alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential.



# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

LELY PATENT N.V., Appellant

v.

DELAVAL INTERNATIONA L AB, Appellee

______________________

2015

- 1669

______________________

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2013

- 00575.

______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

M ARK L. L ORBIECKI

, Lowe Graham Jones PLLC, Sea ttle, WA, argued for appellant.

A NDREW J. P ATCH , Young & Thompson, Alexandria, VA, argued for appellee. Also represented by J EFFREY M.
G OEHRING

, D OUGLAS V. R IGLER

.

M EREDITH H OPE S CHOENFELD

, Office of the Solicitor,
United St ates Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria, VA, argued for intervenor Miche lle K. Lee. Also repr e-sented by T HOMAS W. K RAUSE

, M ICHAEL S UMNER F ORMAN

, S COTT W EIDENFELLER

.

______________________

T HIS C AUSE having been heard and considered, it is

O RDERED and A DJUDGED :

P ER C URIAM (L OURIE

, W ALLACH

, and S TOLL

, Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED

. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURT

February 8, 2016 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole
Date Daniel E. O’Toole
Clerk of Court
#### 252.225-7030 Restriction on Acquisition of Carbon, Alloy, and Armor Steel Plate.

As prescribed in 225.7011-3, use the following clause:

# Restriction on Acquisition of Carbon, Alloy, and Armor Steel Plate (DEC 2006)

(a) Carbon, alloy, and armor steel plate shall be melted and rolled in the United States or Canada if the carbon, alloy, or armor steel plate—

(1) Is in Federal Supply Class 9515 or is described by specifications of the American Society for Testing Materials or the American Iron and Steel Institute; and

(2)(i) Will be delivered to the Government for use in a Government-owned facility or a facility under the control of the Department of Defense; or

(ii) Will be purchased by the Contractor for use in a Government-owned facility or a facility under the control of the Department of Defense.

(b) This restriction—

(1) Applies to the acquisition of carbon, alloy, or armor steel plate as a finished steel mill product that may be used “as is” or may be used as an intermediate material for the fabrication of an end product; and

(2) Does not apply to the acquisition of an end product (*e.g.*, a machine tool), to be used in the facility, that contains carbon, alloy, or armor steel plate as a component.

(End of clause)

[71 FR 75894, Dec. 19, 2006]
Certified Public Accountants  |  280 Kenneth Drive, Suite 100  | Rochester, New York 14623  | 585.427.8900 | EFPRotenberg.com











CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM




SORL Auto Parts, Inc. and Subsidiaries


Delaware




We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statementon Form S-3 of SORL Auto Parts, Inc. and Subsidiaries of our report dated March 29, 2011 relating to the consolidated financial statements, which appear in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.







/s/ EFP Rotenberg, LLP




EFP Rotenberg, LLP


March 29, 2011
#### Byron G. Segog *vs.*John H. Engle.

April 25, 1890.

Garnishment — Excessive Judgment by Default — Bemedy of Garnishee. If a garnishee suffers judgment to go against him upon default of his appearance, his remedy must be taken in the same proceeding. If it turns out that the judgment is in excess of the amount due from him to the principal debtor, he cannot, after satisfying the judgment, seek indemnity from the latter in a suit against him.

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the municipal court of Duluth, sustaining a demurrer to the complaint in an action for $111.68.

*Sherwood & Powell,*for appellant.

*Mahon & Howard,*for respondent.

Vanderburgh, J.

In an action against this defendant, the plaintiff was summoned as a garnishee, and judgment was thereafter duly *192recovered against him upon default of his appearance to make disclosure, which judgment he was thereupon compelled to pay; and he now brings this action to recover the amount thereof of the defendant as money paid out for him, on the ground that he did not, as he alleges, in fact owe the defendant anything when the judgment was recovered against him as such garnishee. The action cannot be maintained. The plaintiff’s remedy was exclusively in the proceeding in which the judgment was rendered. He is as effectually concluded by the judgment, as respects the question of his indebtedness to the defendant, as if it had been taken upon his confession or admission, upon full disclosure, of the fact of such indebtedness. It was his *own*act or negligence, for which the defendant is not responsible, and there is no implied obligation on his part to indemnify the plaintiff garnishee. The judgment remaining in full force, under the circumstances of the case, the plaintiff, in legal contemplation, simply satisfied his own debt, established on his own admission.

