alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2009284EN.01001701.xml

| 25.11.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 284/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.11.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 284/17

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

24 November 2009

2009/C 284/05

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,4969 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 132,57 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4413 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,90310 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,3145 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,5110 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,3765 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,894 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 267,65 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7091 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,1149 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,2665 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,2410 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6254 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5815 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 11,6010 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 2,0541 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,0738 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 731,62 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 11,1762 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 10,2229 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3105 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 14 245,62 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 5,0715 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 70,448 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 43,1625 |
| THB | Thai baht | 49,746 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,5791 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 19,3232 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 69,3890 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,4969

JPY

Japanese yen

132,57

DKK

Danish krone

7,4413

GBP

Pound sterling

0,90310

SEK

Swedish krona

10,3145

CHF

Swiss franc

1,5110

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,3765

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,894

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

267,65

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7091

PLN

Polish zloty

4,1149

RON

Romanian leu

4,2665

TRY

Turkish lira

2,2410

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6254

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5815

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

11,6010

NZD

New Zealand dollar

2,0541

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,0738

KRW

South Korean won

1 731,62

ZAR

South African rand

11,1762

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

10,2229

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3105

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

14 245,62

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

5,0715

PHP

Philippine peso

70,448

RUB

Russian rouble

43,1625

THB

Thai baht

49,746

BRL

Brazilian real

2,5791

MXN

Mexican peso

19,3232

INR

Indian rupee

69,3890

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

JENNIFER XU,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 1:09-cv-00187-MP -GRJ

BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA, DIVISION OF RISK

MANAGEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES,

Defendants.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 53, Motion to Compel Payment for Records

Produced by Board of Trustees of the University of Florida. Defendants move to compel

payment from Plaintiff for copies of records produced in response to Plaintiff’s First Request for

Production of Documents and in compliance with Rule 26 disclosures. Rule 37(a)(5)(A) of the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows for the payment of expenses, including attorney’s fees,

for motions compelling discovery. Plaintiff has filed a Response in Opposition to Defendants’

Motion to Compel Payment for Records Produced. On February 2, 2011, a telephone hearing

was held on this motion. During the hearing, Defendants’ counsel acknowledged that the

invoice for $178.75 has been paid. However, the invoice for $2006.10 remains outstanding.

In response to Plaintiff’s First Request for Production of Documents, Defendant

produced over 20,000 pages of documents and sent Plaintiff an invoice for $2006.10 for the costs

of producing those documents at ten cents per page. Plaintiff asserts that of this total, 12,642 are

duplicates and often include multiple copies of the same documents. Plaintiff contends that she

should not be charged for these duplicates and should be required to pay only $741.90
Page 2 of 2

($2,006.10 - $1,264.20 = $741.90).

After reviewing Plaintiff’s First Request for Production of Documents, the Court finds

that the nature of Plaintiff’s request resulted in the duplication of documents. Plaintiff made

eighty-five separate requests for documents, many of which are overlapping. For example,

request number five asks for “[a]ll documents showing reimbursements to all employees in

Defendant’s OIT for the time period covered by this request” while request number six asks for

“[a]ll documents showing reimbursements to all employees working in Defendant’s OIT for

blackberry costs and expenses.” Since request number six is merely a subset of request number

five they are almost certain to produce duplicate documents.

Defendants’ merely produced copies of the documents requested by Plaintiff and had no

obligation to alter those requests. As such, Plaintiff is responsible for the payment of all records

produced in response to her request. Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. Motion to Compel Payment for Records Produced, Doc. 53, is GRANTED.

2. Plaintiff is ordered to pay $2006.10 for records produced to Defendants’ counsel

by February 11, 2011.

DONE AND ORDERED this 2nd day of February, 2011

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case No: 1:09-cv-00187-MP -GRJ
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

WESTERN DISTRICT 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

 Respondent 

 v. 

ANTHONY JEFFERSON, 

 Petitioner 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 437 WAL 2015 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 1st day of June, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
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 Annual Report of William Lyon Homes (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael D. Grubbs, Chief Financial Officer 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 result of operations of the Company.



