alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
STATE v. Raul OLIVEROS.

No. 80P16-1.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 13, 2016.

Adrian Dellinger, Associate Attorney General, for State of North Carolina.

Saul Oliveros, Polkton, for Oliveros, Raul.

R. Andrew Murray, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 8th of March 2016 by Defendant to Appoint Counsel:

> *480"Motion Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 13th of April 2016."
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 12-1

CKE RESTAURANTS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                Fiscal year ended January 31,
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              (Dollars in thousands)                  2000        1999        1998       1997       1996
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                                 <C>         <C>         <C>         <C>        <C>
Earnings before fixed charges:
  Income (loss) before income taxes and
    extraordinary item                              $(47,460)   $124,097    $ 76,640    $36,710    $17,953
  Fixed charges                                       92,389      68,843      35,325     19,840     18,521
                                                    ------------------------------------------------------
                                                    $ 44,929    $192,940    $111,965    $56,550    $36,474
                                                    ------------------------------------------------------
Fixed charges:
  Interest expense                                  $ 63,283    $ 43,453    $ 16,914    $ 9,877    $10,004
  Interest component of rent expense(1)               29,106      25,390      18,411      9,963      8,517
                                                    ------------------------------------------------------
                                                    $ 92,389    $ 68,843    $ 35,325    $19,840    $18,521
                                                    ------------------------------------------------------
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                       0.5x        2.8x        3.2x       2.9x       2.0x
                                                    ------------------------------------------------------
</TABLE>

(1) Calculated as one-third of total rent expense.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3961 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3961

  To provide Israel a license exception to the Export Administration 
       Regulations currently made available to 36 other nations.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 29, 2014

 Mr. Grayson introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To provide Israel a license exception to the Export Administration 
       Regulations currently made available to 36 other nations.

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

SECTION 1. EXPEDITED LICENSING PROCEDURES.

    (a) In General.--The President shall direct the Secretary of State 
to undertake discussions with Israel to identify the steps required to 
be taken to include Israel within the list of countries described in 
section 740.20(c)(1) of title 15, Code of Federal Regulations (relating 
to eligibility for Strategic Trade Authorizations).
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 21

SUBSIDIARIES OF DARA BIOSCIENCES, INC.



|                                       |  |                                                    
|-------------------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------
|Name of Subsidiary                     |  | Jurisdiction of Organization/State of
Incorporation
|                                       | 
|DARA Pharmaceuticals, Inc.             |  | Delaware                                           
|                                       | 
|DARA Therapeutics, Inc.                |  | North Carolina                                     
|                                       | 
|Signum Pharmaceuticals, Inc.*          |  | North Carolina                                     
|                                       | 
|Point Therapeutics Massachusetts, Inc. |  | Massachusetts                                      



|* | Dissolved December 8, 2009
|- | --------------------------
State of North Carolina v. Isidoro Flores Molina

No. COA15-1180

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: September 6, 2016

NO ERROR.
**Order of the Court of First Instance (First Chamber) of 14 July 2008 – Complejo Agrícola v Commission**

**(Case T-345/06)**

Action for annulment – Directive 92/43/EEC – Conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora – Decision 2006/613/EC – List of sites of Community importance for the Mediterranean biogeographical region – Challengeable act – Lack of direct effect – Inadmissible

1.                     *Actions for annulment – Actionable measures – Meaning – Measures producing binding legal effects (Art. 230, first para., EC;
Council Directive 92/43, Arts 4(2), 5 and 6; Commission Decision 2006/613, Art. 1, second para., and Annexes 1, 2 and 3) (see
paras 25-29)*

2.                     *Actions for annulment – Natural or legal persons – Measures of direct and individual concern to them (Art. 230, fourth para.,
EC; Council Directive 92/43, Arts 4(5) and 6; Commission Decision 2006/613, Annex 1) (see paras 40-45)*

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | Partial annulment of Article 1 of, and Annex 1 to, Commission Decision 2006/613/EC of 19 July 2006 adopting, pursuant to Council Directive 92/43/EEC, the list of sites of Community importance for the Mediterranean biogeographical region (OJ 2006 L 259, p. 1), in so far as it declares the site designated as ‘Acebuchales de la Campiña sur de Cádiz’, which includes a farm belonging to the applicant, to be a site of Community importance for the Mediterranean biogeographical region. |

**Operative part:**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | Dismisses the action as inadmissible; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Orders Complejo Agrícola SA to bear its own costs and to pay those of the Commission; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 3. | | Orders the Kingdom of Spain to bear its own costs. |
# C_2009153EN.01003702.xml

| 4.7.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 153/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.7.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 153/37

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 12 May 2009 — Jurado Hermanos v OHIM (JURADO)

(Case T-410/07) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Community word mark JURADO - Failure by the proprietor of the trade mark to apply for renewal - Removal of the mark on expiry of the registration - Application by the exclusive licensee for restitutio in integrum)

2009/C 153/71

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Jurado Hermanos, SL (Alicante, Spain) (represented by: C. Martín Álvarez, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: O. Montalto and P. López Fernández de Corres, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 3 September 2007 (Case R 866/2007-2) concerning the application lodged by the applicant for restitutio in integrum.

restitutio in integrum

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Jurado Hermanos, SL to pay the costs, including those of the interlocutory proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Jurado Hermanos, SL to pay the costs, including those of the interlocutory proceedings.