Order affirmed.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jocic Slobodan, Appellant.

— Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, rendered January 27, 1977, convicting defendant, after jury trial, of robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree, and grand larceny in the second degree, and sentencing him thereon to terms of imprisonment, respectively, of *8 Vs*to 25, 5 to 15 and *2 Vs*to 7 years to run concurrently, is unanimously modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, so as to reduce the sentences on the robbery counts to terms of imprisonment with a maximum of 10 years and that no minimum be fixed by the court, and to strike the provision for a minimum period of imprisonment from the sentence on the count of grand larceny in the second degree, and the judgment is otherwise affirmed. The three other participants in this crime pleaded guilty to lesser charges and received sentences of five years’ probation, and imprisonment not to exceed three years (for the accomplice who cut the victim). We recognize that there is nothing improper about the fact that participants in a crime who plead guilty to lesser offenses may receive substantially more lenient sentences than those who go to trial and are convicted of more serious offenses. But in the present case the disparity is so great as to raise serious questions as to whether appellant is not being penalized for going to trial, even allowing for possible differences among the participants with respect to previous conflicts with the law. Considered independently of the sentences imposed on his accomplices, the sentences imposed on appellant — in each case the maximum permitted by statute— appear excessive in the light of his participation in the crime and previous history and the nature and circumstances of the crime. Appellant deserves appropriately severe but not grossly disparate punishment. We have considered the other points raised on the appeal and do not think they warrant reversal. Concur — Lupiano, J. P., Silverman, Fein, Sandler and Sullivan, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                                         <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  6-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998             JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                          46,000               3,423,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   33,000                 102,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               927,000               3,587,000
<PP&E>                                      25,094,000              19,935,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                   9,000                   3,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              26,312,000              23,519,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,434,000                 231,000
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                  4,550,000               4,500,000
<COMMON>                                     5,121,000               4,971,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  14,997,000              13,607,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                26,312,000              23,519,000
<SALES>                                              0                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               450,000                 162,000
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,636,000                 743,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               690,000                 289,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              63,000                 130,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,939,000)             (1,000,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,939,000)             (1,000,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,939,000)             (1,000,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (.038)                  (.025)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (.038)                  (.025)
        





</TABLE>
IIA 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 45 

Condemning the deadly attack on May 26, 2017, in Portland, Oregon, expressing deepest condolences to the families and friends of the victims, 

and supporting efforts to overcome hatred, bigotry, and violence. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 8, 2017 

Mr. WYDEN (for himself and Mr. MERKLEY) introduced the following joint 

resolution; which was read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Condemning the deadly attack on May 26, 2017, in Portland, 

Oregon, expressing deepest condolences to the families 

and friends of the victims, and supporting efforts to 

overcome hatred, bigotry, and violence. 

Whereas, on May 26, 2017, 3 brave community members— 

Rick Best, Taliesin Myrddin Namkai-Meche, and Micah 

David-Cole Fletcher—were stabbed as they protected 2 

young women who were the targets of threatening antiMuslim hate speech while riding on the Metropolitan 

Area Express Light Rail (commonly known as the 

‘‘MAX’’) in Portland, Oregon; 

Whereas Rick Best and Taliesin Myrddin Namkai-Meche lost 

their lives and Micah David-Cole Fletcher was gravely injured as a result of the attack; 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•SJ 45 CPS 

Whereas acts of heroism and sacrifice for the safety and sake 

of others in the face of acts of domestic terrorism were 

demonstrated by the deceased and surviving victims; 

Whereas Oregonians and people across the United States 

grieve for the families of all people affected by this needless tragedy; and 

Whereas the people of the United States stand in solidarity 

against terrorism, white supremacy, hate, and intolerance: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 That Congress— 

4 (1) condemns the deadly attack on May 26, 

5 2017, in Portland, Oregon, in which 2 innocent peo6 ple were killed and 1 other person was injured while 

7 standing up to hate and intolerance; 

