alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-2135

ENNIO MANOLO DE LEON ESTRADA,

Petitioner,

versus

JULIE L. MYERS, Assistant Secretary; ALBERTO

R. GONZALES, Attorney General,

Respondents.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration

Appeals. (A96-794-351; A73-524-000)

Submitted: May 4, 2007 Decided: June 6, 2007

Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Linda A. Dominguez, L A DOMINGUEZ LAW, LLC, Baltimore, Maryland,

for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Papu

Sandhu, Senior Litigation Counsel, Daniel J. Davis, UNITED STATES

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondents.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Ennio Manolo De Leon Estrada, a native and citizen of

Guatemala, petitions for review of the reinstatement of an order of

deportation entered in 1995. Soon after his deportation, Estrada

illegally reentered the United States. Estrada was arrested in

2006 during an interview regarding his application for adjustment

of status. The prior order of deportation was reinstated pursuant

to 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(5) (2000), 8 C.F.R. § 1241.8 (2006). Estrada

seeks review of this order.

Under 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(5), the Attorney General may

reinstate a prior order of removal from its original date, and the

order “is not subject to being reopened or reviewed . . . .” Our

examination of the record convinces us that this statute was

properly applied to Estrada. See Fernandez-Vargas v. Gonzales, 126

S. Ct. 2422, 2425 (2006) (holding § 1231(a)(5) has no improper

retroactive effect when applied to an alien who was deported and

who illegally returned before the effective date of the statute);

Velasquez-Gabriel v. Crocetti, 263 F.3d 102, 108-10 (4th Cir. 2001)

(same). Therefore, under the plain language of the statute, we

lack jurisdiction to review the reinstated order of removal. 

We deny the petition for review. 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.
- 3 -

PETITION DENIED
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Annual Report of Nevsun Resources Ltd. (the Company) on Form 40-F/A (Amended) for the year ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John A. Clarke, the Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



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/ John A. Clarke

John A. Clarke

President and Chief Executive Officer



June 28, 2006
**Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Seventh Chamber) of 16 September 2009 – Alber v OHIM (hand grip)**

**(Case T-391/07)**

Community trade mark – Application for a three-dimensional Community trade mark – Hand grip – Absolute ground for refusal – Lack of distinctive character – Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) – Duty to give reasons – Article 73 of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009) – Principle of examination of the facts of its own motion – Article 74(1) of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 76(1) of Regulation No 207/2009)

Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Absolute grounds for refusal – Marks devoid of any distinctive character (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 7(1)(b)) (see paras 50-62)

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | ACTION brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 16 August 2007 (Case R 361/2007-4) and against the decision of the examiner of OHIM of 16 January 2007 in that case, in so far as it rejects Community trade mark application No 4396727 for certain goods covered by that mark. |

**Information relating to the case**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| Applicant for the Community trade mark: | Alfons Alber |
| Community trade mark sought: | Three‐dimensional trade mark representing a hand grip in respect of goods in Classes 6 and 8 – Application No 4396727 |
| Decision of the Examiner: | Registration partially refused |
| Decision of the Board of Appeal: | Appeal dismissed |

**Operative part**

The Court:

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

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Orders Alfons Alber to pay the costs. |
**Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 6 December 2007 – Commission v France**

**(Case C‐106/07)**

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 2000/59/EC – Port reception facilities for ship-generated waste and cargo residues – Failure to develop and implement waste reception and handling plans for all ports

Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Examination of merits by the Court – Situation to be taken into consideration – Situation on expiry of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 16)

**Re:**

| |
| --- |
| Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to adopt, within the prescribed period, the measures necessary to comply with Directive 2000/59/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2000 on port reception facilities for ship-generated waste and cargo residues (OJ 2000 L 332, p. 81). |

**Operative part**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | | Declares that, by failing to develop and implement, within the prescribed period, waste reception and handling plans for all its ports, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 5(1) and 16(1) of Directive 2000/59/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2000 on port reception facilities for ship-generated waste and cargo residues; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | | Orders the French Republic to pay the costs. |
| |                                                                                                |  |                                                                  |  |  | 
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------- |  |  | 
| |                                                                                                | 
| | KPMG LLP
Chartered Accountants
PO Box 10426  777 Dunsmuir Street
Vancouver  BC  V7Y 1K3
Canada |  | Telephone
(604) 691-3000
Fax
(604) 691-3031
Internet
www.kpmg.ca







CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Board of Directors of Nevsun Resources Ltd

We consent to the inclusion in this annual report on Form 40-F of:

- our auditors' report dated March 24, 2008 on the consolidated balance sheets of Nevsun Resources Ltd ("the Company") as at December 31,
2007 and December 31, 2006, and the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income (loss), shareholders equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the two-year period ended December 31, 2007
- our auditors' report on reconciliation to United States GAAP dated March 24, 2008
- our Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm dated March 24, 2008 on the Companys internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2007

each of which is containedinthis annual report on Form 40-F of the Company for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007.



