alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2019120EN.01000401.xml

| 8.5.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 120/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.5.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 120/4

---

COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2019/704

of 15 April 2019

on the conclusion, on behalf of the Union and its Member States, of a Protocol amending the Agreement on Air Transport between Canada and the European Community and its Member States, to take account of the accession to the European Union of the Republic of Croatia

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 100(2), in conjunction with Article 218(6)(a) thereof,

Having regard to the Act of Accession of Croatia, and in particular the second subparagraph of Article 6(2) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,

Having regard to the consent of the European Parliament (1),

Whereas:

| (1) | In accordance with Council Decision (EU) 2019/703 (2), the Protocol amending the Agreement on Air Transport between Canada and the European Community and its Member States (3), to take account of the accession to the European Union of the Republic of Croatia (‘the Protocol’) has been signed, subject to its conclusion. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

In accordance with Council Decision (EU) 2019/703 (2), the Protocol amending the Agreement on Air Transport between Canada and the European Community and its Member States (3), to take account of the accession to the European Union of the Republic of Croatia (‘the Protocol’) has been signed, subject to its conclusion.

| (2) | The Protocol should be approved, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The Protocol should be approved,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The Protocol amending the Agreement on Air Transport between Canada and the European Community and its Member States, to take account of the accession to the European Union of the Republic of Croatia is hereby approved on behalf of the Union and its Member States.

The text of the Protocol is attached to this Decision.

Article 2

The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the person(s) empowered to deposit, on behalf of the Union and its Member States, the instrument of approval provided for in Article 3 of the Protocol (4).

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

Done at Luxembourg, 15 April 2019.

For the Council

The President

P. DAEA

---

(1)  Consent of 12 September 2018 (not yet published in the Official Journal).

1

(2)  Council Decision (EU) 2019/703 of 8 October 2014 on the signing, on behalf of the Union and its Member States, of a Protocol amending the Agreement on Air Transport between Canada and the European Community and its Member States, to take account of the accession to the European Union of the Republic of Croatia (see page 3 of this Official Journal).

2

(3)  The text of the Agreement is published in OJ L 207, 6.8.2010, p. 32.

3

(4)  The date of entry into force of the Protocol will be published in the Official Journal of the European Union by the General Secretariat of the Council.

4

Official Journal of the European Union

---
# C_2015414EN.01002901.xml

| 14.12.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 414/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.12.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 414/29

---

Judgment of the General Court of 23 October 2015 — I Castellani v OHIM — Chomarat (Representation of a circle)

(Case T-137/14) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Revocation procedure - Figurative mark representing a circle - Genuine use of a mark - Extent of use - Article 15(1)(a) and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Shape which differs by elements which do not alter the distinctive character of the mark - Rights of the defence - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2015/C 414/37)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: I Castellani Srl (Meldola, Italy) (represented by: M. Caramelli, F. Boscariol de Roberto, I. Gatto and D. Martucci, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: M. Rajh and A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Compagnie Chomarat (Paris, France)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 13 December 2013 (Case R 1001/2012-2), relating to revocation proceedings between Compagnie Chomarat and I Castellani Srl.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders I Castellani Srl to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders I Castellani Srl to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 135, 5.5.2014.

1

---
<PAGE>

                      ACCESS SOLUTIONS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
                                650 TENROD ROAD
                           NORTH KINGSTOWN, RI 02852



March 31, 1997


PaperClip Software, Inc.
Three University Plaza
Hackensack, NJ   07601
Attn: William Weiss,
      Chief Executive Officer

      Re: Letter of Intent dated January 2, 1997 ("Letter of Intent")
          -----------------------------------------------------------

Dear Bill:

      This letter confirms our mutual agreement that each time the "January 31,
1997" date appears in Paragraph 9 of the Letter of Intent, such date shall be
replaced with "April 11, 1997."

      Please acknowledge your agreement by executing this letter where
indicated below.

Very truly yours,

By  Robert H. Stone, President and CEO

  /s/ Robert H. Stone
-----------------------------

ACCESS SOLUTIONS INTERNATIONAL, INC.


