alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2016326EN.01002201.xml

| 5.9.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 326/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.9.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 326/22

---

Judgment of the General Court of 20 July 2016 — TeamBank v EUIPO — Easy Asset Management (e@sy Credit)

(Case T-745/14) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark e@sy Credit - Earlier national figurative mark EasyCredit - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 326/40)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: TeamBank AG Nürnberg (Nuremberg, Germany) (represented by: H. Lindner, D. Terheggen and T. Kiphuth, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented initially by: P. Geroulakos, and subsequently by: D. Gája, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO and intervener before the General Court: Easy Asset Management AD (Sofia, Bulgaria) (represented by: M. Georgieva-Tabakova and H. Raychev, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO and intervener before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 September 2014 (Case R 1975/2013-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between Easy Asset Management AD and TeamBank AG Nürnberg.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders TeamBank AG Nürnberg to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders TeamBank AG Nürnberg to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 7, 12.1.2015.

1

---
# C_2015294EN.01006301.xml

| 7.9.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 294/63 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.9.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 294/63

---

Order of the General Court of 9 June 2015 — Drahtwerk St. Ingbert and Others v Commission

(Case T-275/14) (1)

1

((State aid - Measures adopted by Germany in favour of electricity generated from renewable energy sources and of energy-intensive undertakings - Decision to open the procedure under Article 108(2) TFEU - Adoption of the final decision after the action was brought - No need to adjudicate))

(2015/C 294/76)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Drahtwerk St. Ingbert GmbH (Sankt Ingbert, Germany); DWK Drahtwerk Köln GmbH (Cologne, Germany); Kalksteingrube Auersmacher GmbH (Völklingen, Germany); Rogesa Roheisengesellschaft Saar mbH (Dillingen, Germany); Stahlguss Saar GmbH (Sankt Ingbert); and Zentralkokerei Saar GmbH (Dillingen) (represented by: S. Altenschmidt and H. Janssen, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Maxian Rusche and R. Sauer, acting as Agents, and by A. Luke and C. Maurer, lawyers)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application to annul in part Commission decision C (2013) 4424 final of 18 December 2013 to open the procedure under Article 108(2) TFEU regarding measures implemented by the Federal Republic of Germany in favour of renewable electricity and of energy-intensive users (State aid SA.33995 (2013/C) (ex 2013/NN)).

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the present action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the present action.

| 2. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the application for intervention submitted by the EFTA Surveillance Authority. |
| --- | --- |

2.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the application for intervention submitted by the EFTA Surveillance Authority.

| 3. | Drahtwerk St. lngbert GmbH, DWK Drahtwerk Köln GmbH, Kalksteingrube Auersmacher GmbH, Rogesa Roheisengesellschaft Saar mbH, Stahlguss Saar GmbH and Zentralkokerei Saar GmbH shall bear their own costs and those incurred by the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Drahtwerk St. lngbert GmbH, DWK Drahtwerk Köln GmbH, Kalksteingrube Auersmacher GmbH, Rogesa Roheisengesellschaft Saar mbH, Stahlguss Saar GmbH and Zentralkokerei Saar GmbH shall bear their own costs and those incurred by the European Commission.

| 4. | The EFTA Surveillance Authority shall bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

4.

The EFTA Surveillance Authority shall bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 223, 14.7.2014.

1

---
# C_2015398EN.01004101.xml

| 30.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 398/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.11.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 398/41

---

Judgment of the General Court of 7 October 2015 — Zentralverband des Deutschen Bäckerhandwerks vCommission

(Case T-49/14) (1)

1

((Protected geographical indication - ‘Kołocz śląski’ or ‘Kołacz śląski’ - Cancellation proceedings - Legal base - Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 - Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 - Grounds for cancellation - Fundamental rights)

(2015/C 398/51)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Zentralverband des Deutschen Bäckerhandwerks eV (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: I. Jung, M. Teworte-Vey, A. Renvert and J. Saatkamp, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Guillem Carrau and D. Triantafyllou, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action for the annulment of Commission Implementing Decision of 14 November 2013 concerning the rejection of a request to cancel a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications provided for in Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Kołocz śląski/kołacz śląski (PGI)) (OJ 2013 L 306, p. 40).

