alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### High Steel Structures, Inc., Respondent, v Buckram Industries Corp. et al., Appellants.

[719 NYS2d 880]

In an action, *inter alia,*to recover damages for breach of contract, the *611defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DeMaro, J.), entered November 3, 1999, as, after a nonjury trial, *inter alia,*awarded the plaintiff interest at a rate of 18% per annum and an attorney’s fee.

Ordered that the judgment is modified, by deleting the second decretal paragraph thereof; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The court properly determined that the contract set forth in the plaintiffs Exhibit 21 was the contract entered into by the parties *(see,*UCC 2-204 [1]; 2-207 [3]). Accordingly, the defendants were bound by the provisions thereof *(see, Ruttenberg v Davidge Data Sys. Corp.,*215 AD2d 191, 195). However, the court improperly awarded the plaintiff an attorney’s fee, since the defenses raised by the defendants were not “without substantial basis in fact or law” (State Finance Law § 137 [4] [c]). Altman, J. P., Goldstein, McGinity and Schmidt, JJ., concur.
# Official Journal C 69/2016

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 69 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5923 February 2016 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 69

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5923 February 2016

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2016/C 069/1 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7929 — Mitsubishi Corporation/KKR/South Staffordshire Plc) (
  1
  ) | 1 |
| 2016/C 069/2 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7913 — Allianz/Spar/Fischapark) (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2016/C 069/1

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7929 — Mitsubishi Corporation/KKR/South Staffordshire Plc) (
  1
  )

1

1

2016/C 069/2

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7913 — Allianz/Spar/Fischapark) (
  1
  )

1

1

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2016/C 069/3 | Euro exchange rates | 2 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2016/C 069/3

Euro exchange rates

2

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY |
| | European Commission |
| 2016/C 069/4 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7918 — Indorama Netherlands/Guadarranque Polyester) (
  1
  ) | 3 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

2016/C 069/4

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7918 — Indorama Netherlands/Guadarranque Polyester) (
  1
  )

1

3

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
exhibit10-5.htm




 










	  	  	  
	
Notice of Grant of

	  	
LSI CORPORATION


	
Stock Option

	  	
ID: 94-2712976


	
Under the

	  	
1320 RIDDER PARK DRIVE


	
LSI Corporation 2003 Equity Incentive Plan

	  	
SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95131







 










	  	  	  	  
	
GRANTEE NAME

	  	
Award Number:

	  
	
Address

	  	
Grant Date:

	  
	
Address

	  	
Number of Shares:

	  
	  	  	
Exercise Price:

	  
	  	  	
Expiration Date:

	  





 









 


On the grant date shown above, LSI Corporation granted you a nonqualified stock option covering the number of shares shown above under the LSI Corporation 2003 Equity Incentive Plan. When exercisable, the option will allow you to purchase shares of LSI’s common stock for a price per share equal to the exercise price shown above. Your right to exercise this Option will terminate on the expiration date shown above or earlier if provided in the attached Nonqualified Stock Option Agreement or in the plan.


 


 


Your option will become exercisable with respect to the number of shares and at the time or times indicated below, but only if [any applicable performance requirements indicated below have been met and] you have not incurred a Termination of Service prior to the applicable time. 


 



	  	  	  	  	  
	
Shares

	  	
Vesting Date

	  
	  	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  	  





 









 


By your signature below, you agree that this award is governed by this Notice of Grant, the attached Nonqualified Stock Option Agreement and the LSI Corporation 2003 Equity Incentive Plan. You acknowledge that you have received, read and understand this Notice of Grant, the attached agreement and the plan. You agree to accept as binding all decisions or interpretations of the Board of Directors of LSI or its delegate regarding any questions relating to this Notice of Grant, the attached agreement or the plan. 


 










	  	  	  
	
______________________________________________

	  	  
	
GRANTEE NAME

	  	  
	
Date:
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 10**  **- 7694** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v.
CHARLES EDWARD O ’ NEIL, a/k/a Charles Edward Oneil, Jr., a/k/a Worm , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from t he United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Statesville

. Richard L. Voorhees , District Judge. ( 5:00

- cr - 00047

- RLV

- 5 )

Submitted : May 26, 2011 Decided: May 31, 2011

Before KING, SHEDD, and DIAZ , Circuit Judges.

A ffirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Charles Edward O ’ Neil, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CUR IAM:
Charles Edward O’Neil appeals the district court ’ s order denying h is motion for a reduction of sentence filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (200 6 ). We hav e reviewed the
record and conclude the distri c t court did not abuse its discretion in denyi ng the motion. See United States v. Stewart , 595 F.3d 197, 200 (4th Cir. 2010 ) . Accordingly, we affirm the
district court ’ s order for the reasons stated there. See United
States v. O’Neil , No. 5:00

- cr - 00047

- RLV

- 5 (W.D.N.C. Dec. 7, 2010). We dispense wi th 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
ESTATE OF Vaughn E. RUSSELL, BY AND THROUGH its administrator, Nancy E. RUSSELL, and Nancy E. Russell, individually, Plaintiffs v. Sondra Lynn RUSSELL and Janice M. Russell, Defendants.