/s/    MICHAEL D. GRUBBS

---

Michael D. Grubbs

Senior Vice President, Chief Financial

Officer and Treasurer

March 27, 2009



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to William Lyon Homes and will be retained by William Lyon Homes and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

CARL D. MORGAN,

Petitioner,

vs. CASE NO.: 5:10cv188/RS/MD

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Respondent.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This cause is before the court upon referral from the clerk. Petitioner initiated

this action on July 9, 2010, by filing of a petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28

U.S.C. § 2254. (Doc. 1). Because the petition was not in proper form and petitioner

failed to pay the $5.00 filing fee or submit an application for leave to proceed in

forma pauperis, the court entered an order on July 12, 2010 requiring petitioner to

file, within twenty-eight days, an amended petition or notice of voluntary dismissal. 

Petitioner was further directed to pay the filing fee or submit an application to

proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 3). Petitioner was warned that failure to comply

with the order would result in dismissal of his case. 

Having received no response from petitioner, an order to show cause was

issued on August 26, 2010 giving petitioner fourteen days to show cause why this

case should not be dismissed. (Doc. 4). The time for complying has passed with no

response from petitioner.
Page 2 of 2

Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED:

That this case be dismissed without prejudice for petitioner’s failure to

prosecute and failure to comply with an order of the court.

At Pensacola, Florida, this 24 day of September, 2010.

th

 /s/ Miles Davis

MILES DAVIS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

Any objections to these proposed findings and recommendations must be filed

within fourteen days after being served a copy hereof. Any different deadline that

may appear on the electronic docket is for the court’s internal use only, and does not

control. A copy of any objections shall be served upon any other parties. Failure to

object may limit the scope of appellate review of factual findings. See 28 U.S.C. §

636; United States v. Roberts, 858 F.2d 698, 701 (11 Cir. 1988). th

Case No: 5:10v188/RS/MD
# C_2009281EN.01000602.xml

| 21.11.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 281/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.11.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 281/6

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5683 — Brookfield/BBI/DBCT)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2009/C 281/03

On 13 November 2009, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32009M5683. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32009M5683. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

JOSHUA S. FRIEBEL and ELIZABETH

F. FRIEBEL,

Plaintiffs,

vs. CASE NO. 5:10cv120/RS-MD

PARADISE SHORES OF BAY COUNTY,

LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company;

ROBERT E. BLACKERBY; and MAGNUM

CAPITAL, LLC, a Florida Limited Liability

Company,

Defendants

_________________________________/

ORDER

The relief requested by the Stipulated Motion For Extension Of Time (Doc. 260) is

granted.

ORDERED on May 23, 2011.

/S/ Richard Smoak 

RICHARD SMOAK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 5:10-cv-00120-RS-CJK Document 263 Filed 05/23/11 Page 1 of 1
# C_2009020EN.01000902.xml

| 27.1.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 20/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.1.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 20/9

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5390 — MPS Group/Argos Soditic/Bellco)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2009/C 20/06)

On 22 December 2008, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M5390. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu). |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M5390. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

---
**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 Pleasant Kids, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2015, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Kenneth C. Wiedrich, Chief Financial Officer 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 result of operations of the Company.

 

 

 

 By:

/s/ Kenneth C. Wiedrich

 

 

Kenneth C. Wiedrich

Chief Financial Officer

 

 

April 1, 2016

 

 

A signed original of this certification has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. 

 

  |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

THOMAS FRANK OWEN,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 3:10-cv-286-MW/CJK

DAVID MORGAN, Sheriff of

Escambia County, Florida;

Deputy Sheriff JOHN MATTHEW

ATKINS; and other yet to be

identified Escambia County

Deputy Sheriffs,

Defendants.

__________________________/

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO RESCHEDULE TRIAL

The Court has considered, without hearing, the Notice of Conflict/Consented 

Motion to Reschedule or Continue Trial, ECF No. 78, filed February 20, 2013. 

The Court GRANTS the motion. The Clerk shall issue an Amended Order for 

Pretrial Conference.

SO ORDERED on February 21, 2013.

s/Mark E. Walker

United States District Judge
Case 3:00-cv-00566-LC Document 7 Filed 03/30/01 Page 1 of 1
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

ALBERT W. CARTER,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 1:10-cv-00165-MP-GRJ

ERIC K SHINSEKI, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendants.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 16, Motion for New Scheduling Order by Albert

W. Carter III. Plaintiff requests a new scheduling order to permit the filing of past due discovery

and proposes the following deadlines: (a) Rule 26(a)(2) Disclosures of Expert Witnesses shall

be made no later than September 14, 2011, and defendant‘s Expert Witness Disclosures shall be

made within 45 days thereafter; (b) Discovery shall not be later than December 13, 2011; and (c)

Dispositive motions, including motions for summary judgment, shall be filed on or before

January 2, 2012. Defendant has no objection to a new scheduling order. Accordingly, it is

hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. Plaintiff’s Motion for New Scheduling Order, Doc. 16, is GRANTED.