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1) | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1)

Dismisses the action;

| 2) | Orders Zentralverband des Deutschen Bäckerhandwerks eV to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2)

Orders Zentralverband des Deutschen Bäckerhandwerks eV to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 112, 14.4.2014.

1

---
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7769 

To amend the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 to reauthorize the 

Commission on Farm Transitions-Needs for 2050, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 21, 2024 

Ms. CARAVEO (for herself, Mr. KELLY of Mississippi, Mr. DAVIS of North 

Carolina, and Mr. NUNN of Iowa) introduced the following bill; which was 

referred to the Committee on Agriculture 

A BILL 

To amend the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 to reauthorize the Commission on Farm Transitions-Needs for 

2050, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Farm Transitions Act 

5 of 2024’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7769 IH

1 SEC. 2. COMMISSION ON FARM TRANSITIONS—NEEDS FOR 

2 2050. 

3 Section 12609 of the Agriculture Improvement Act 

4 of 2018 (Public Law 115–334; 132 Stat. 5009) is amend5 ed— 

6 (1) in subsection (a), by striking ‘‘There is es7 tablished’’ and inserting ‘‘Not later than 60 days 

8 after the date of the enactment of the Farm Transi9 tions Act of 2024, the Secretary shall establish’’; 

10 (2) in subsection (b)— 

11 (A) in the subsection heading, by inserting 

12 ‘‘AND RECOMMENDATIONS’’ after ‘‘STUDY’’; 

13 (B) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), 

14 by inserting ‘‘, and make recommendations re15 lating to,’’ after ‘‘study on’’; 

16 (C) in paragraph (1)— 

17 (i) in subparagraph (B), by inserting 

18 ‘‘and timely’’ after ‘‘affordable’’; and 

19 (ii) by striking subparagraph (D) and 

20 inserting the following: 

21 ‘‘(D) apprenticeships, mentoring programs, 

22 business training, and technical assistance pro23 grams;’’. 

24 (D) in paragraph (3)— 

25 (i) in the matter preceding subpara26 graph (A), by striking ‘‘existing and new 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 7769 IH

1 Federal tax policies’’ and inserting ‘‘exist2 ing and new State and Federal policies, in3 cluding tax policies’’; and 

4 (ii) in subparagraph (A), by inserting 

5 ‘‘or impede’’ after ‘‘facilitate’’; 

6 (E) in paragraph (4), by striking ‘‘and’’ at 

7 the end; 

8 (F) in paragraph (5), by striking the pe9 riod at the end and inserting a semicolon; and 

10 (G) by adding at the end the following: 

11 ‘‘(6) heirs’ property and succession of agricul12 tural land; 

13 ‘‘(7) any unique barriers faced by historically 

14 underserved and women farmers and ranchers in the 

15 ability to transfer, inherit, or purchase agricultural 

16 assets, including land; and 

17 ‘‘(8) leasing and ownership trends, including 

18 leasing and ownership trends by foreign persons or 

19 entities.’’; 

20 (3) in subsection (f), by striking ‘‘1 year after 

21 the date of enactment of this Act’’ and inserting ‘‘2 

22 years after the date of enactment of the Farm Tran23 sitions Act of 2024’’; and 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
4 

•HR 7769 IH

1 (4) in subsection (m), by striking ‘‘2023’’ and 

2 inserting ‘‘2028’’. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 32.2

                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 Avitar,  Inc.  (the  "Company") on
Form10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, Jay C.  Leatherman,
Jr.,  Chief  Financial  Officer of the  Company  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of
2002, to my knowledge, that:

     (1) The Report  fully  complies  with the  requirements  of  Section  13(a)
or15(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: May 17, 2004

                                         /s/ Jay C. Leatherman, Jr.
                                         -------------------------
                                         Jay C. Leatherman, Jr.
                                         Chief Financial Officer (Principal
                                         Financial and Accounting Officer),
                                         Secretary
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT MEMORANDUM

To: Public Information (MS 5030)

Plans Section, Office of Field Operations (MS 5231) Public Information copy of Exploration Plan Control # - N-09570 Type - Initial Exploration Plan Lease(s) - OCS-G07957 Block - 762 Mississippi Canyon Area OCS-G07962 Block - 762 Mississippi Canyon Area OCS-G07962 Block - 806 Mississippi Canyon Area OCS-G24112 Block - 805 Mississippi Canyon Area Operator - Shell Offshore Inc. Batch set, drill, and complete wells M-T DP SEMISUBMERSIBLE Attached is a copy of the subject plan for public comments on issues that should be addressed in an Environmental Assessment. It has been deemed submitted as of this date and is under review for approval.

