alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 23
- 0376 IN THE MATTER OF: M.S., Respondent and Appellant **ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including June 12 , 2024, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 6 2024

05/06/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0376
# C_2006261EN.01002001.xml

| 28.10.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 261/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.10.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 261/20

---

Action brought on 4 August 2006 — Europig v OHIM (EUROPIG)

(Case T-207/06)

(2006/C 261/38)

Language in which the application was lodged: French

Parties

Applicant: Europig (Josselin, France) (represented by: D. Masson, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | annul the contested decision of the Board of Appeal of 31 May 2006 (R 1425/2005-4); |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision of the Board of Appeal of 31 May 2006 (R 1425/2005-4);

| — | order OHIM to pay the costs in their entirety. |
| --- | --- |

—

order OHIM to pay the costs in their entirety.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘EUROPIG’, for goods in Classes 29 and 30 (Application No 3 816 691)

Community trade mark concerned:

Decision of the examiner: Refusal of the application

Decision of the examiner:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c), (2) and (3) of Council Regulation No 40/94. The applicant claims that the mark applied for is not descriptive of the goods designated, is fully distinctive and that, in any event, the distinctive character of the name 'Europig' has been acquired through use.

Pleas in law:

---
§ 247.3 Who is eligible to use the sites? ( a ) You may use the sites for access to usual and accustomed fishing areas and ancillary fishing facilities if you are a member of the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakima Indian Nation (Yakima), the Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon (Warm Springs), the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (Umatilla), and the Nez Perce Tribe (Nez Perce).
( b ) The general public or people fishing who do not belong to the tribes listed above cannot use these sites.
( c ) Families of such Indians may camp on the sites.
( d ) You may not deny access to these sites to any eligible user.
ANNUAL COMPLIANCE STATEMENT

 

CERTIFICATION

 

J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2012-C6

Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates

Series 2012-C6 (the "Trust")

 

I, David M. Croskery, the Authorized Signatory of Holliday GP Corp., the general partner of Holliday Fenoglio Fowler, L.P., as sub-servicer under that Sub-Servicing Agreement dated as of April 1, 2012, between Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as master servicer (the “Master Servicer”), and Holliday Fenoglio Fowler, L.P., as sub-servicer' (the “Certifying Servicer”), relating to the above referenced Certificates (the “Sub-Servicing Agreement”), certify to J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp., the Master Servicer and their respective officers, directors and affiliates, and with the knowledge and intent that they will rely upon this certification, that:

 

I (or Servicing Officers under my supervision) have reviewed the Certifying Servicer's activities during the period from January 1, 2014 through December 31,2014 (the “Reporting Period”) and the Certifying Servicer's performance under the Sub-Servicing Agreement; and

 

To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Certifying Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Sub-Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout such Reporting Period.

 

Date: Effective February 10, 2015

 

Holliday Fenoglio Fowler, L.P.

 

By:               Holliday GP Corp., its general partner

 

                    /s/ David M. Croskery

                    David Croskery

Authorized Signatory
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 36 (Wednesday, February 23, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 10043]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-4049]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-3316-EM; Docket ID FEMA-2011-0001]


Oklahoma; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of an Emergency Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of an emergency declaration for 
the State of Oklahoma (FEMA-3316-EM), dated February 2, 2011, and 
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: February 5, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Office of Response and 
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3886.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the incident 
period for this emergency is closed effective February 5, 2011.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, 
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis 
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster 
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance 
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and 
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, 
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing 
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially 
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other 
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially 
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.


W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2011-4049 Filed 2-22-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 82 (Monday, April 29, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25064-25065]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-10034]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

State Energy Advisory Board (STEAB)

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of 
Energy.

ACTION: Notice of Open Teleconference.

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

[[Page 25065]]

SUMMARY: This notice announces a teleconference call of the State 
Energy Advisory Board (STEAB). The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. 
L. 92-463; 86 Stat.770) requires that public notice of these meetings 
be announced in the Federal Register.

