alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States Bankruptcy Court 

Eastern District of Virginia 

______________ Division

In re: Case No.______________________________ 

Adv. Proceeding No._____________________ 

 Civil Action No. ________________________ 

 Debtor(s) 

TRANSMITTAL OF RECORD ON APPEAL TO DISTRICT COURT 

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Ț158, Notice of Appeal was filed on ________________ and transmitted on ________________. 

1. ( ) Order/Judgment, Docket Record, Designation(s) [if any], and Items Designated 

2. ( ) Copy of restricted transcript(s), if designated, included as separate electronic file(s) 

3. ( ) Copies of exhibits, if designated, included as a separate file(s): ___ electronic and/or ___ conventional, on paper 

4. ( ) Copies of exhibits designated by Appellant/Appellee, filed conventionally, have not been submitted pursuant to FRBP 8009 and LBR 8009-1 

5. ( ) Other Documents _________________________________________________________________________________________ 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

6. ( ) No Designation of Record on Appeal filed (See Certification Below) 

 

 WILLIAM C. REDDEN, Clerk of Court 

Date: ___________________________ By _____________________________________, Deputy Clerk 

..............................................................................................................................................................................

CERTIFICATION TO APPELLATE COURT 

It is hereby certified that the designation of record required by Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 8009 and Local Bankruptcy Rule 8009-1 

has not been filed within 14 days after the filing of the notice of appeal. 

 WILLIAM C. REDDEN, Clerk of Court 

 By: ____________________________________, Deputy Clerk 

..............................................................................................................................................................................

RECEIPT OF EXHIBITS BY DISTRICT COURT [if applicable] 

The undersigned deputy clerk of the U. S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia, hereby acknowledges receipt of one or more exhibits from 

the U.S. Bankruptcy Court, which are submitted conventionally, on paper, to be made a part of the Record on Appeal in Civil Action No. 

________________________.

Date: ____________________________ By: ____________________________________, Deputy Clerk 

 

 [transeapp ver. 12/14] 

Alexandria

Elizabeth Corey Hart 19-10763-KHK

1:19-cv-00674-TSE-IDD

05/28/2019 05/29/2019

✔

✔ Official Form 121 is a restricted document.

July 2, 2019 /s/ Jillinda Glenn

Case 19-10763-KHK Doc 68 Filed 07/02/19 Entered 07/02/19 17:49:59 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 1
Electrical Conductivity, UMHOS

Day High Low Mean TDS

1 615 557 589 380

2 608 570 588 379

3 571 532 553 358

4 580 566 574 371

5 578 555 565 365

6 553 532 541 350

7 583 537 564 365

8 567 538 547 354

9 554 514 530 344

10 529 498 513 333

11 571 509 550 356

12 584 559 567 366

13 604 586 599 386

14 596 557 577 373

15 578 545 563 364

16 579 544 556 360

17 579 521 545 353

18 520 513 517 336

19 515 109 371 245

20 494 101 206 143

21 564 502 536 347

22 618 564 582 376

23 617 547 568 367

24 545 509 524 340

25 531 493 511 332

26 569 533 550 356

27 574 564 569 368

28 575 556 563 364

29 575 541 558 361

30 574 532 554 358

Total 16130

COMMENT(S):

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

Historical Archive and Report Database

Delta Mendota Canal At Check 21 

Period: June 2022 Run Date: 11/22/2022
JLPARTMENT OF 

iriANSPORWiOi^ 

;0-;KETCPFRAT[ONS 

SERVED DECEMBER 12, 2011 ..,! rj[c [ 3 p j. 53 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

D & M CUSTOM INJECTION MOLDING CORPORATION 

FA A DOCKET No. CPl IGLOOOO 

(Civil Penalty Case) 

FDMS No. FAA-201 I -0679 

ORDER LIMITING HEARING TO SANCTION 

Respondent D & M Custom Injection Molding Corporation ("Respondent") has 

answered our November 28, 201 I Order to Show Cause. Respondent states that il has no 

objectioa to grant of the motion of ComplainaiU Fecieral Aviation Administration 

("Complainant" or "the agency") to deem the allegations of the agency's Complaint 

admitted. It asks, in accordance with Complainant's alternative prayer, for a hearing 

limited to the issue of sanction. 