No. COA17-21

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: July 5, 2017

AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 188 (Thursday, September 29, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 56962]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-19513]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION


Data Collection Available for Public Comments and Recommendations

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this 
notice announces the Small Business Administration's intention to 
request approval on a new and/or currently approved information 
collection.

DATES: Submit comments on or before November 28, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Send all comments regarding whether these information 
collections are necessary for the proper performance of the function of 
the agency, whether the burden estimates are accurate, and if there are 
ways to minimize the estimated burden and enhance the quality of the 
collections, to Carmen-Rosa Torres, Director, Office of Analysis, 
Planning, and Accountability, Small Business Administration, 409 3rd 
Street SW., Suite 6000, Washington, DC 20416.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carmen-Rosa Torres, Director, 202-205-
6112 <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#581b392a353d362a372b39762c372a2a3d2b182b3a39763f372e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c182a0b3aca4afb3aeb2a0efb5aeb3b3a4b281b2a3a0efa6aeb7">[email protected]</span></a> Curtis B. Rich, Management Analyst, 202-
205-7030 <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#1c7f696e68756f326e757f745c6f7e7d326f7e7d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="214254535548520f53484249615243400f524340">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: ``Lender Survey''.
    Description of Respondents: This survey will be administered to 
representatives of lenders that originate small business loans.
    Form No: N/A.
    Annual Responses: 75.
    Annual Burden: 37.5.
    Title: ``Assisted Business Survey''.
    Description of Respondents: This survey will be administered to a 
random sample of businesses assisted under various SBA programs.
    Form No: N/A.
    Annual Responses: 3,000.
    Annual Burden: 1,000.

Jacqueline White,
Chief, Administrative Information Branch.
[FR Doc. 05-19513 Filed 9-28-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
---

Table of Contents

EXHIBIT 13.2

Certification pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of Telemig Celular Participações
S.A. (the Company), does hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that:

The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained
in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

| |                        |                        
| | ---------------------- | -----------------------
| | Dated: June 29, 2007. 
| |                       
| | By: /s/ Oscar Thompson
| | Name                   | : Oscar Thompson       
| | Title:                 | Chief Financial Officer

---
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 Colony Resorts LVH Acquisitions, LLC (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2004, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), we, Rodolfo Prieto and Robert Schaffhauser, Chief Executive Officer and Executive Vice President of Finance, respectively, of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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/ Robert Schaffhauser                                              
|Robert Schaffhauser Executive Vice President
of Finance June 28, 2004
# C_2014395EN.01003101.xml

| 10.11.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 395/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.11.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 395/31

---

Judgment of the General Court of 2 October 2014 — Evropaïki Dynamiki v Commission

(Case T-340/07 RENV) (1)

((Arbitration clause - Contract relating to Community financial support for a project in the framework of the ‘eContent’ programme - Termination of the contract by the Commission - Reimbursement of eligible costs))

(2014/C 395/35)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (Athens, Greece) (represented by: N. Korogiannakis, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by: E. Manhaeve and M. Wilderspin, then by M. Wilderspin, S. Delaude and L. Cappeletti and lastly by S. Delaude and L. Cappeletti, acting as Agents, and by D. Philippe and M. Gouden, lawyers)

Re:

Action on the basis of an arbitration clause, seeking an order that the Commission pay (i) the sums allegedly due to the applicant and (ii) damages, following termination of a contract relating to Community financial support for the project ‘e Content Exposure and Business Opportunities’ (Contract No EDC-53007 EEBO/27873), concluded in the framework of the multiannual Community programme to stimulate the development and use of European digital content on the global networks and to promote linguistic diversity in the information society.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Orders the European Commission to pay Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE the sum of EUR 8 843,10; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Orders the European Commission to pay Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE the sum of EUR 8 843,10;

| 2. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Orders the European Commission to pay 5 % of its own costs and 5 % of the costs of Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis, and the latter to pay 95 % of its own costs and 95 % of the Commission’s costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the European Commission to pay 5 % of its own costs and 5 % of the costs of Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis, and the latter to pay 95 % of its own costs and 95 % of the Commission’s costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 269, 10.11.2007.

---
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-6890
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus EMERY ANTHONY BRADLEY, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert D. Potter, Senior District Judge. (CR-91-34, CR-91-49, CA-97-215-P) Submitted: November 6, 1997 Decided: November 25, 1997 Before WIDENER and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Emery Anthony Bradley, Appellant Pro Se. Kenneth Davis Bell, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order dismissing his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997) motion without prejudice. Because a dismissal without prejudice is generally not appealable, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392 , 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993). 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.