DATES: Thursday, May 16, 2013, from 3:30 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. (EDT). To 
receive the call-in number and passcode, please contact the Board's 
Designated Federal Officer (DFO) at the address or phone number listed 
below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gil Sperling, STEAB Designated Federal 
Officer, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and 
Renewable Energy, 1000 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20585. 
Phone number is (202) 287-1644.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    Purpose of the Board: To make recommendations to the Assistant 
Secretary for the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 
regarding goals and objectives, programmatic and administrative 
policies, and to otherwise carry out the Board's responsibilities as 
designated in the State Energy Efficiency Programs Improvement Act of 
1990 (Pub. L. 101-440).
    Tentative Agenda: Receive an update on the activities of the 
STEAB's Taskforces, provide an update to the Board on routine business 
matters and other topics of interest, and work on agenda items and 
details for the June 2013 meeting.
    Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. Written 
statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the 
meeting. Members of the public who wish to make oral statements 
pertaining to agenda items should contact Gil Sperling at the address 
or telephone number listed above. Requests to make oral comments must 
be received five days prior to the meeting; reasonable provision will 
be made to include requested topic(s) on the agenda. The Chair of the 
Board is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will 
facilitate the orderly conduct of business.
    Minutes: The minutes of the meeting will be available for public 
review and copying within 60 days on the STEAB Web site at: 
www.steab.org.

