alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §221e. Additional lands

The following described area is added to and made a part of the Grand Canyon National Park: Beginning at the corner common to sections 14, 15, 22, and 23, township 30 north, range 4 east, Gila and Salt River meridian; thence west along the section line between sections 15 and 22 a distance of nine hundred and fifty feet; thence south a distance of one thousand three hundred and twenty feet to a point on the south line of the north tier of forties of said section 22; thence east a distance of one thousand six hundred and ten feet; thence north a distance of one thousand three hundred and twenty feet to a point on the line between sections 14 and 23; thence west along said section line a distance of six hundred and sixty feet to the place of beginning, containing an area of forty-eight and seventy-nine hundredths acres, more or less: Provided, That livestock permitted to graze in adjoining national forest areas shall be allowed to drift across the land described herein to private land north thereof within the park.

(Mar. 7, 1928, ch. 137, §1, 45 Stat. 234.)
116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 929 

AN ACT 

To amend title 28, United States Code, to redefine the 

eastern and middle judicial districts of North Carolina. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

†S 929 ES

1 SECTION 1. JUDICIAL DISTRICTS OF NORTH CAROLINA. 

2 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 113 of title 28, United 

3 States Code, is amended— 

4 (1) in subsection (a), by striking ‘‘and Wilson 

5 and’’ and inserting ‘‘Wilson, those portions of Hoke, 

6 Moore, Scotland, and Richmond counties encom7 passing the Fort Bragg Military Reservation and 

8 Camp Mackall, and’’; and 

9 (2) by striking subsection (b) and inserting the 

10 following: 

11 ‘‘(b) MIDDLE DISTRICT.—The Middle District com12 prises the counties of Alamance, Cabarrus, Caswell, Chat13 ham, Davidson, Davie, Durham (excluding that portion of 

14 Durham County encompassing the Federal Correctional 

15 Institution, Butner, North Carolina), Forsyth, Guilford, 

16 Hoke (excluding that portion of Hoke County encom17 passing the Fort Bragg Military Reservation and Camp 

18 Mackall), Lee, Montgomery, Moore (excluding that por19 tion of Moore County encompassing the Fort Bragg Mili20 tary Reservation and Camp Mackall), Orange, Person, 

21 Randolph, Richmond (excluding that portion of Richmond 

22 County encompassing the Fort Bragg Military Reserva23 tion and Camp Mackall), Rockingham, Rowan, Scotland 

24 (excluding that portion of Scotland County encompassing 

25 the Fort Bragg Military Reservation and Camp Mackall), 

26 Stanly, Stokes, Surry, and Yadkin.’’. 
3 

†S 929 ES

1 (b) APPLICATION.—The amendments made by sub2 section (a) shall not apply to any action commenced or 

3 pending in any judicial district of North Carolina before 

4 the date of enactment of this Act. 

Passed the Senate July 30, 2019. 

Attest: 

Secretary. 
116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 929 

AN ACT 

To amend title 28, United States Code, to redefine 

Carolina. the eastern and middle judicial districts of North
#### Hilliard *v.*King.

July 14, 1910.

Action for breach of contract. Before Judge Meadow. Greene superior court.

June *22,*1909.

*Samuel H. Sibley*and *James B. Park,*for plaintiff in error.

*James Davison,*contra.

Beck, J.

1. Where a contractor had built a house for another-, and, claiming that the building contract had been fully complied with, demanded payment of the part of the contract price which remained unpaid, and the owner, insisting that the contract was not completed in that the plastering in the house was defective as to material and workmanship and was not in accordance with the specifications, refused to pay the balance of the contract price, and the contractor thereupon, in order to obtain payment of the balance, executed a writing wherein it was stipulated that he did thereby “warrant the plastering throughout the said house for a term of twelve months, and should any defect in workmanship or material develop, I guarantee to put same in perfect condition, and should I neglect to attend to and do said work promptly Dr. C. C. King [the owner! has and is hereby empowered to have said work done at my expense.” the owner could maintain an action for damages for a breach of this written undertaking, where defects in workmanship or material developed within the period of time specified, in ease the contractor failed anj neglected to put the plastering in the condition contemplated in the undertaking, and he was not limited to the remedy of having the imperfect and defective work completed and then suing the contractor for the expense incurred.