Respondent's request, and thai portion of Complainant's Motion to Deem 

Allegations Admitted, is hereby GRANTED. That portion of Complainant's Motion 

which seeks a determination on the amount of penalty is hereby DENIED. 

Respondent, having admitted each of Complainant's allegations, is found in ' 

violation of the following Hazardous Materials Regulations: 49C.F.R. §§171.2(e). 

172.200(a), 172.204(a), 172.301(a), 172.400(a), 172.600(c)(2), 172.702(a). l72.10Uh), 

172.312(a)(2), 173.1(b), 173.21(c), 173.24(b)(1), and 173.27(c)(1) as set out in the 

Complaint. 
The hearing will be limited to the issue of sanction. It will be scheduled by 

subsequent order. 

Attachment - Service List 

Richard C. Goodwin 

U.S. Administrative Law Judge 
FDMS No. FAA-2011-0679 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000' 

ONE COPY 

Michael Teofilovich, President 

D&M Custom Injection Molding Corporation 

dba D&M Plastics Corporation, Respomient 

\ 50 French Road 

Burlington, IL 60109 

Kate Barber, Complainant 'A- Counsel 

Attorney, Office of the Regional Counsel 

Great Lakes Region, AGL-7B 

Federal Aviation Administration 

2300 East Devon Avenue 

DesPlaines,IL 60018 

TEL: 847-294-7862 

FAX: 847-294-7498 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2139 Attorney-Advisor 

202-366-5121 Legal Assistant 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by e.\pedHed courier, use tlie following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration. 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wnght Building—Suile 2W1000, Washington, 

DC 20.'i9I; AKention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
(Case No. 00166

#### In Re Application of Arline Sorby.

*Opinion filed May 23, 1979.*

James J. Reidy, Attorney for Claimant.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; Francis M. Donovan, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.

This claim, arising out of the death of a fireman killed in the line of duty, seeks payment of compensation to the decedent’s beneficiary pursuant to the provisions of the “Law Enforcement Officers and Firemen Compensation Act,” (hereafter, the Act) Ill. Rev. Stat., Ch. 48, Sec. 281, et seq., 1977.

*1064The Court has carefully considered the application for benefits submitted on the form prescribed and furnished by the Attorney General, a written statement of the decedent’s supervising officer, and a report by the Illinois Attorney General’s office which substantiates matters set forth in the application. Based upon these documents and other evidence submitted at a hearing before the full Court on April 19,1979, the Court finds as follows:

1. That the Claimant, Arline Sorby, is the wife of the decedent, and in the absence of a designated beneficiary, Section 3(a) of the Act provides that any award hereunder shall be paid to the surviving widow.

2. That the decedent, Robert C. Sorby, was a 24 year veteran of the Chicago Fire Department and was engaged in the active performance of his duties, within the meaning of Sec. 2(e) of the Act, on October 10,1978.

3. Fireman Sorby began his regular 24-hour duty assignment at 8:00 a.m. and at 3:12 p.m. on October 10, 1978, and Sorby and others assigned to Engine Company Ten responded to an alarm of an “oil spill.” While proceeding to the scene, Sorby fell from the engine truck on which he was riding, and he struck his head on the street. Fireman Sorby, unconscious, was taken to Resurrection Hospital and admitted at 4:00 p.m. He never regained consciousness and was pronounced dead at 7:40 a.m. on October 29, 1978. The medical examiner’s certificate of death recites the immediate cause of death as “severe skull fracture with intracranial and intracerebral hemorrhage.”

We find, therefore:

> a) that Fireman Sorby was killed in the line of duty as defined in Section 2(e) of the Act; and

> b) that the proof submitted in support of this claim satisfies all of the requirements of the Act, and the claim is therefore compensable thereunder.