    Issued at Washington, DC, on April 23, 2013.
LaTanya R. Butler,
Deputy Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2013-10034 Filed 4-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
```
Order entered October 20, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-15-01235-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF A.N., A CHILD

On Appeal from the 199th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 199-30144-2014

ORDER

Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 34.5(c), we ORDER Collin County 

District Clerk Andrea Stroh Thompson to file, no later than October 30, 2015, either (1) a 

supplemental clerk’s record containing the September 24, 2015 order or judgment terminating 

Father’s parental rights or (2) written verification that no judgment or order terminating Father’s 

parental rights has been signed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 34.5(c).

/s/ CRAIG STODDART 

JUSTICE
Exhibit 32.1


                              CERTIFICATION OF THE
                      CHAIRMAN AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                             PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In  connection   with  the  Quarterly   Report  of  KeySpan   Corporation   (the
"Corporation")  for the quarter ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Robert B. Catell,
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C.  Section 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, as amended; and

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



                                    /s/ Robert B. Catell
                                    --------------------
                                    Name: Robert B. Catell
                                    Title: Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
                                    Date: August 5, 2004
#### ROY BURT ENTERPRISES v. MARSH

No. 561PA89

Case below: 96 N.C.App. 275

Petition by defendant (Waymond Marsh) for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 allowed 5 April 1990.
### §7688. Armor-piercing ammunition and components: condition on disposal

(a) Limitation on Resale or Other Transfer.—Except as provided in subsection (b), whenever the Secretary of the Army carries out a disposal (by sale or otherwise) of armor-piercing ammunition, or a component of armor-piercing ammunition, the Secretary shall require as a condition of the disposal that the recipient agree in writing not to sell or otherwise transfer any of the ammunition (reconditioned or otherwise), or any armor-piercing component of that ammunition, to any purchaser in the United States other than a law enforcement or other governmental agency.

(b) Exception.—Subsection (a) does not apply to a transfer of a component of armor-piercing ammunition solely for the purpose of metal reclamation by means of a destructive process such as melting, crushing, or shredding.

(c) Special Rule for Non-Armor-Piercing Components.—A component of the armor-piercing ammunition that is not itself armor-piercing and is not subjected to metal reclamation as described in subsection (b) may not be used as a component in the production of new or remanufactured armor-piercing ammunition other than for sale to a law enforcement or other governmental agency or for a government-to-government sale or commercial export to a foreign government under the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2751).

(d) Definition.—In this section, the term "armor-piercing ammunition" means a center-fire cartridge the military designation of which includes the term "armor penetrator" or "armor-piercing", including a center-fire cartridge designated as armor-piercing incendiary (API) or armor-piercing incendiary-tracer (API–T).

(Added Pub. L. 106–398, §1 [[div. A], title III, §382(a)(1)], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A–85, §4688; renumbered §7688, Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §808(d), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1839.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Arms Export Control Act, referred to in subsec. (c), is Pub. L. 90–629, Oct. 22, 1968, 82 Stat. 1320, as amended, which is classified principally to chapter 39 (§2751 et seq.) of Title 22, Foreign Relations and Intercourse. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 2751 of Title 22 and Tables.

#### Amendments

2018—Pub. L. 115–232 renumbered section 4688 of this title as this section.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 2018 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 115–232 effective Feb. 1, 2019, with provision for the coordination of amendments and special rule for certain redesignations, see section 800 of Pub. L. 115–232, set out as a note preceding section 3001 of this title.

#### Effective Date

Pub. L. 106–398, §1 [[div. A], title III, §382(b)], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A–85, provided that: "Section 4688 [now 7688] of title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall apply with respect to any disposal of ammunition or components referred to in that section after the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 30, 2000]."
# C_2006281EN.01000301.xml

| 18.11.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 281/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.11.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 281/3

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 14 September 2006 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Diikitiko Protodikio Ioanninon — Greece) — Alfa Vita Vassilopoulos AE, formerly Trofo Super-Markets AE v Elliniko Dimosio, Nomarkhiaki Aftodiikisi Ioanninon (C-158/04), Carrefour Marinopoulos AE v Elliniko Dimosio, Nomarkhiaki Aftodiikisi Ioanninon (C-159/04)

(Joined Cases C-158/04 and C-159/04) (1)

1

(Free movement of goods - Article 28 EC - Quantitative restrictions - Measures having equivalent effect - Marketing of frozen ‘bake-off’ products)

(2006/C 281/04)

Language of the case: Greek

Referring court

Diikitiko Protodikio Ioanninon — Greece

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Alfa Vita Vassilopoulos AE, formerly Trofo Super-Markets AE (C-158/04), Carrefour Marinopoulos AE (C-159/04)

Applicants:

Defendant: Elliniko Dimosio, Nomarkhiaki Aftodiikisi Ioanninon

Defendant:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Diikitiko Protodikio Ioanninon — Marketing of ‘bake-off’ bakery products — Requirement for a licence — Compatibility with Article 28 EC

Operative part of the judgment

Article 28 EC is to be interpreted as precluding national legislation which makes the sale of ‘bake-off’ products subject to the same requirements as those applicable to the full manufacturing and marketing procedure for traditional bread and bakery products.

---

(1)  OJ C 106, 30.04.2006.

1

---