8 (2) offers deepest condolences to the families 

9 and friends of Rick Best and Taliesin Myrddin 

10 Namkai-Meche; 

11 (3) expresses hope for the swift and complete 

12 recovery of Micah David-Cole Fletcher; 

13 (4) supports community efforts to heal from 

14 this terrible crime; and 

15 (5) supports nationwide efforts to overcome ha16 tred, bigotry, and violence. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
C O N F I D E N T I A LC O N F I D E N T I A LC O N F I D E N T I A LC O N F I D E N T I A LC O N F I D E N T I A LC O N F I D E N T I A LC O N F I D E N T I A LC O N F I D E N T I A LC O N F I D E N T I A LC O N F I D E N T I A L
#### 252.228-7005 Mishap Reporting and Investigation Involving Aircraft, Missiles, and Space Launch Vehicles.

As prescribed in 228.371(d), use the following clause:

# Mishap Reporting and Investigation Involving Aircraft, Missiles, and Space Launch Vehicles (NOV 2019)

(a) The Contractor shall report promptly to the Administrative Contracting Officer all pertinent facts relating to each mishap involving an aircraft, missile, or space launch vehicle being manufactured, modified, repaired, or overhauled in connection with this contract.

(b) If the Government conducts an investigation of the mishap, the Contractor shall cooperate and assist the Government's personnel until the investigation is complete.

(c) The Contractor shall include a clause in subcontracts under this contract to require subcontractor cooperation and assistance in mishap investigations.

(End of clause)

[56 FR 36479, July 31, 1991, as amended at 75 FR 32647, June 8, 2010, 84 FR 65312, Nov. 27, 2019; 88 FR 17354, Mar. 22, 2023]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
<CIK> 0000714560
<NAME> US AIRWAYS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                       1,091,540
<SECURITIES>                                   870,205
<RECEIVABLES>                                  491,052<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0<F1>
<INVENTORY>                                    200,494
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,934,980
<PP&E>                                       5,889,277
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,428,948
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,265,500
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,131,149<F3>
<BONDS>                                      2,424,954
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,101,766
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,265,500
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             8,501,485
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,915,335
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             260,029
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                673,229
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (378,930)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,052,159
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,052,159
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0<F2>
<FN>
<F1>Receivables are presented net of allowances.
<F2>EPS calculations are not relevant because US Airways, Inc. is a wholly-owned
subsidiary of US Airways Group, Inc.
<F3>This amount was restated to conform with current classifications.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

April 28, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
135889 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. TIMOTHY M. McCOY and ROBIN LaBARGE Stephen J. Markman, McCOY, Justices Plaintiffs-Appellees,

v SC: 135889 COA: 272440 Sanilac CC: 04-030064-CK LAMOTTE COACHLIGHT CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellant, and

SCHULT HOMES CORPORATION, Defendant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 6, 2007 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

t0421 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

April 28, 2008

Clerk
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

GERARDO ARANDA, GRANT )

BIRCHMEIER, STEPEHN PARKES, and )

REGINA STONE, ON behalf of themselves )

and classes of others similarly situated, ) Case No. 12-cv-4069

)

Plaintiffs, ) Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly

)

v. )

)

CARIBBEAN CRUISE LINE, INC., )

ECONOMIC STRATEGY GROUP, )

ECONOMIC STRATEGY GROUP, INC., )

ECONOMIC STRATEGY, LLC, )

THE BERKLEY GROUP, INC. AND ) 

VACATION OWNERSHIP MARKETING )

TOURS, INC., )

)

Defendants. )

_________________________________________ )

THE BERKLEY GROUP, INC.’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

NOW COMES Defendant The Berkley Group, Inc. (“Berkley”), pursuant to Rule 12(c) 

of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, by and through its attorneys, and moves this Court for 

entry of judgment on the pleadings in favor of Berkley. In support of this Motion for Judgment 

on the Pleadings, Berkley incorporates its accompanying Memorandum.

WHEREFORE, Berkley respectfully prays that this Court grant Berkley’s Motion for 

Judgment on the Pleadings, award Berkley its costs, and enter whatever further relief this Court 

deems just and appropriate. 
2

Dated this the 12th day of June. 2015.

THE BERKLEY GROUP, INC.