*1065It is hereby ordered that the sum of $20,000.00 be, and is hereby awarded to Arline Sorby, as wife and beneficiary of the deceased fireman, Robert C. Sorby.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4878 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 4878

  To authorize the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to carry out a major 
           medical facility project in Jacksonville, Florida.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 28, 2019

Mr. Lawson of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                 to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To authorize the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to carry out a major 
           medical facility project in Jacksonville, Florida.

    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 ``Veterans Emergency Treatment 
Services Act'' or the ``VETS Act''.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF MAJOR MEDICAL FACILITY PROJECT.

    The Secretary of Veterans Affairs may carry out a major medical 
facility project in fiscal year 2021 consisting of the construction of 
a medical center in Jacksonville, Florida, in an amount not to exceed 
$300,000,000.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 4.1


 


The shares represented by this certificate have not been registered or
qualified under federal or state securities laws. The shares may not be offered
for sale, sold, pledged or otherwise disposed of unless so registered or
qualified or unless an exemption exists, the availability of which is to be
established by an opinion of counsel (which opinion and counsel shall both be
reasonably satisfactory to the Corporation).


 


 


For Value Received,
           hereby sell,
assign and transfer unto                                                           
                                           Shares
represented by the within Certificate, and do hereby irrevocably constitute and
appoint             


Attorney to transfer the said Shares on the
books of the within named Corporation with full power of substitution in the
premises.


 


	
  Dated

  	
  A.D. 20

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  In
  presence of

  	
   

  



 


 


 


NOTICE. THE
SIGNATURE OF THIS ASSIGNMENT

MUST CORRESPOND WITH THE NAME AS WRITTEN UPON THE

FACE OF THE CERTIFICATE, IN EVERY PARTICULAR, WITHOUT

ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT, OR ANY CHANGE WHATEVER.


 

















 


	
  NUMBER

  XXX

  	
  

  	
  SHARES

  -XXXXX-

  



 


SAGE INTERACTIVE, INC.


a Nevada corporation


 


100,000,000 Shares of $.001 Par
Value Common Stock Authorized


 


This Certifies that XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX is the registered holder of

–XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX– Shares of the
$.001 par value common stock of Sage Interactive, Inc.


 


transferable only on the books of the
Corporation by the holder hereof in person or by Attorney upon surrender of
this Certificate properly endorsed.


 


In Witness Whereof, the said Corporation has
caused this Certificate to be signed by its duly authorized officers and its
Corporate Seal to be hereunto affixed


	
  this
  XX day

  	
  of
  XXXXXX A.D. 20XX

  



 


 


© GOES KG2


All Rights Reserved
Editorial Note on Part 637
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 637 appear at 67 FR 75934, Dec. 10, 2002.

§ 637.205 Policy. ( a ) *Quality assurance program.* Each STD shall develop a quality assurance program which will assure that the materials and workmanship incorporated into each Federal-aid highway construction project on the NHS are in conformity with the requirements of the approved plans and specifications, including approved changes. The program must meet the criteria in § 637.207 and be approved by the FHWA.
( b ) *STD capabilities.* The STD shall maintain an adequate, qualified staff to administer its quality assurance program. The State shall also maintain a central laboratory. The State's central laboratory shall meet the requirements in § 637.209(a)(2).
( c ) *Independent assurance program.* Independent assurance samples and tests or other procedures shall be performed by qualified sampling and testing personnel employed by the STD or its designated agent.
( d ) *Verification sampling and testing.* The verification sampling and testing are to be performed by qualified testing personnel employed by the STD or its designated agent, excluding the contractor and vendor.
( e ) *Random samples.* All samples used for quality control and verification sampling and testing shall be random samples.
!""" 

 
!	

	#$%$&'	(

'
&	


	%$)*!)+%,

	-%&
$$.	&%
	/&%+%,&	-%&$-.