2. The Clerk is directed to enter a new scheduling order setting all the appropriate

deadlines therein.

DONE AND ORDERED this 16th day of June, 2011

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case 1:10-cv-00165-MP-GRJ Document 17 Filed 06/16/11 Page 1 of 1
Order entered January 12, 2018

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-17-01141-CR

No. 05-17-01142-CR

GEORGE EDWARD PURDY, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 282nd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. F07-33144-S, F07-33145-S

ORDER

Before the Court is appellant’s January 10, 2018 first unopposed motion to extend time to 

file appellant’s brief. We GRANT the motion and ORDER appellant’s brief filed THIRTY 

DAYS from the date of this order.

/s/ LANA MYERS 

JUSTICE
Rimrock Gold Corp. 10-Q/A



Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF

PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350





In connection with the accompanying
quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of Rimrock Gold Corp. (the “Company”) for the quarter ended February 28, 2009
(the “Report”), I, Jordan Starkman, President and Secretary of the Company hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:



|1. | Such 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 such Report fairly represents in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|              | RIMROCK GOLD CORP.
|------------- | ------------------
|              |                   
|July 14, 2015 | By:               
|              |
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1

                             LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES

ESG Communications Inc.                                Delaware

IINS, Inc.                                             Delaware

Infonet Broadband Services Corporation                 Delaware

Infonet USA Corporation                                Delaware

NetWorks Telephony Corporation                         Delaware

Infonet N.V./S.A.                                      Belgium

Interpac Belgium S.A.                                  Belgium

Infonet Software Solutions                             Canada

Infonet China Limited                                  China

Infonet France S.A.                                    France

Osiware International, S.A.                            France

Infonet Italia S.p.A.                                  Italy

Interpac Luxembourg S.A.                               Luxembourg

Infonet Servicios de Communicaciones, S.A. de C.V.     Mexico

Infonet Taiwan                                         Taiwan

Infonet UK, Ltd.                                       UK

IBSC Limited                                           UK
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. CASE NO.: 3:10cr43/MCR

PERRY JENNINGS

 /

ACCEPTANCE OF PLEA OF GUILTY

Pursuant to the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate

Judge, to which there have been no timely objections, and subject to this Court’s

consideration of the Plea Agreement pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 11, the plea of guilty of

the Defendant, PERRY JENNINGS, to Count I and II of the Indictment is hereby

ACCEPTED. All parties shall appear before this Court for sentencing as directed.

DONE and ORDERED this 23rd day of April 2010. 

 s/ M. Casey Rodgers 

M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 1 of 1
**EXHIBIT 10.2**

 

**Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act 2002**

 

I, PeterHills, director of ONO Finance PLC, certify that to the best of my knowledge(i) the Form 20-F fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information containedin the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of ONO Finance PLC.

 
| By:                         | /s/ Peter  Hills |   |
|-----------------------------|------------------|--------|
| **Name:  Peter Hills** |
| **Title:  Director**   |
| **Date:**                   |

 

1

----
##### 



EXHIBIT 23.1

KYLE L. TINGLE, CPA

|                        |  |               
|----------------------- |  | --------------
|To Whom It May Concern: |  | March 18, 2002

The firm of Kyle L. Tingle, CPA, LLC consents to the inclusion of
his report of March 18, 2002 accompanying the audited financial
statements of Flickering Start Financial, Inc., as of December 31,
2001 and 2000, and the related statements of income, stockholders
equity, and cash flows for the years then ended, and the period
November 25, 1996 (inception) through December 31, 2001, in the
Form 10KSB with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Very truly yours,

/s/ Kyle L. Tingle

Kyle L. Tingle, CPA, LLC

P.O. Box 50141, Henderson, Nevada 89016, Phone:
(702) 434-8452,
Fax: (702) 436-4218, e-mail: Ktingle@worldnet.att.net