2. Where one of the questions for determination by the jury was whether certain plastering done by the contractor fulfilled the requirements of given specifications in the building contract, it was competent for an expert to testify as to whether or not it “came up to the specifications.”

3. The portions of the charge excepted to are not open to the criticisms made, and the evidence authorized the verdict.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
#### § 345.54 Overtime compensation.

An inmate worker is entitled to overtime pay at a rate of two times the hourly or unit rate for hourly, individual, and group piecework rate workers, when the total hours worked (including administrative pay) exceed the FPI factory's regularly scheduled workday. Hours worked on days other than the scheduled work week (e.g., Saturday) shall be compensated at the overtime rate.
# C_2014112EN.01000201.xml

| 14.4.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 112/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.4.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 112/2

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 27 February 2014 — United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v Council of the European Union

(Case C-656/11) (1)

1

((Coordination of social security systems - Agreement between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Swiss Confederation, of the other, on the free movement of persons - Council decision - Choice of legal basis - Article 48 TFEU - Article 79(2)(b) TFEU))

2014/C 112/02

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented initially by C. Murrell and subsequently by M. Holt, Agents, and by A. Dashwood QC)

Applicant:

Intervener in support of the applicant: Ireland (represented by E. Creedon, L. Williams and J. Stanley, Agents, and by N.J. Travers BL)

Intervener in support of the applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented initially by G. Marhic and M. Veiga and subsequently by A. De Elera, Agents)

Defendant:

Interveners in support of the defendant: French Republic (represented by G. de Bergues and N. Rouam, Agents), European Commission (represented initially by V. Kreuschitz and subsequently by S. Pardo Quintillán and J. Enegren, Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action for annulment — Council Decision of 16 December 2011 on the position to be taken by the European Union in the Joint Committee established under the Agreement between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Swiss Confederation, of the other, on the free movement of persons as regards the replacement of Annex II to that Agreement on the coordination of social security schemes (OJ L 2011 341, p. 1) — Choice of legal basis — Article 48 TFEU (adoption, in the field of social security, of necessary measures to provide freedom of movement for workers) or Article 79(2)(b) TFEU (rights of third-country nationals residing legally in a Member State) — Practical effect of this choice on the rights and obligations of the United Kingdom, by reason of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to pay the costs; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to pay the costs;

| 3. | Orders Ireland, the French Republic and the European Commission to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders Ireland, the French Republic and the European Commission to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 49, 18.2.2012.

1

---
314937-AO 06/30/2020

cdc.gov/coronavirus

Kuze ki bu debi sabi sobri COVID-19 pa bu 

podi proteji bu kabésa y otus

Sabi sobri COVID-19

• Coronavirus (COVID-19) é un duensa 

kauzadu pa un virus ki podi pasa di algen pa 

algen.

• Kel virus ki ta kauza COVID-19 é un novu 

coronavirus ki dja spadja na mundu interu.

• Sintomas di COVID-19 podi varia di un 

duensa leve (ô sen sintomas) a duensa gravi.

Sabi modi ki COVID-19 ta spadja

• Bu podi fika infetadu atravez di kontatu 

pertu (serka di 6 pe ô distánsia di dos brasu) 

ku un algen ki teni COVID-19. COVID-19 é 

prinsipalmenti transmisivel di algen pa algen.

• Bu podi fika infetadu atravez di gotas 

respiratoriu ora ki un algen infetadu tosi, 

spira, ô fala.

• Bu podi panha-l tanbê atravez di toki na 

superfisi ô objetu ki teni virus na el, y logu 

dipos toka bu boka, nariz, ô odjus.

Proteji bu kabésa y otus di COVID-19

• Nes momentu ka ten nun vasina pa proteji 

kontra COVID-19. Midjor manera pa bu 

proteji bu kabésa é pa ivita ser spostu a virus 

ki ta kauza COVID-19.

• Fika na kaza masimu pusivel y ivita kontato 

pertu ku otus algen.

• Uza un kubertura di rostu di panu ki ta kubri 

bu nariz y boka na lugaris publiku.

• Linpa y dizinfeta superfisis ki ta tokadu ku 

frekuénsia.