[financials002.gif]

Chartered Accountants



Vancouver, Canada

March
26, 2008

KPMG LLP, a Canadian limited liability partnership is the Canadian member firm of KPMG International, a Swiss cooperative.

---
In the Matter of: Kiley Winebarger

No. COA15-1357

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: October 4, 2016

AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated financial statements found in the Company's Annual Report on Form
10-K for the twelve month period ended December 31, 1998 and is qualified in
its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                               2
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   69,347
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                78,689
<PP&E>                                          27,665
<DEPRECIATION>                                   9,595
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 137,955
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           33,254
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           160
<OTHER-SE>                                      52,369
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   137,955
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               338,560
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  317,861
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                29,610
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,324
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (12,235)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,520
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (17,755)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (17,755)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.13)
        

</TABLE>
STATE of North Carolina v. Susan Annette ALLEN, Defendant.

No. COA16-539

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: December 6, 2016

NO ERROR.
# C_2009055EN.01002601.xml

| 7.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 55/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 55/26

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 16 December 2008 — Gaedertz v OHIM — Living Byte Software (GlobalRemote)

(Case T-209/07) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Application for a declaration of invalidity - Withdrawal of the application for a declaration of invalidity - No need to adjudicate)

(2009/C 55/47)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Johann-Christoph Gaedertz (Frankfurt am Main, Germany) (represented by: E.M. Gerstenberg, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: B. Schmidt, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance: Living Byte Software GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: A. Freifrau von Welser, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 25 April 2007 (Case R 272/2005-4) relating to invalidity proceedings between Mr Johann-Christoph Gaedertz and Living Byte Software GmbH

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

| 2. | The applicant and the intervener are ordered to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The applicant and the intervener are ordered to bear their own costs.

| 3. | The applicant is ordered to pay the defendant's costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The applicant is ordered to pay the defendant's costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 183, 4.8.2007.

1

---
# C_2008272EN.01002503.xml

| 25.10.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 272/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.10.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 272/25

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 8 September 2008 — Kerstens v Commission

(Case T-222/07 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Civil Service - Officials - Career development report - Time limit for lodging a complaint - Lateness - Appeal not founded)

(2008/C 272/48)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Petrus Kerstens (Overijse, Belgium) (represented by: C. Mourato, lawyer)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: D. Martin and K. Herrmann, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re:

Appeal brought against the order of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) on 25 April 2007 in Case F-59/06 Kerstens v Commission, not yet published in the ECR, and seeking annulment of that order

Kerstens

Commission

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders Mr Petrus Kerstens to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Petrus Kerstens to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 199, 25.8.2007.

1

---
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 9, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

136311 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: 136311 

 COA: 281963 

Oakland CC: 92-115042-FC 

TERRY D. ALTMAN, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 5, 2008 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). 

p0828 

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
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
COMPANY'S  INCOME  STATEMENT  AND  BALANCE  SHEET  DATED  JUNE  30,  1999 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                              663
<SECURITIES>                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     1,115
<ALLOWANCES>                                          0
<INVENTORY>                                       4,801
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  6,669
<PP&E>                                              948
<DEPRECIATION>                                        0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    7,661
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             2,338
<BONDS>                                           1,035
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<COMMON>                                         20,652
<OTHER-SE>                                            0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      7,661
<SALES>                                           7,059
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  7,059
<CGS>                                             4,137
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     4,137
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  4,538
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                    0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (1,644)
<INCOME-TAX>                                          0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                   0
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (1,644)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.28)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (0.28)



</TABLE>
<PAGE>
 
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.33


                                PROMISSORY NOTE


$1,000,000                                                     February 26, 1997

     As hereinafter stated, for value received Jayhawk Medical Acceptance
Corporation promises to pay to the order of Carl Westcott in Dallas, Texas the
sum of One Million Dollars, payable on demand with interest at the rate of prime
per annum from the date of this Promissory Note.   This Promissory Note may be
prepaid at any time without penalty.  Amounts due under this Promissory Note
from and after it is due shall bear interest at the highest lawful rate.