James Webb Plan Coordinator Description - Rig Type - Subject: From: June 24, 2011
# C_2014372EN.01000202.xml

| 20.10.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 372/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.10.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 372/2

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Nürnberg (Germany) lodged on 14 July 2014 — Criminal proceedings against Andreas Wittmann

(Case C-339/14)

2014/C 372/03

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Oberlandesgericht Nürnberg

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Andreas Wittmann

Other party: Generalstaatsanwaltschaft Nürnberg

Other party:

Question referred

Question referred

Must Article 11(4) of Directive 2006/126/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (1) be interpreted as meaning that a situation where a driving licence has not been withdrawn from the driver of a vehicle only because his driving licence was withdrawn from him previously and he therefore no longer has a driving licence, and where, at the same time, an order is made to the effect that that person is not in any event to be issued with a new driving licence for a given period of time, is equivalent to the withdrawal of a driving licence?

1

---

(1)  Directive 2006/126/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on driving licences; OJ 2006 L 403, p. 18.

1

---
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            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 CEC  Entertainment,  Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended September 26, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  the
undersigned  certifies,  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.




                                            /s/ Richard M. Frank
                                            ----------------------------
                                            Richard M. Frank
                                            Chief Executive Officer
                                            March 18, 2005



A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to CEC  Entertainment,  Inc. and will be retained by CEC Entertainment,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities  and Exchange  Commission or its staff upon
request.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Interior

###### Bureau of Land Management

          - [LLNM910000 L18200000.XG0000]

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Bureau of Land Management, New Mexico State Office located at 1474 Rodeo Road, Santa Fe, New Mexico has relocated to 301 Dinosaur Trail, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

# DATES:

*Effective Date:*                         November 2, 2009.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The office at 1474 Rodeo Road remained open during the move which took place starting on October 26 through November 6, 2009. The mailing address remains the same (P.O. Box 27115, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87502-0115). The main office telephone number has changed to (505) 954-2000.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Rosemary Herrell, Branch Chief, Support Services, at (505) 438-7625, BLM New Mexico State Office, P.O. Box 27115, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87502-0115.

Linda S.C. Rundell,

State Director.

[FR Doc. 2010-4055 Filed 2-26-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-FB-P
## In T he Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07 - 20 - 00340 - CR DUSTIN KENDRICK

, A PPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , APPELLEE On Appeal from the 364th District Court Lubbock County, Texas Trial Court No . 2010 - 427,528 , Honorable William R. Eichman II , Presiding



### January 6, 2021 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before PIRTLE and PARKER and DOSS , JJ. Appellant, Dustin Kendrick , appearing pro se, seeks to appeal the trial court ’s Order Denying Defendant’s Motion for Jurisdiction Inquiry with Incorporated Memorandum . We dismiss the purported appeal for want of jurisdiction. In 2012, p ursuant to a plea bargain agreement, appellant was convicted of capital murder and sentence d to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. In July 2020, appellant filed “Defendant’s Motion for Jurisdiction Inquiry with Incorporated2

Memorandum” in the trial court, challenging the trial court’s jurisdiction to convict him . The trial court d enied the motion and this appeal followed. Generally, an appellate court has jurisdiction to consider an appeal by a criminal defendant only from a judgment of conviction or where appellate jurisdiction has been expressly granted by law. See Abbott v. St ate , 271 S.W.3d 694, 696 - 97 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). We have found no authority to consider an appeal from an order denying a defendant’s post - conviction challeng e to the trial court’s original jurisdiction . See Bowman v. State , No. 0 2 - 20 - 00146 - CR , 2020 T ex. App. LEXIS 10017 , at * 5 - 6 (Tex. App. — Fort Worth Dec. 17, 2020 , no pet. h. ) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (finding no authority to review the denial of a post - conviction “ Motion to Call into Question Trial Court ’ s Jurisdiction with Incorporated Memorandum ” ). Rather, only the Court of Criminal Appeals has jurisdiction over matters seeking post - conviction relief from a final felony conviction. See T EX . C ODE . C RIM . P ROC . A NN . art. 11.07 (West 2015 ) (outlining the procedures for an appl ication for writ of habeas corpus); Ater v. Eighth Court of Appeals , 802 S.W.2d 241, 243 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). By letter of December 3 , 2020, we directed a ppellant to show how we have jurisdiction over the appeal. Although a ppellant filed a response, h e did not demonstrate grounds for continuing the appeal. Because the trial court ’ s Order Denying Defendant’s Motion for Jurisdiction Inquiry with Incorporated Memorandum is not a judgment of conviction or an appealable order, we dismiss the appeal for wan t of jurisdiction. Per Curiam Do not publish.
# C_2015007EN.01005701.xml