AGREED AND ACCEPTED:


/s/ William Weiss
-----------------------------

By: William Weiss, CEO

PAPERCLIP SOFTWARE, INC.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

September 4, 2012

d0827

Order 

September 4, 2012

144877

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 144877

COA: 301482

Wayne CC: 10-000967-FH

RICHARD LEE CURRIE,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 23, 2012 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
§ 522.1338 Medetomidine and vatinoxan. ( a ) *Specifications.* Each milliliter of solution contains 0.5 milligrams (mg) medetomidine hydrochloride and 10 mg vatinoxan hydrochloride.
( b ) *Sponsor.* See No. 043264 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter.
( c ) *Conditions of use* — ( 1 ) *Amount.* Administer by intramuscular injection a dose based on body surface area (BSA). Calculate the dose using 1 mg medetomidine per square meter (/m2) BSA or use the dosing table provided in labeling.
( 2 ) *Indications for use.* For use as a sedative and analgesic in dogs to facilitate clinical examination, clinical procedures, and minor surgical procedures.
( 3 ) *Limitations.* Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.
[87 FR 58962, Sept. 29, 2022, as amended at 87 FR 76421, Dec. 14, 2022]
#### § 211.52 Washing and toilet facilities.

Adequate washing facilities shall be provided, including hot and cold water, soap or detergent, air driers or single-service towels, and clean toilet facilities easily accesible to working areas.
In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-19-00077-CV

IN RE O.W. LOYD, II

On Appeal from the 402nd District Court

Wood County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2019-307

Before Morriss, C.J., Burgess and Stevens, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Stevens
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

O.W. Loyd, II, has attempted to appeal from a May 30, 2019, order holding him in civil 

contempt of the 402nd Judicial District Court of Wood County. The issue before this Court is 

whether we have jurisdiction to hear the appeal. We conclude that we do not and dismiss the 

appeal for want of jurisdiction.

“An order holding a person in contempt is not one from which [a direct] appeal may be 

brought.” Monasco v. Gilmer Boating & Fishing Club, No. 06-11-00132-CV, 2012 WL 524472, 

at *1 (Tex. App.—Texarkana Feb. 1, 2012, no pet.) (mem. op.) (citing Ex parte Cardwell, 416 

S.W.2d 382, 384 (Tex. 1967); Pandozy v. Beaty, 254 S.W.3d 613, 616 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 

2008, no pet.) (citing Ex parte Williams, 690 S.W.2d 243 (Tex. 1985))). Consequently, it appears 

that we are without jurisdiction over this appeal.

By letter dated August 22, 2019, we informed Loyd of this potential defect in our 

jurisdiction and afforded him the opportunity to demonstrate proper grounds for our retention of 

the appeal. Loyd did not file a response to our letter. 

In light of the foregoing, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

Scott E. Stevens

Justice

Date Submitted: September 11, 2019

Date Decided: September 12, 2019
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7508 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7508

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
   at 1285 Emancipation Highway in Fredericksburg, Virginia, as the 
                    ``Gladys P. Todd Post Office''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 29, 2024

 Ms. Spanberger (for herself, Mr. Connolly, Ms. McClellan, Ms. Wexton, 
  and Mr. Scott of Virginia) introduced the following bill; which was 
       referred to the Committee on Oversight and Accountability