• Lava bu mô frekuentimenti ku sabon y 

agua pa pelu menus 20 sugundus, ô uza un 

alkua-jel ki ten pelu menu 60% di alkua pa 

dizenfeta mô.

milk

Pratika distansiamentu sosial

• Fazi konpra di kumida y 

ramedi, ba dotor, y fazi 

atividadis bankariu pa internet 

si for pusivel.

• Si bu ten ki bai pesualmenti, 

fika pelu menus 6 pe lonji di 

otu algen y dizinfeta kuzas ki 

bu ten ki toka nel.

• Opta pa entregas di kumida, y 

limita kontatu pesual masimu 

pusivel.

Ivita spadja COVID-19 si bu 

stiver duenti

• Fika na kaza si bu stiver 

duenti, tirandu se pa rasebi 

kuidadus mediku. 

• Ivita transporti publiku, taxis 

atravez di aplikativu, o taxis 

normal.

• Sipara bu kabésa di otus algen y 

animal di stimason na bu kaza. 

• Ka ten nun tratamentu 

spesifiku pa COVID-19, má bu 

podi buska kuidadus mediku 

pa djuda alivia sintomas.

• Si bu mesti atenson mediku, 

txoma antisipadamenti.

Konxi bu risku di panha 

duensa gravi.

• Tudu algen ta kori risku di 

panha COVID-19

• Adultus mas bedju y algen di 

kalker idadi ki ten prublemas 

di saude seriu podi sta na risku 

mas grandi di fika gravementi 

duenti.
# C_2010161EN.01005501.xml

| 19.6.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 161/55 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.6.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 161/55

---

Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2010 — DTL v OHIM — Gestión de Recursos y Soluciones Empresariales (Solaria)

(Case T-188/10)

(2010/C 161/86)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: DTL Corporación, S.L. (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: C. Rueda Pascual, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Gestión de Recursos y Soluciones Empresariales, S.L. (Pamplona, Spain)

Form of order sought

| — | annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 17 February 2010 in Case R 767/2009-2; |
| --- | --- |

—

annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 17 February 2010 in Case R 767/2009-2;

| — | replace it by another which rejects the opposition brought by GESTIÓN DE RECURSOS Y SOLUCIONES EMPRESARIALES, S.L. against the Community trade mark No 5153325 ‘SOLARIA’ permitting that Community trade mark to be registered not only in Class 41, but also for all the services applied for in Classes 37 and 42; and order the opposing party to pay the costs of the opposition and the appeal before OHIM; and |
| --- | --- |

—

replace it by another which rejects the opposition brought by GESTIÓN DE RECURSOS Y SOLUCIONES EMPRESARIALES, S.L. against the Community trade mark No 5153325 ‘SOLARIA’ permitting that Community trade mark to be registered not only in Class 41, but also for all the services applied for in Classes 37 and 42; and order the opposing party to pay the costs of the opposition and the appeal before OHIM; and

| — | order OHIM and the other parties to the proceedings who oppose this action to pay the costs thereof. |
| --- | --- |

—

order OHIM and the other parties to the proceedings who oppose this action to pay the costs thereof.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: DTL Corporación, S.L.

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark containing the word element ‘SOLARIA’ (Application No 5 153 325) for services in Classes 37, 41 and 42.

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Gestión de Recursos y Soluciones Empresariales, S.L.

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Spanish figurative mark containing the word element ‘SOLARTIA’ (No 2 689 747) for services in Classes 37 and 42.

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition partially upheld.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed.

Pleas in law: Incorrect interpretation and application of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 on the Community trade mark.

---
§ 501.1 Bureau of Prisons emergencies. ( a ) *Suspension of rules during an emergency.* The Director of the Bureau of Prisons (Bureau) may suspend operation of the rules in this chapter as necessary to handle an institutional emergency or an emergency affecting the Bureau. When there is an institutional emergency which the Director or Warden considers a threat to human life or safety, the Director or Warden may suspend the operation of the rules in this chapter as necessary to handle the emergency.
( b ) *Responsibilities of the Warden* — ( 1 ) *Notifying the Director.* If the Warden suspends operation of the rules, the Warden must, within 24 hours of the suspension or as soon as practicable, notify the Director by providing written documentation which: ( i ) Describes the institutional emergency that threatens human life or safety;
( ii ) Sets forth reasons why suspension of the rules is necessary to handle the institutional emergency;
( iii ) Estimates how long suspension of the rules will last; and
( iv ) Describes criteria which would allow normal rules application to resume.
( 2 ) *Submitting certification to Director of continuing emergency.* 30 days after the Warden suspends operation of the rules, and every 30 days thereafter, the Warden must submit to the Director written certification that an institutional emergency threatening human life or safety and warranting suspension of the rules continues to exist. If the Warden does not submit this certification to the Director, or if the Director so orders at any time, the suspension of the rules will cease.
[70 FR 29191, May 20, 2005]
**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 NMXS.com, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned principal executive officer and the principal financial officer 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, 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. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