	01%	-
2.%
*345/

""#"$

45 #$%$&
	-
&%%&%6

4*5 2
	'
%
	&	)$$	
	'
$$	+%
	45


7%&%,1.	+%,)
	45$$.1-	)	%.)$$
	
	7%

.
+'	$	
	'7%
1%	
%%,
	&	
	
+$	
-%
1	



Case 19-10888-KHK Doc 18 Filed 05/22/19 Entered 05/22/19 15:40:58 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 5
%&'


	(

'
&	


()*+),---+

45 
	%$)*!)&.-
		1%$1		
	&	
%
1	)


	$$'
	1)
-#8
	-#9
:33)-%)"! 

331-
;<*!!!	-

	=-
&;)**3!!	-

	

	-%%,3<-

#$#'-1&	%&#$
.
-$&7%%=!-


	
-&1&
%	'-%%.

4<5 
	$$%$$$&	$&%.
-:	1	

	
	&1

&)7%
1:%
)&	
+%&	17%%,&.
%
	1	7%%>&'

	'	%$&&	
+%&	11.&&%%
$%
	-%
	1-'

	01%	
	&	-%%


	?&%
$%.
-6%$1	
%-$'.
-$'7%%

	
+%%
$$,	
1&
	&%-%$

435 
'$%+
%&..%
45.
-$&'.%
"495
#$-1

-&'%$%,

&+		'#	
.&%,$	%:'4=!5&'	
-&


	'
%	&	

4=5 
$&	
..1	&.$%-	
+%&&
	%	,	<

	<
$

$$	%$%.1	%,1..$%-1%$	$%	
%5'-
1&	$'%,&

&	-%&1&	(	1.'$7
	%%5&%.	,1&	.%
*"
	%%%51.$%%


	7%+
%&&'	
1	
	&		&%%.
	
.%&&+		'

	
.&%,%.%&%-%&
	.
+	&7%
1.
-$%

$)1.$%$$

	%&'1.
$&	
:	.
,%@&'$%.$(	1.'$7

4>5 
	45$$.
-$'7%,	&-
&%%.%

,
1	


	&	
%	-%,#$)7%.$$1$-#$1&%,%&&%%

'-

	
+%&&'	,	
+

&AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

$%%&	&

2%&9(	1.'B1&,

May 22 2019 /s/ Klinette Kindred

Entered on Docket: May 22, 2019

Case 19-10888-KHK Doc 18 Filed 05/22/19 Entered 05/22/19 15:40:58 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 5

%	-%
.
--&&

ACC
-#8
	-AAAAAAAAAAA


-#8
	-

		1

!!
	D%,
	)<!!


$:&	%)E
**<

4>!5"= ***=

E9F*=<*

G
.$1$!** 45	%%.%



	,
%,	&	7&
	&'&C
		+&1
$$.	'	%1	1
G
.$

1$!** 45

CC
-#8
	-AAAAAAAAAAAAAA


-#8
	-)		1

Case 19-10888-KHK Doc 18 Filed 05/22/19 Entered 05/22/19 15:40:58 Desc Main

 Document Page 3 of 5
	 
!		 
!	./'0

#/")1)*+),---+

 2	"#3	


	45$$1	%	11$&	$&%.
-:	1	7%%


	'%+4<35&'
&1&
1.	1	
	.'	
	.)$1

&	$&%.
-:	1&%:.
;*3!!!	1-1$
	7%


	&	&'%
1	&&%%
)
	$$1	%	1'1.-
145	

		&	-%&'
1	
&%
$%.
-

	45&1	%,&.'


%	
.&%,&'&&%%
$%
	-%
	1-'	01%	
	&	-%%




	&%
$%.
-6%$1	
.
-$'7%%	
+%%
$$,	
1&
	

&%-%$

A

ACC	(

'
&	
AAAAAAAAAAAAAA

	(

'
&	


A

ACC6%	AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

6%	)0

A

ACC
-#8
	-AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA


-#8
	-

Case 19-10888-KHK Doc 18 Filed 05/22/19 Entered 05/22/19 15:40:58 Desc Main

 Document Page 4 of 5
%&'


	(

'
&	


()*+),---+


	


	(

'
&	


	
	

<
&-%	$	%+

D

&	%&,)E
***

6%	)0



	'
	
	

6%	 &$	)GG

>>%9	%&,&F*

6%	:)E
**!!