 By: /s/Brian P. O’Meara

One of its Attorneys 

M. Peebles Harrison (Pro Hac Vice)

700 Blue Jay Street, Suite 1

Post Office Box 405

Kill Devil Hills, North Carolina 27948

Telephone: (252) 480-1414

Facsimile: (252) 480-1765

Email: peebles@outerbankslaw.com

Brian P. O'Meara

Forde Law Offices LLP

111 West Washington Street

Suite 1100

Chicago IL 60602

Telephone: (312) 465-4780

Facsimile: (312) 641-1288

Email: bomeara@fordellp.com

Attorneys for The Berkley Group, Inc.
3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned, an attorney, states that the foregoing THE BERKLEY GROUP, INC.’S 

MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS was electronically filed with the Clerk of 

Court by using the CM/ECF system, which will provide copies to all counsel of record registered 

to receive CM/ECF notification on this 12th day of June 2015.

/s/Brian P. O’Meara
#### 2409.507 Solicitation provisions and contract clause.
BCAeronautics Training Manual

NOTES:

Dual flight controls will be utilized when possible.

Compliance with the NPRM regarding sUASs makes this a dynamic document.

As of MAY2015, necessary certifications include, at least but not limited to, sport pilot and 

current third class medical or valid US driver’s license.

Training scenarios must be dedicated as such and progress to Initial Operating Experience.

PROCEDURES:

Preflight:

Inspect sUAS, flight controller, batteries for damage in regards to go/no go functionality.

Take care to visually and physically inspect airfoils for corruption.

Environmental/Situational Awareness:

Identify obstacles at the surface (lateral visual inspection 360o)

Identify obstacles at 20ft AGL, 50ft AGL, 75-150ft AGL (laterally and horizontally 360o)

ALWAYS SET RTHfunction altitude with regard to environment.

PIC (trainer) and VO commence airborne traffic scanning (all flight levels/all directions).

Secure ground station with regards to non-participants and impediments to focused 

control of sUAS

Flight Procedures:

Takeoff in concordance with DJI flight manuals.

Maintain no less than 10ft laterally from ground station and 7ft AGL vertically and 

initiate hover in place> check for flight stability> execute left and right 360 separately and check

for control response and stability> execute descent then ascent (do not exceed 12ft AGL) check 

for control response and stability.

*In the event of loss of control or instability initiate Return to Home Function then manually 

execute hard landing with immediate landing as the prime objective.

After stable and responsive flight has been verified in accordance with DJI Ops MANUALs:

>execute maneuvers required for data acquisition (predetermined) at 20-400ft AGL in ascending 

order by altitude (increments shall increase exponentially)
Attention should be directed to maintaining VLOS (reliance on camera system not approved).

Practice evasive descent maneuvers for airborne traffic. Practice evasive lateral maneuvers for 

fixed/ground obstacles. Ascents for the purpose of avoiding traffic are not approved. Ascents for 

the purpose of avoiding fixed/ground based obstacles should be secondary to lateral movements.

Attention to battery limit and teamwork with VO should be gradually increased.

After predetermined training maneuvers have been executed> begin controlled descent> utilize 

reverse of takeoff procedure regarding obstacles> utilize RTHfunction as necessary (only allow 

automated landing as a last resort)

Identify flat surface (takeoff location preferable) for smooth controlled landing in accordance 

with DJI OPs MANUAL.

Post Flight

Review all portions of flight then check mission data for specific information and address 

deviations from planned activity and DJI OPs MANUAL.

Log flight time 

100 flight cycles and 25 operational hours are suggested for certification along with any and all 

regulatory changes in the NPRM.
Wegener Corporation and
subsidiary




EXHIBIT
23.2





CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





Wegener
Corporation


Johns
Creek, Georgia





We hereby
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form
S-3 (No. 333-08017 and 333-27527) and Form S-8 (No. 33-45390, 33-42007,
333-29887, 333-51205 and 333-29889) of Wegener Corporation of our reports dated
November 25, 2009, relating to the consolidated financial statements and
financial statement schedule which appear in this Form 10-K. Our report relating
to the consolidated financial statements contains an explanatory paragraph
regarding the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern.





Atlanta,
      Georgia
            BDO
      USA, LLP (formerly known as BDO Seidman, LLP).November
      15, 2010