---

(1)  OJ C 8, 12.1.2008.

1

---
Exhibit 32.2  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002   In connection with the Quarterly Report of Develocap, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Nguyen Van Thong, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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 results of operations of the Company,  Date: November 23, 2009/s/ Nguyen Van ThongNguyen Van ThongChief Financial Officer
1

DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. BRUEGGEMAN. 

[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Brueggeman, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 

2021-Ohio-21.] 

(No. 2019-1734—Submitted January 7, 2021—Decided January 11, 2021.) 

ON APPLICATION FOR REINSTATEMENT. 

____________________ 

{¶ 1} This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an 

application for reinstatement by respondent, Edward Paul Brueggeman, Attorney 

Registration No. 0029159, last known business address in Mason, Ohio. 

{¶ 2} The court coming now to consider its order of April 23, 2020, wherein 

the court, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(12)(A)(3), suspended respondent for a period 

of two years, with the final 18 months stayed on condition, finds that respondent 

has substantially complied with that order and with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. 

V(24). 

{¶ 3} Therefore, it is ordered by this court that respondent is reinstated to 

the practice of law in the state of Ohio. 

{¶ 4} It is further ordered that the clerk of this court issue certified copies 

of this order as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(17)(E)(1) and that publication be 

made as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(17)(E)(2). 

{¶ 5} For earlier case, see Disciplinary Counsel v. Brueggeman, 160 Ohio 

St.3d 198, 2020-Ohio-1578, 155 N.E.3d 833. 

O’CONNOR, C.J., and KENNEDY, FISCHER, DEWINE, DONNELLY, STEWART,

and BRUNNER, JJ., concur. 

________________________
##### 



Exhibit 12.1
 CKE RESTAURANTS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
 Fiscal years ended January 31,2007
    
    
    2006
    
    
    2005
    
    
    2004
    
    
    2003Earnings before fixed charges:Income (loss) before taxes,
discontinued operations and
cumulative effect of accounting
change for goodwill
    
    $
    82,071
    
    
    $
    57,251
    
    
    $
    17,070
    
    
    $
    (48,013
    )
    
    $
    12,121Fixed charges
    
    
    52,019
    
    
    
    55,380
    
    
    
    71,329
    
    
    
    72,224
    
    
    
    71,211$
    134,090
    
    
    $
    112,631
    
    
    $
    88,399
    
    
    $
    24,211
    
    
    $
    83,332Fixed charges:Interest expense
    
    $
    19,751
    
    
    $
    23,016
    
    
    $
    36,748
    
    
    $
    39,962
    
    
    $
    39,924Interest component of rent expense
    
    
    32,268
    
    
    
    32,364
    
    
    
    34,581
    
    
    
    32,262
    
    
    
    31,287$
    52,019
    
    
    $
    55,380
    
    
    $
    71,329
    
    
    $
    72,224
    
    
    $
    71,211Ratio of earnings to fixed charges
    
    
    2.6
    
    
    
    2.0
    
    
    
    1.2
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    1.2Deficiency (if any)
    
    $
    
    
    
    $
    
    
    
    $
    
    
    
    $
    (48,013
    )
    
    $
    Rent expense
    
    
    96,803
    
    
    
    97,092
    
    
    
    103,743
    
    
    
    96,787
    
    
    
    93,862Interest component (1/3 of rent expense)
    
    
    32,268
    
    
    
    32,364
    
    
    
    34,581
    
    
    
    32,262
    
    
    
    31,287
Exhibit 10.2

 

CURRENT DIRECTOR COMPENSATION PROGRAM

As of May 28, 2014

 

1.              Annual Retainer:  $125,000 — (effective on the date of the Annual Meeting of Shareholders in 2014) — Paid in quarterly installments in arrears at the end of each quarter in cash or, if the director so elects, in deferred stock units to be distributed at a later date designated by the director.

 

2.              Annual Deferred Stock Award:  $165,000 (effective with respect to awards granted after December 31, 2014) — Awarded in February to incumbent directors who are nominated for re-election at the next shareholders’ meeting in the form of deferred stock units.  Deferred stock units vest one day prior to the date of the annual shareholder meeting occurring in the year following the year of the date of grant.  Vested deferred stock units are distributed either in a lump sum six months after termination of service as a director or, if the director so elects, in annual installments beginning at least six months following termination of service as a director.

 

3.              Committee Chair Fees:  Currently, the annual amount of committee chair fees, which are paid quarterly in arrears, are as follows:  Audit - $25,000, Compensation - $20,000, Nominating and Governance - $20,000, Investment and Capital Markets - $20,000 and Risk - $20,000.