-#8
	-

		1

!!
	D%,
	)<!!


$:&	%)E
**<

Case 19-10888-KHK Doc 18 Filed 05/22/19 Entered 05/22/19 15:40:58 Desc Main

 Document Page 5 of 5
Opinion issued January 2, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-12-01065-CV

———————————

IN RE ST. LUKE’S SUGAR LAND PARTNERSHIP, L.L.P., Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On November 20, 2012, relator St. Luke’s Sugar Land Partnership, L.L.P. 

filed a petition for writ of mandamus, requesting that this court order the trial court 

to set aside an order compelling the production of documents.

*

 We deny the 

 

* The underlying case is Patel et al. v. St. Luke’s Sugar Land Partnership, 

L.L.P. et al., No. 2011-24016, in the 152nd District Court of Harris County, 

Texas, the Honorable Robert Schaffer presiding.
2

petition for writ of mandamus and lift the partial stay entered on November 21, 

2012.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Massengale, Brown, and Huddle.
#### Jacob Hurwitz, Respondent, v. Hyman Bernstein, Appellant.

Motion for reargument denied, without costs. Present — Jenks, P. J., Thomas, Carr, Stapleton and Putnam, JJ.
JONES (TRACY) CLIFT BANKS (DELTA) FED DOS BYRON Delta Mendota Canal-California Aqueduct Intertie

PUMPING PLANT COURT PUMPING PLANT BANKS AMIGOS BETHANY Pumping (DMC to CA) Release (CA TO DMC) DMC-POOL

Day Fed

1

State

2

Total

3

Total

4

State

5

Fed

6

Total

7

XVC

8

XVC

9

Total

10

Fed

11

State

12

XVC

13

Total

14

Fed

15

State

16

XVC

17

Total

18

Demands

19

1 1,801 0 1,801 592 457 0 457 0 0 221 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,607

2 1,815 0 1,815 581 476 0 476 0 0 191 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,759

3 1,819 0 1,819 591 467 0 467 0 0 167 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,323

4 1,796 0 1,796 577 455 0 455 0 0 165 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,079

5 1,800 0 1,800 592 467 0 467 0 0 125 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 994

6 1,793 0 1,793 592 467 0 467 0 0 147 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,038

7 1,794 0 1,794 583 0 0 0 0 0 153 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,894

8 1,809 0 1,809 582 933 0 933 0 0 186 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,495

9 1,798 0 1,798 586 364 0 364 0 0 201 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,506

10 1,804 0 1,804 584 271 0 271 0 0 205 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,369

11 1,804 0 1,804 592 364 0 364 0 0 185 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,276

12 1,811 0 1,811 590 364 0 364 0 0 226 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,450

13 1,808 0 1,808 595 273 0 273 0 0 172 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,290

14 1,809 0 1,809 578 373 0 373 0 0 162 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,950

15 1,807 0 1,807 580 361 0 361 0 0 176 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,210

16 1,809 0 1,809 574 458 0 458 0 0 180 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,164

17 1,798 0 1,798 565 364 0 364 0 0 180 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,168

18 1,813 0 1,813 587 364 0 364 0 0 158 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,795

19 1,784 0 1,784 572 467 0 467 0 0 127 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 999

20 1,714 0 1,714 576 467 0 467 0 0 130 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,181

21 1,805 0 1,805 588 467 0 467 0 0 186 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,414

22 1,823 0 1,823 577 455 0 455 0 0 186 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,530

23 1,827 0 1,827 579 719 0 719 0 0 204 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,402

24 1,831 0 1,831 594 446 0 446 0 0 191 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,395

25 1,832 0 1,832 791 560 0 560 0 0 188 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,517

26 1,832 0 1,832 772 546 0 546 0 0 162 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,307

27 1,828 0 1,828 782 637 0 637 0 0 145 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,351

28 1,827 0 1,827 0 182 0 182 0 0 183 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,176

29 1,800 0 1,800 0 0 0 0 0 0 153 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,450

30 1,807 0 1,807 592 0 0 0 0 0 98 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,041

Totals 54,198 0 54,198 16,944 12,224 0 12,224 0 0 5,153 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 63,130

Historical Archive and Report Database

Federal-State Operations

June 2022 Run Date: 1/4/2024
Comments: All values in Acre - Feet

Total Banks: Jun 2022 verified with DWR-OCO 8 Page Summary 11-27-2023.