     We, the makers, sureties, endorsers and guarantors of this Promissory Note,
hereby severally waive presentment for payment, notice of nonpayment, protest
and notice of protest and diligence of bringing suit for collection, and consent
that time of payment may be extended without notice thereof to any of the
makers, sureties, endorsers or guarantors of this Promissory Note.  It is
further expressly agreed that if this Promissory Note is placed in the hands of
an attorney for collection, or suit is brought on same, or is collected through
the Probate Court, then, and in that event, the makers, sureties, endorsers and
guarantors will pay the holder of this Promissory Note the costs of collection,
including but not limited to the attorney's fees, incurred by the holder of this
Promissory Note.

     MAKER:                          /s/ Douglas Theodore
                                    -----------------------------------------
                                    By: Douglas Theodore for
                                    Jayhawk Medical Acceptance
# C_2012138EN.01001301.xml

| 12.5.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 138/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.5.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 138/13

---

Judgment of the General Court of 29 March 2012 — Telefónica and Telefónica de España v Commission

(Case T-336/07) (1)

(Competition - Abuse of a dominant position - Spanish markets for access to broadband internet - Decision declaring an infringement of Article 82 EC - Price-fixing - Margin squeeze - Definition of the markets - Dominant position - Abuse - Calculation of the margin squeeze - Effects of the abuse - Competence of the Commission - Rights of the defence - Subsidiarity - Proportionality - Legal certainty - Sincere cooperation - Principle of sound administration - Fines)

(2012/C 138/21)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicants: Telefónica, SA (Madrid, Spain); and Telefónica de España, SA (Madrid) (represented by: F. González Díaz and S. Sorinas Jimeno, then F. González Díaz, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre, É. Gippini Fournier and K. Mojzesowicz, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: France Telecom España, SA (Pozuelo de Alarcon, Spain) (represented by: S. Martínez Lage, H. Brokelmann and M. Ganino, lawyers); Asociación de Usuarios de Servicios Bancarios (Ausbanc Consumo) (Madrid) (represented by: L. Pineda Salido and I. Cámara Rubio, lawyers); and European Competitive Telecommunications Association (Wokingham, United Kingdom) (represented by: M. Di Stefano and A. Salerno, lawyers)

Re:

Annulment of Commission Decision C(2007) 3196 final, of 4 July 2007, relating to proceedings under Article 82 [EC] (Case COMP/38.784 — Wanadoo España v Telefónica), and, in the alternative, annulment or reduction of the fine imposed on the applicants.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Telefónica, SA and Telefónica de España, SA to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission, France Telecom España, SA, the Asociación de Usuarios de Servicios Bancarios (Ausbanc Consumo) and the European Competitive Telecommunications Association, in accordance with the forms of order sought by the latter. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Telefónica, SA and Telefónica de España, SA to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission, France Telecom España, SA, the Asociación de Usuarios de Servicios Bancarios (Ausbanc Consumo) and the European Competitive Telecommunications Association, in accordance with the forms of order sought by the latter.

---

(1)  OJ C 269, 10.11.2007.

---
Converted by EDGARwiz





PROMISSORY NOTE




AMMENDMEMT AGREEMENT




ORIGINAL PROMISSORY NOTE AMOUNT: $310,000.00







ON JULY 16, 2014 THE PARTIES, IIM Global Corporation (hereinafter refer to as the “Borrower”), and Penn Investments Inc (hereafter refer to as the “Lender"), have agreed to extend the repayment due date of the Promissory Note for the Amount of $310,000 (Three Hundred Ten Thousand) Dollars dated and executed on April 30, 2014 from November 30, 2014 to January 30, 2015.




All the other Terms and Conditions of the original Promissory Note remain in full force and in effect.




This Amendment Agreement and the original Promissory Note has been entered into and shall be performed in Seminole County, Florida, and shall be construed in accordance with the laws of Florida and any applicable federal statutes or regulations of the United States.  Any claims or disputes concerning this Amendment Agreement and the original Note shall, be adjudicated in Seminole County, Florida.






IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement was executed as of the date first above written.  




  

 IIM Global Corporation

                                                  Penn Investments Inc




 

__/s/ David S. Jones ____________________

                           ___/s/ Douglas Solomon ____________

 Signed on behalf of IIM Global Corporation 

Signed on behalf of Penn Investments Inc

 By David S. Jones, President & CEO.

By Douglas Solomon, President & CEO
Exhibit 32.1
  (1)
    
    the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010 which this
statement accompanies 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 Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2010 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of Fentura Financial, Inc.
  /s/ Donald L. GrillDonald L. GrillChief Executive Officer and President/s/ Douglas J. KelleyDouglas J. KelleyChief Financial Officer