| 12.1.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 7/57 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.1.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 7/57

---

Action brought on 25 October 2014 — ZZ v Parliament

(Case F-120/14)

(2015/C 007/72)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: A. Salerno, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Parliament

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision of the Parliament rejecting the applicant’s request that his place of origin be changed to Larnaca (Cyprus) and the centre of his interests to Singapore, instead of Montreal (Canada), following his transfer to the European Parliament.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:

| — | Annul the decision of the appointing authority of the Parliament of 17 December 2013 refusing to substitute Singapore for Montreal as the centre of his interests and consequently to fix his place of origin as Larnaca, and, insofar as necessary, annul the decision of 16 July 2014 rejecting the complaint that he had lodged against the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the appointing authority of the Parliament of 17 December 2013 refusing to substitute Singapore for Montreal as the centre of his interests and consequently to fix his place of origin as Larnaca, and, insofar as necessary, annul the decision of 16 July 2014 rejecting the complaint that he had lodged against the contested decision;

| — | Order the Parliament to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Parliament to pay the costs.

---
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7682 

To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to increase under the Medicaid 

program the minimum monthly personal needs allowance for institutionalized individuals and couples, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 13, 2024 

Ms. WEXTON (for herself and Ms. NORTON) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to increase 

under the Medicaid program the minimum monthly personal needs allowance for institutionalized individuals 

and couples, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Personal Needs Allow5 ance Modernization Act’’ or the ‘‘PNA Modernization 

6 Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 7682 IH

1 SEC. 2. INCREASING UNDER THE MEDICAID PROGRAM THE 

2 MINIMUM MONTHLY PERSONAL NEEDS AL3 LOWANCE FOR INSTITUTIONALIZED INDIVID4 UALS AND COUPLES. 

5 Section 1902(q)(2) of the Social Security Act (42 

6 U.S.C. 1396a(q)(2)) is amended— 

7 (1) by inserting after ‘‘$30’’ the following: ‘‘(or, 

8 beginning January 1, 2025, $60)’’; 

9 (2) by inserting after ‘‘and $60’’ the following: 

10 ‘‘(or, beginning January 1, 2025, $120)’’; and 

11 (3) by adding at the end the following new sen12 tence: ‘‘Whenever benefit amounts under title II of 

13 the Social Security Act are increased by any per14 centage effective with a month after November 2025 

15 as a result of a determination made under section 

16 215(i) of such Act, each of the dollar amounts in ef17 fect under the previous sentence for the month be18 fore such month shall be increased by the same per19 centage.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
IIB 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7417 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 4, 2024 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 135 West Spring Street in Titusville, Pennsylvania, as the ‘‘Edwin L. Drake Post Office Building’’. 

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


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 7417 RFS

1 SECTION 1. EDWIN L. DRAKE POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 135 West Spring Street in 

4 Titusville, Pennsylvania, shall be known and designated 

5 as the ‘‘Edwin L. Drake Post Office Building’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Edwin L. Drake Post 

10 Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives June 3, 2024. 

Attest: KEVIN F. MCCUMBER, 

Clerk. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
§ 822.32 What records are the investigators in my surveillance plan required to keep? Your investigator must keep copies of: ( a ) All correspondence between investigators, FDA, the manufacturer, and the designated person, including required reports.
( b ) The approved postmarket surveillance plan, with documentation of the date and reason for any deviation from the plan.
( c ) All data collected and analyses conducted at that site for postmarket surveillance.
( d ) Any other records that we require to be maintained by regulation or by order.