DISMISSED
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.2




                            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 Annual Report of Liberty Property Trust (the "Company")
on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, GEORGE J.
ALBURGER, JR., Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Liberty
Property Trust, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that based on 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.



/s/  GEORGE J. ALBURGER, JR.
-------------------------------------------------------
George J. Alburger, Jr.
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Order entered December 3 , 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**
No. 05 - 13 - 01457 - CV IN RE SOUTHPAK CONTAINER C ORPORATION AND CLEVE LAND STEEL CONTAINER CORPORATIO N, Relators Original Proceeding from the County Court at Law No. 3 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC - 11 - 05714 - C 

### O RDER In accordance with the Court’s opinion issued this date, the petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED IN PART and conditionally GRANTED IN PART . The Court ORDERS the trial judge, the Hono rable Sally Montgomery, Judge of Dallas County Court at Law No. 3, to (a) VACATE the portion of paragraph 1 of her “Order Granting Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Deposition of Robert McIntyre” that requires testimony on matters protected by the attorney

clie nt and work product privileges, (b) VACATE paragraph 3 of the order, and (c) ENTER an order excluding privileged information from the scope of paragraph 1 and eliminating paragraph 3 from the topics on which Robert McIntyre may be questioned at his deposit ion. Should the trial judge fail to comply with this order, the writ will issue. The Court ORDERS the trial judge to file with this Court, within thirty (30) days of the date of this order , a certified copy of its order issued in compliance with this or der.We ORDER that relators recover their costs of this original proceeding from real parties in interest.

/s/ DAVID EVANS JUSTICE
EX-4.2




 Name of Company: 

IDREAMSKY TECHNOLOGY LIMITED 
 Number: 

Class A Ordinary Share(s): 
 -[no. of shares]- 

Issued to: 
 [name of shareholder] 

Dated 
 Transferred from:



 Exhibit 4.2 

IDREAMSKY TECHNOLOGY LIMITED 
  

			
	Number	  	Class A Ordinary Share(s)

 -[no. of shares]- 

Incorporated under the laws of the Cayman Islands 

Share capital is US$50,000 divided into 

(i) 418,553,880 Class A Ordinary Shares of a par value of US$0.0001 each and 

(ii) 81,446,120 Class B Ordinary Shares of a par value of US$0.0001 each 

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT [name of shareholder] is the registered holder of [no. of shares] Class A Ordinary Share(s) in the above-named
Company subject to the Memorandum and Articles of Association thereof. 
 EXECUTED on behalf of the said Company on
the         day of              2014 by: 
 DIRECTOR
                                         
        

 











 TRANSFER 
  

			
	I	  	(the Transferor) for the value received
	DO HEREBY transfer to	  	(the Transferee) the
		  	shares standing in my name in the

 undertaking called IDREAMSKY TECHNOLOGY LIMITED 

To hold the same unto the Transferee 
 Dated 

Signed by the Transferor 
 in the presence of: 

 

					
	   
	 		 	   

	Witness	 		 	Transferor
STATE of North Carolina v. Teddy Jabar HARGETT

No. 102P17

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 17, 2017

Michele Goldman, Attorney at Law, for Hargett, Teddy Jabar.

Robert Devane Croom, IV, Assistant Attorney General, Scott E. Thomas, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the notice of appeal from the North Carolina Court of Appeals, filed by the Defendant on the 29th of March 2017 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-30, and the motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question filed by the State of NC, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the motion to dismiss the appeal is

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 17th of August 2017."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 29th of March 2017 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

*162"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 17th of August 2017."
#### STATE ex rel. Nathan HYMES v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 2002-KH-2175.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 19, 2003.

In re Hymes, Nathan; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Beauregard, 36th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. CR 235-97; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 02-00140.

Denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4137 Engrossed in House (EH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4137

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To prohibit assistance provided under the program of block grants to 
States for temporary assistance for needy families from being accessed 
  through the use of an electronic benefit transfer card at any store 
                    that offers marijuana for sale.

    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 ``Preserving Welfare for Needs Not 
Weed Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON USE OF ELECTRONIC BENEFIT TRANSFER CARD TO 
              ACCESS TANF ASSISTANCE AT ANY STORE THAT OFFERS MARIJUANA 
              FOR SALE.

    (a) Prohibition.--Section 408(a)(12)(A) of the Social Security Act 
(42 U.S.C. 608(a)(12)(A)) is amended--
            (1) by striking ``or'' at the end of clause (ii);
            (2) by striking the period at the end of clause (iii) and 
        inserting ``; or''; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following:
                            ``(iv) any establishment that offers 
                        marihuana (as defined in section 102(16) of the 
                        Controlled Substances Act) for sale.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall 
take effect on the date that is 2 years after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 16, 2014.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
113th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 4137

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To prohibit assistance provided under the program of block grants to 
States for temporary assistance for needy families from being accessed 
  through the use of an electronic benefit transfer card at any store 
                    that offers marijuana for sale.
```