 

4.              Lead Director:  Effective November 2, 2006, the Board established the position of Lead Director of the Board and agreed that the Lead Director will be paid $25,000 per year (payable in arrears in quarterly installments as of the last business day of each quarter).
**EXHIBIT 23.1****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements of FenturaFinancial, Inc. on Form S-3D (File No.333-120182) on Form S-8 (File No. 333-118085), on Form S-8(File No. 333-137104) and on Form S-8 (File No. 333-137103) of our report dated March 3, 2007 onthe 2006 Consolidated Financial Statements of Fentura Financial, Inc., which report is included inthe 2006 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Fentura Financial, Inc.              /s/ CROWE CHIZEK AND COMPANY LLC         Grand Rapids, Michigan
# Continuation of the Exercise of Certain Authorities under the Trading with the Enemy Act

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

                        Under section 101(b) of Public Law 95-223 (91 Stat. 1625; 50 U.S.C. App. 5(b) note), and a previous determination on September 10, 2004 (69                         *Fed. Reg.*                         55497), the exercise of certain authorities under the Trading with the Enemy Act is scheduled to terminate on September 14, 2005.                     

I hereby determine that the continuation for 1 year of the exercise of those authorities with respect to the applicable countries is in the national interest of the United States. 

Therefore, pursuant to the authority vested in me by section 101(b) of Public Law 95-223, I continue for 1 year, until September 14, 2006, the exercise of those authorities with respect to countries affected by: 

31 C.F.R. part 500
31 C.F.R. part 505
31 C.F.R. part 515

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

[FR Doc. 05-18495

Billing code 4811-33-P
Polyfield HARRIS, William Harris, Tonya Barkley, Samantha Davis, and Patricia Perkins v. Myra H. GILCHRIST, Valerie Harris, The Estate of Thomas Harris, Roosevelt Harris, Dorothy Morant, and Helen Howard

No. 156P16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 22, 2016

*224M. Annette Rhodes, Attorney at Law, For Harris, Polyfield, et al.

Nathaniel Currie, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, For Gilchrist, Myra H., et al.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 29th of April 2016 by Plaintiffs 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 22nd of September 2016."
1691.

#### THOMAS *v.*THE STATE.

A defendant may be convicted of simple larceny on an indictment charging larceny from the person. Hence, if a defendant is acquitted under ■an indictment charging him with larceny from the person, lie can not, as against a plea of former jeopardy, be put to trial for tile same transaction under another accusation, charging him with simple larceny.

Indictment for larceny from person, from city court of Albany —Judge Crosland. December 17, 1908.

Submitted March 9,

Decided March 16, 1909.

*B. J. Bacon,*for plaintiff in error.

*J. D. Pope, solicitor,*contra.

Powell, J.

The defendant was indicted for larceny from the person. The privacy of the taking is an essential element in this offense. The State failed to show this element, and a verdict of not guilty was returned, under the direction of the court. The State’s counsel thereupon prepared another accusation against the defendant, charging the same transaction as a simple larceny. The defendant pleaded in bar the former jeopardy. The court sustained a general demurrer to the plea.

It was held in *Lavender*v. *State,*107 *Ga.*707 (33 S. E. 420), that a defendant might be convicted of simple larceny under an indictment charging him with larceny from the person. The .State’s counsel, in his brief in this court, concedes that this principle, if adhered to, would ■ control the case in the defendant’s favor, and asks that it be certified to the Supreme Court for review. We decline this request. We think the *Lavender*case is ■correct in principle, and should not be overruled.

*Judgment reversed.*
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
      AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     I, Kenneth W. Bean, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant  to  Section  906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly
Report  of  Pediatric  Prosthetics, Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period
ended  September  30, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or  15(d)  of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained
in  such  Form  10-QSB  fairly  presents  in all material respects the financial
condition  and  results  of  operations  of  Pediatric  Prosthetics,  Inc.

                              By:/s/ Kenneth W. Bean
                              --------------------------
                              Kenneth W. Bean
                              Principal Financial Officer

December 5, 2006

<PAGE>
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3688 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3688

To amend title 18, United States Code, to direct the Bureau of Prisons 
 to provide certain voting information to Federal prisoners upon their 
                          release from prison.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 10, 2013

Mr. Jeffries (for himself and Ms. Meng) introduced the following bill; 
          which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title 18, United States Code, to direct the Bureau of Prisons 
 to provide certain voting information to Federal prisoners upon their 
                          release from prison.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Ex-Offender Voter Registration Act 
of 2013''.

SEC. 2. PROVISION OF VOTING INFORMATION TO FEDERAL PRISONERS.

    Section 4042(a)(E) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by 
inserting after clause (vii) the following:
                            ``(viii) The laws and regulations governing 
                        the right of an individual convicted of a 
                        felony who has been released from prison to 
                        vote in each of the 50 States, and, for the 
                        State in which the prisoner will reside upon 
                        release, any voter registration or application 
                        forms that the prisoner will need to complete 
                        in order to vote.''.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

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

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of NES Rentals Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”)on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2005 as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Andrew P. Studdert, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:

 

(1)          The Report fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

 
| /s/  ANDREW P. STUDDERT                |   |
|----------------------------------------|--------|
|                                   |
| Andrew  P. Studdert                    |
| President  and Chief Executive Officer |
| May  12, 2005                          |

 

 

 

 

                Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished tothe Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.