Fed Banks: Jun 2022 verified with DWR-OCO 8 Page Summary 11-27-2023.

Fed Banks XVC: Jun 2022 verified with DWR-OCO 8 Page Summary 11-27-2023.

Jun 2022 verified with SLDMWA EOM Report 09-19-2022.

DCI XVC Pump: Jun 2022 verified with DWR-OCO 8 Page Summary 09-19-2022.

DCI XVC 

Release:

Jun 2022 verified with DWR-OCO 8 Page Summary 09-19-2022.

Jun 2022 verified with DWR-OCO 8 Page Summary 09-19-2022.

Total Tracy: Jun 2022 verified with SLDMWA EOM Report 09-19-2022.

State Tracy: Jun 2022 verified with DWR-OCO 8 Page Summary 09-19-2022.

Historical Archive and Report Database

Federal-State Operations

June 2022 Run Date: 1/4/2024
#### WRIGHT, Appellant, v. ANDERSON, et ux, Respondents.

(253 N. W. 490.)

(File No. 7533.

Opinion filed March 6, 1934.)

*C. E. Noel,*of Highmore, for Appellant.

*Stover & Jaynes,*of Watertown, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order dissolving attachment and is ancillary to the case of Wright, Executrix, v. Anderson, No. 7599, 62 S. D. 444, 253 N. W. 484, this day decided. The opinion in appeal No. 7599 recites the facts fully. Judgment adverse to the plaintiff having been afBrmed in appeal No. 7599, the question presented in the present appeal, to wit, whether or not the court erred in dissolving plaintiff’s attachment, becomes entirely moot, and this appeal is therefore dismissed.

All the Judges concur.
g:\blm\buttermp\ams\FinalFigures\Fig2-17_West_Yell_CTT_Habitat_8511 

BLACKFOOT BASIN

17010203 

Map 

Location 

Butte Field Office Bureau Of Land Management I Planning Area Boundary (BLM) Lands 

HUC Boundary Bureau Of Reclamation

Rivers and Streams (BOR) Lands Sensitive Salmonid Species Habitat Yellowstone Cutthroat Trout Habitat Private Lands 

Westslope Cutthroat Trout Habitat Blackfoot Basin

State of Montana Lands Butte Field Office - EIS 0 Miles 4 Bull Trout Habitat 

No warranty is made by the Bureau of USDA Forest Service Lands RMP Planning Area, Montana Land Management (BLM) for use of USDI Fish and Wildlife FIGURE 2-21b data for purposes not intended by BLM. Service Lands
----

Action brought on 9 September 2005 — MacLean-Fogg/OHIM

(Case T-339/05)

(2005/C 296/60)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant(s): MacLean-Fogg Company (Mundelein, USA) [represented by: H. Eichmann, G. Barth, U. Blumenröder, C. Niklas-Falter, M. Kinkeldey, K. Brandt, A. Franke, U. Stephani, B. Allekotte, E. Bertram, K. Lochner, B. Ertle, C. Neuhierl, S. Prückner, C. Schmitt, B. Mehnert, P. Lübbe, S. Brötje, lawyers]

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

Form of order sought

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘LOKTHREAD’ for goods in class 6 (bolts, bolts of metal, nuts, nuts of metal) — application No 3 440 666

Decision of the examiner: Refusal of the application for all goods

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Council Regulation No 40/94 as the trade mark has to be considered as a whole and not as composed of two English words and thus possesses a minimum degree of distinctiveness.

----