | orders Centre européen pour la statistique et le développement ASBL (CESD-Communautaire) to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

orders Centre européen pour la statistique et le développement ASBL (CESD-Communautaire) to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 229, 17.9.2005.

1

---
# C_2008022EN.01005302.xml

| 26.1.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 22/53 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.1.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 22/53

---

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 13 December 2007 — Wandschneider v Commission

(Case F-28/06) (1)

1

(Staff case - Officials - Assessment - Career development report - Assessment year 2004 - Action for annulment - Grounds - Manifest error of assessment)

(2008/C 22/100)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Paolo Sequeira Wandschneider (Brussels, Belgium) (represented: initially by G. Vandersanden and C. Ronzi, lawyers, then by G. Vandersanden, C. Ronzi and L. Levi, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: G. Berscheid and C. Berardis-Kayser, agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Annulment of the applicant's career development report for the assessment year 2004 and, secondly, a claim for damages.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

| 1. | Dismisses the application; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the application;

| 2. | Orders each party to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders each party to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 121 of 20.5.2006, p. 19.

1

---
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

November 29, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 128912 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, JEANNIE L. COLLINS, Personal Representative Justices
 

of the Estate of RICHARD E. COLLINS,

Deceased, and KIRBY TOTTINGHAM,

Plaintiffs-Appellants, 

v SC: 128912 

 COA: 251795 

Jackson CC: 02-002521-NO 

MAES CORPORATION, d/b/a AUTO IMAGES 

OF JACKSON, ERIC MAES, and APRIL MAES,

Defendants-Appellees. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 22, 2005 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

d1121 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

November 29, 2005 

Clerk
----

----

|   | EXHIBIT      32.1  |
|--------|-------------------------|

|   | CERTIFICATION |
|--------|---------------|

|   | PURSUANT      TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002 |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 1)  I      have reviewed the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Titan Technologies,      Inc.; |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2) This      quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact      or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in      light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not      misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;      and |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 3) The      financial statements and other information contained in this quarterly      report fairly present, in all material respects, thefinancial condition,      results of operations  and cash flows of the      Company. |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | Dated:  December      22, 2008 |
|--------|------------------------------------------|

|   | /s/      Ronald L. Wilder, President |
|--------|--------------------------------------|

|   | Ronald L.      Wilder, President |
|--------|----------------------------------|

|   | (Chief      Executive Officer) |
|--------|--------------------------------|

|   | (Chief      Financial Officer) |
|--------|--------------------------------|

----

----
# C_2009267EN.01005301.xml

| 7.11.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 267/53 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.11.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 267/53

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 23 September 2009 — Spain v Commission

(Case T-341/05 (1))

1

(Agriculture - Common organisation of the market in milk and milk products - Abolition of export refunds for all milk products to Ceuta and Melilla - Conditions - Principle of non-discrimination - Proportionality)

2009/C 267/89

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: J Cárcamo and M. Muñoz Pérez, abogados del Estado)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by C. Cattabriga and F. Jimeno Fernández, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Annulment of Commission Regulation (EC) No 909/2005 of 16 June 2005 fixing the export refunds on milk and milk products (OJ 2005 L 154, p. 10), in so far as its Annex includes Ceuta and Mellila among the destinations grouped together under the destination L 01.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1) | Annuls Commission Regulation (EC) No 909/2005 of 16 June 2005 fixing the export refunds on milk and milk products, in so far as it mentions Ceuta et Melilla among the destinations grouped together under the destination L 01. |
| --- | --- |

1)

Annuls Commission Regulation (EC) No 909/2005 of 16 June 2005 fixing the export refunds on milk and milk products, in so far as it mentions Ceuta et Melilla among the destinations grouped together under the destination L 01.

| 2) | Orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2)

Orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 217 of 29.10.2005.

1

---
Exhibit 21.1

SUBSIDIARIES OF RADICA GAMES LIMITED




                                                      State or Country
Name of Subsidiary                                    in Which Organized
------------------------------------------------------------------------

UNITED STATES

Radica Enterprises Ltd                                Nevada
(Operates as Radica USA Ltd)
 - Radica UK Ltd                                      UK
 - Radica Canada Ltd                                  Canada

Disc., Inc.                                           Nevada
(Operates as Radica Innovations)


INTERNATIONAL

Radica Limited                                        Hong Kong
 - Radica China Ltd                                   British Virgin Islands
    - Dongguan Radica Games Manufactory Co. Ltd       People's Republic of China
    - RadMex S.A. de C.V. (dormant)                   Mexico

Radica Sales (HK) Ltd                                 Hong Kong
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 9, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

136608 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, 

Justices 

v SC: 136608 

 COA: 277239 

Washtenaw CC: 06-001432-FH 

JAMES FRANKLIN SIMMONS,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 13, 2008 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

t0828 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

September 9, 2008 

 Clerk