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
   at 1285 Emancipation Highway in Fredericksburg, Virginia, as the 
                    ``Gladys P. Todd Post Office''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. GLADYS P. TODD POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 1285 Emancipation Highway in Fredericksburg, Virginia, shall 
be known and designated as the ``Gladys P. Todd Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Gladys P. 
Todd Post Office''.
                                 <all>
```
#### Anita H. Hartmann, Administratrix (Estate of William Wordie) *v.*Richard J. Smith et al., Trustees of the Property of the New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad Company

King, C. .L, Alcorn, House, Thim and Ryan, Js.

Argued May 8

decided May 13, 1969

*Arthur Levy, Jr.,*with whom, on the brief, was *Irwin E. Friedman,*for the appellant (plaintiff).

*Joseph P. Cooney,*with whom, on the brief, were *John D. McHugh*and *David T. Ryan,*for the appellees (defendants).

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff, on appeal to this court, claimed for the first time that the defendants’ motion for summary judgment should not have been granted because the defendants had not filed an answer to her complaint. Practice Book § 298. Because the question was not raised in or decided by the trial court, we decline to consider it. Practice Book §§ 223, 652.

The plaintiff’s counter affidavit in opposition to the motion for summary judgment presented no genuine issue of fact as to whether the decedent, *614whose body was found on the tracks of the New Haven Bailroad, had been a passenger on the defendants’ train or as to how he met his death. It is not enough that one opposing a motion for a summary judgment claims there is a genuine issue of material fact; some evidence showing the existence of such an issue must be presented in the counter affidavit. Practice Book §§ 299, 300; *Boyce*v. *Merchants Fire Ins. Co.,*204 F. Sup. 311, 314 (D. Conn.); *Kasowitz*v. *Mutual Construction Co.,*154 Conn. 607, 613, 228 A.2d 149. The court therefore properly granted the motion for summary judgment.

There is no error.
# C_2016016EN.01005201.xml

| 18.1.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 16/52 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.1.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 16/52

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (2nd Chamber) of 19 November 2015 — Marcuccio v Commission

(Case F-33/14)

((Exclusion from the proceedings of a party’s representative - No new representative appointed - Applicant ceasing the answer the Tribunal’s requests - No need to adjudicate))

(2016/C 016/61)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Luigi Marcuccio (Tricase, Italy) (represented by: Z, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision rejecting the request of 20 January 2013 for payment of the sum of EUR 700 000 in respect of compensation for the material and non-material harm allegedly incurred as a result of the decision to reassign the applicant to Brussels.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no further need to adjudicate on the action in Case F-33/14 Marcuccio v Commission. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no further need to adjudicate on the action in Case F-33/14 Marcuccio v Commission.

| 2. | Mr Marcuccio shall bear his own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mr Marcuccio shall bear his own costs.

---
First Amendment to 2012 Equity Incentive Plan



 Exhibit 4.2 

FIRST AMENDMENT TO 

AMENDED AND RESTATED 

ORAGENICS, INC. 
 2012
EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN 
 This First Amendment to the Amended and Restated 2012 Equity Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) is made
pursuant to Section 12 of the Plan. 
 Recitals: 

WHEREAS, the Plan was originally adopted by the Company on August 6, 2012 and approved by the shareholders on October 23,
2012; and 
 WHEREAS, the Board of Directors believes it would be in the best interest of the Company and its shareholders to
increase the authorized shares available under the Plan. 
 NOW THEREFORE, Section 4 titled “SHARES SUBJECT TO PLAN”
is hereby amended as follows: 
 The reference to “4,000,000” is replaced with “5,500,000”, to reflect an increase in
the shares reserved for use under the Plan. 
 All other terms and conditions of the Plan not otherwise modified hereby shall remain in full
force and effect. The Amendment was approved by the Board of Directors on May 16, 2017 and submitted to the Company’s shareholders for approval in connection with the Company’s May 4, 2017 Annual Meeting.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference in this registration statement on Form S-8 of our report dated January
20, 1998 included in Frontier Financial Corporation's Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 1997.



/s/ MOSS ADAMS LLP

Everett, Washington
March 26, 1998
# C_2015171EN.01000602.xml

| 26.5.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 171/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.5.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 171/6

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny (Poland), lodged on 5 June 2014 — Jednostka Innowacyjno-Wdrożeniowa Petrol S.C. Paczuski Maciej i Puławski Ryszard v Minister Finansów

(Case C-275/14)

(2015/C 171/09)

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Referring court

Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Jednostka Innowacyjno-Wdrożeniowa Petrol S.C. Paczuski Maciej i Puławski Ryszard

Applicant:

Defendant: Minister Finansów

Defendant:

By order of 5 February 2015, the Court held that the second subparagraph of Article 2(3) of Council Directive 2003/96/EC of 27 October 2003 restructuring the Community framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity (1) must be construed as precluding national provisions, such as those in issue in the main proceedings, which impose excise duty on additives coming under heading 3811 of the Combined Nomenclature set out in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1031/2008 of 19 September 2008, at a rate which differs from that applied to the fuel to which they are added.

1

The second subparagraph of Article 2(3) of Directive 2003/96 must be interpreted as meaning that it may be relied on by an individual as against the competent national authority in the context of proceedings before a national court which seek to have set aside the application of national legal rules which are at variance with that provision.

---

(1)  OJ 2003 L 283, p. 51.

1

---
Exhibit 10.3
 (EXIDE LOGO)Exide Technologies13000 Deerfield ParkwayBldg. 200Milton, GA 30004Telephone: 678.566.9000www.Exide.com
     $950,000 $760,000 $1,900,000




---



##### 



Indicator
    
    Threshold Goal
    
    Target Goal
    
    Maximum GoalAdjusted EBITDA
    
    $
    179,266,000
    
    
    $
    239,021,000
    
    
    $
    310,727,000Adjusted EPS
    
    $
    0.435
    
    
    $
    0.58
    
    
    $
    0.754




---



##### 



provided however
  
 /s/
George
S. Jones Jr.
  /s/ Gordon A. Ulsh




---



##### 



EXIDE TECHNOLOGIES
2004 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN
 Exhibit A
 Designation of Beneficiary
 Award Agreement Company Recipient
 Name of Beneficiary:Address:Social Security No.:
   By:
    /s/ Gordon UlshGordon Ulsh
# C_2015073EN.01001002.xml

| 2.3.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 73/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.3.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 73/10

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Rüsselsheim (Germany) lodged on 27 November 2014 — Catherine Gimmig v Condor Flugdienst GmbH

(Case C-544/14)

(2015/C 073/15)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Amtsgericht Rüsselsheim

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Catherine Gimmig

Defendant: Condor Flugdienst GmbH

This Case was removed from the Register of the Court by Order of the Court of 10 January 2015.

---
§ 573.480 Formic acid. The food additive, formic acid, may be safely used in accordance with the following conditions: ( a ) The additive is used as a preservative in hay crop silage in an amount not to exceed 2.25 percent of the silage on a dry weight basis or 0.45 percent when direct cut, as follows: ( 1 ) The top foot of silage stored should not contain formic acid and
( 2 ) Silage should not be fed to livestock within 4 weeks of treatment.
( b ) The additive is used or intended for use as a feed acidifying agent, to lower the pH, in complete feed for swine and poultry at levels not to exceed 1.2 percent of the complete feed. ( 1 ) The additive consists of not less than 85 percent formic acid (CAS 64-18-6).
( 2 ) The additive meets the following specifications: ( i ) Free methyl alcohol not to exceed 1,000 parts per million (ppm);
( ii ) Methyl formate not to exceed 1,000 ppm; and
( iii ) Moisture not to exceed 15 percent.
( 3 ) To ensure safe use of the additive, formic acid and formate salts from all added sources cannot exceed 1.2 percent of complete feed when multiple sources of formic acid and its salts are used in combination.
( 4 ) To assure safe use of the additive, in addition to the other information required by the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, the label and labeling shall contain: ( i ) The name of the additive.
( ii ) Adequate directions for use including a statement that formic acid must be uniformly applied and thoroughly mixed into complete feeds and that the complete feeds so treated shall be labeled as containing formic acid.
( iii ) Cautions for use including this statement: Caution: Follow label directions. Formic acid and formate salts from all added sources cannot exceed 1.2 percent of complete feed when multiple sources of formic acid and its salts are used in combination.
( 5 ) To ensure safe use of the additive, in addition to the other information required by the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and paragraph (b)(4) of this section, the label and labeling shall contain: ( i ) Appropriate warnings and safety precautions concerning formic acid (85 percent formic acid).
( ii ) Statements identifying formic acid (85 percent formic acid) as a corrosive and possible severe irritant.
( iii ) Information about emergency aid in case of accidental exposure. ( A ) Statements reflecting requirements of applicable sections of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA) human safety guidance regulations.
( B ) Contact address and telephone number for reporting adverse reactions or to request a copy of the Safety Data Sheet (SDS).
[76 FR 7106, Feb. 9, 2011, as amended at 82 FR 52209, Nov. 13, 2017; 83 FR 20, Jan. 2, 2018; 83 FR 66618, Dec. 27, 2018]
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

P.J

- P

. , a child

, Appellant,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES
,

Appellee

.

No. 4D 15

- 1191

[ July 29, 2015 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm

Beach County ; Rosemarie Scher , Judge; L.T. Case No.

2015DP300097XXXXMB

.

Jan Peter Weiss of Law Offices of Jan Peter Weiss, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Rosemarie Farrell, Orlando, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed

. See O.I.C.L. v. Dep ’t of Children & Families

, 2015 WL 4461164 (Fla. 4 th DCA July 22, 2015).

W ARNER
, M AY and K LINGENSMITH

, JJ., concur

.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.