Date:  February 6, 2006

 

/s/ Richard Govatski

Richard Govatski, President

(Principal Executive Officer)

 

/s/ Teresa Dickey

Teresa Dickey, Treasurer

(Principal Financial Officer)
Exhibit 32

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


         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Cedar Grove Marketing, Inc.,
on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  the undersigned,  B.
Stephen Bailey,  Chief Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.
906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  that to the best of my  knowledge  and
belief:

         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.


Date: April 19, 2004

/s/ B. Stephen Bailey
B. Stephen Bailey
President
(Principal Executive & Accounting Officer)


A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
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.
# C_2012287EN.01001502.xml

| 22.9.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 287/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.9.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 287/15

---

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 12 July 2012 — Smart Technologies ULC v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case C-311/11 P) (1)

1

(Appeals - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Article 7(1)(b) - Word mark WIR MACHEN DAS BESONDERE EINFACH - Mark consisting of an advertising slogan - Distinctive character - Refusal to register)

2012/C 287/26

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Smart Technologies ULC (represented by: M. Edenborough QC, and T. Elias, barrister)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 13 April 2011Smart Technologies v OHMI (Case T-523/09) by which that court dismissed an application for annulment of the decision R 554/2009-2 of the second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 29 September 2009, rejecting the appeal against the examiner’s decision refusing to register the word mark ‘WIR MACHEN DAS BESONDERE EINFACH’ in respect of goods in Class 9.

Smart Technologies

OHMI

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the appeal.

| 2. | Orders Smart Technologies ULC to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Smart Technologies ULC to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 269, 10.9.2011.

1

---
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">Compas Medical, P.C., as Assignee of Prempin, Sergo, Appellant, <br><br>against<br><br>ELRAC, Inc., Respondent.</font></b></div><br><br><p>The Rybak Firm, PLLC (Damin J. Toell, Esq.), for appellant.Carman, Callahan &amp; Ingham, LLP (Jeffrey P. Saxon, Esq.), for respondent.</p><p>Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Carolyn E. Wade, J.), entered February 18, 2014. The order granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.</p><p>ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with $25 costs.</p><p>In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, defendant moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that plaintiff's assignor and/or plaintiff had failed to comply with 11 NYCRR 65-2.4 (a), (b) and (c), which make it a condition precedent to coverage to provide written notice of an accident no later than 30 days after the accident and to submit written proof of claim no later than 45 days after health care supplies or services are furnished. Plaintiff opposed the motion, asserting facts and raising arguments similar to those raised by the plaintiff in <a href="../2015/2015_51223.htm" target="_blank"><i>Great Health Care Chiropractic, P.C. v Elrac, Inc. </i>(48 Misc 3d 139</a>[A], 2015 NY Slip Op 51223[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th &amp; 13th Jud Dists 2015]). By order entered February 18, 2014, the Civil Court granted defendant's motion.</p><p>For the reasons stated in <a href="../2015/2015_51223.htm" target="_blank"><i>Great Health Care Chiropractic, P.C. v Elrac, Inc. </i>(48 Misc 3d 139</a>[A], 2015 NY Slip Op 51223[U]), the order is affirmed.</p><p>PESCE, P.J., ALIOTTA and SOLOMON, JJ., concur.</p><br>ENTER:<br>Paul Kenny<br>Chief Clerk<br>Decision Date: July 21, 2017<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_2_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
#### § 158.709 Exemption from other laws regarding deployment.

The provisions of laws, among other similar laws, listed in §§ 158.405, 158.502, and 158.605 do not apply under CTMS, to the DHS-CS, or to talent management involving the individuals described in § 158.103.