#### § 559.6 May the Chair require a tribe to submit applicable and available Indian lands or environmental and public health and safety documentation regarding any gaming place, facility, or location where gaming will occur?

A tribe shall provide applicable and available Indian lands or environmental and public health and safety documentation requested by the Chair.
This opinion is subject to administrative correction before final disposition.

Before 

MONAHAN, STEPHENS, and DEERWESTER

Appellate Military Judges

_________________________

UNITED STATES

Appellee

v.

Christian D. PADUA

Sergeant (E-5), U.S. Marine Corps

Appellant

No. 202100236

_________________________

Decided: 13 December 2021

Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary

Military Judge: 

Melanie J. Mann

Sentence adjudged 19 July 2021 by a general court-martial convened 

at Marine Corps Base Hawaii, consisting of a military judge sitting 

alone. Sentence in the Entry of Judgment: reduction to E-1, confinement for 13 months, and a dishonorable discharge.

For Appellant: 

Captain Brian L. Farrell, USMCR

_________________________

This opinion does not serve as binding precedent under 

NMCCA Rule of Appellate Procedure 30.2(a).

_________________________
United States v. Padua, NMCCA No. 202100236

Opinion of the Court

2

PER CURIAM:

After careful consideration of the record, submitted without assignment of 

error, we have determined that the findings and sentence are correct in law 

and fact and that no error materially prejudicial to Appellant’s substantial 

rights occurred.1

The findings and sentence are AFFIRMED.

FOR THE COURT:

RODGER A. DREW, JR.

Clerk of Court

 

1 Articles 59 & 66, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859, 866.
IV

House Calendar No. 206

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 474

[Report No. 106–578]

Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the

concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 290) establishing the congressional

budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2001, revising

the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal

year 2000, and setting forth appropriate budgetary levels for each of

fiscal years 2002 through 2005.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 12, 2000

Mr. GOSS, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution;

which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

RESOLUTION

Waiving points of order against the conference report to

accompany the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 290)

establishing the congressional budget for the United

States Government for fiscal year 2001, revising the

congressional budget for the United States Government

for fiscal year 2000, and setting forth appropriate budgetary levels for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2005.

1 Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it

2 shall be in order to consider the conference report to ac-
2

HRES 474 RH

1 company the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 290) es2 tablishing the congressional budget for the United States

3 Government for fiscal year 2001, revising the congres4 sional budget for the United States Government for fiscal

5 year 2000, and setting forth appropriate budgetary levels

6 for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2005. All points of

7 order against the conference report and against its consid8 eration are waived. The conference report shall be consid9 ered as read. The conference report shall be debatable for

10 one hour equally divided and controlled by chairman and

11 ranking minority member of the Committee on the Budg12 et.
House Calendar No. 206

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 474

[Report No. 106–578]

RESOLUTION

Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the concurrent resolution (H.

Con. Res. 290) establishing the congressionalbudget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2001, revising the congressional budgetfor the United States Government for fiscal year2000, and setting forth appropriate budgetarylevels for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2005.

APRIL 12, 2000

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
### [§2409. Renumbered §4701]
EXHIBIT 32.2

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OFTHE**

**SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

** **

In connection with the Annual Report ofSSTL, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K, for the period ended December 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission, I, Susan Lokey, Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)	The Report fully complies with the requirements of section13(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.

 

Date: April 15, 2012

 

/s/ Susan Lokey

Name: Susan Lokey

Chief Accounting Officer and Chief FinancialOfficer
[No. 4784.]

#### The People ex rel. The Colorado Bar Association v. Wm. J. Thomas.

Attorneys. at Law — Disbarment—Embracery—Demurrer.

Where an. information in disbarment proceedings charges the respondent with the crime of embracery, an answer setting up his acquittal upon a criminal charge based upon the same facts is not a defense to the proceeding for disbarment, and a demurrer to such answer will be sustained. — P. 127.

Original proceeding in disbarment on the relation of the Colorado Bar Association against William J. Thomas. Demurrer to information.

Decision *en banc..*

*Demurrer sustained.*

*127Mr. L. P. Twitchell, for petitioner.

Mr. Thomas Ward, Jr., Mr. A. M. Stevenson and Mr. Milton Smith, for respondents.

Mr. Justice Gunter

delivered the opinion of the court:

The information herein charges respondent with the crime of embracery. The answer denies the allegations of the information, and sets up two affirmative defenses, each entitled “further and separate answer.” The one of these affirmative defenses alleges that respondent was proceeded against in a criminal action for the same crime as that charged in the information, embracery, and acquitted thereof. The other sets up a proceeding fop contempt, and an acquittal thereof.

A general demurrer presents the question of the sufficiency of these two' defenses.

It is contended by counsel that the same principle obtains as to both defenses,' that is, if the acquittal in the criminal proceeding is not a complete defense to this action for disbarment, then the acquittal in the action for contempt is likewise not a defense.

That the acquittal upon the criminal charge is not a defense to a proceeding for disbarment, based upon the same facts, is *stare decisis*in this jurisdic*tion.*— People *v. Mead,*29 Colo. 348; *People v. Weeben,*26 Colo. 229.

Other authorities to the same effect are: In the matter of an attorney, 86 N. T. 563; *In re Wellcome,*23 Montana 213.

*Demurrer sustained.*

Decision *en banc.*