alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2017129EN.01001502.xml

| 24.4.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 129/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.4.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 129/15

---

Judgment of the General Court of 14 March 2017 — Hersill v EUIPO — KCI Licensing (VACUP)

(Case T-741/14) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark VACUP - Earlier EU word marks MINIVAC and V.A.C. - No genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2017/C 129/25)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Hersill, SL (Móstoles, Spain) (represented by: M. Aznar Alonso and P. Koch Moreno, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervening before the General Court: KCI Licensing, Inc. (San Antonio, Texas, United States) (represented by: S. Malynicz QC)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervening before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 August 2014 (Case R 1520/2013-2), relating to opposition proceedings between KCI Licensing and Hersill.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 14 August 2014 (Case R 1520/2013-2); |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 14 August 2014 (Case R 1520/2013-2);

| 2. | Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Hersill, SL; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Hersill, SL;

| 3. | Orders KCI Licensing, Inc. to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders KCI Licensing, Inc. to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 448, 15.12.2014.

1

---
**Exhibit 21.1**

**SUBSIDIARIES OF MACKIE DESIGNSINC.As of December 31, 2000**

 
| Subsidiary                                 |   | State  of Incorporation or  Country in which Organized |   |
|--------------------------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                       |   |                                                   |   |
| Mackie  Sales Corporation                  |   | Barbados                                               |   |
| Mackie  Designs Manufacturing Inc.         |   | Washington                                             |   |
| Mackie  Designs (Netherlands) B.V.         |   | The  Netherlands                                       |   |
| Mackie  Designs (Italy) S.p.A.             |   | Italy                                                  |   |
| AVM S.r.l.                                 |   | Italy                                                  |   |
| Mackie  Designs (France) S.A.              |   | France                                                 |   |
| RCF  Electronics (U.K.) Ltd.               |   | United  Kingdom                                        |   |
| Mackie  Industrial, Inc.                   |   | New  Jersey                                            |   |
| RCF  China Limited                         |   | China                                                  |   |
| Mackie  Designs (Deutschland) GmbH         |   | Germany                                                |   |
| Eastern  Acoustic Works, Inc.              |   | Massachusetts                                          |   |
| EAW  International Ltd.                    |   | U.S.  Virgin Islands                                   |   |
| Eastern  Acoustic Works International Ltd. |   | UK                                                     |   |
| SIA  Software Company                      |   | New  York                                              |   |
| Acuma  Labs Inc.                           |   | British  Columbia                                      |   |
86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 

# Year 0 10 20 30 40 50**p p** **b** 

### Baton Rouge Mean Morning NOx Concentrations **June-A ugust, 5-8 AM LST** 

Capitol Port Allen
### Becky Schwantes

- Questionnaire for the Steam Electric Power Generating Effluent Gui delines

EPA is in the process of distributing the Questionn aire for the Steam Electric Power Generating Efflue nt
Guidelines to selected fossil- and nuclear-fueled s team electric power plants. The questionnaire, whi ch was approved by the Office of Management and Budget on May 20, 2010, can be viewed on EPA’s website at http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/guide/steam/ . In addition, the website identifies the 733 faci lities selected to receive the questionnaire.

The questionnaire consists of nine sections which a ddress specific processes, specific data needs, or types of power plants. It will collect general plant informa tion and selected technical information about the p lant processes and the electric generating units. The requested in formation includes economic data and technical info rmation about flue gas desulfurization (FGD) wastewater, as h handling, cleaning of metal process equipment, wa stewater treatment, surface impoundment and landfill operati ons, and nuclear operations. The questionnaire also requires certain power plants to collect and analyze samples of leachate from surface impoundments and landfill s containing coal combustion residues.

For further information about the questionnaire, pl ease contact Ms. Jezebele Alicea-Virella by email a t Alicea.Jezebele@epa.gov , or by telephone at (202) 566-1755.

--------------------------------------------------- ------- Ron Jordan Engineering and Analysis Division (4303T)
Office of Water U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20460 (202) 566-1003
http://www.epa.gov/waterscience 

### From: <Jordan.Ronald@epamail.epa.gov>

To: <eschaeffer@environmentalintegrity.org>, <jpeterson@environmentalintegrity.or g>,

<craig.segall@sierraclub.org>, <akron@defenders.org>, <msenatore@defenders.org>, Abigail Dillen <adillen@earthjustice.org>

Date: 6/4/2010 7:30 PM Subject: Questionnaire for the Steam Electric Power Generating Effluent Guidelines

CC: <Alicea.Jezebele@epamail.epa.gov>, <Reding.Richard@epamail.epa.gov> Page 1 of 1

6/17/2010 file://C:\Documents and Settings\BSchwantes\Local Settings\Temp\XPgr pwise\4C1912DC

...
# C_2016038EN.01005001.xml

| 1.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 38/50 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 38/50

---

Judgment of the General Court of 10 December 2015 — Fútbol Club Barcelona v OHIM (Representation of the outline of a crest)

(Case T-615/14) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Application for a figurative Community trade mark representing the outline of a crest - Absolute grounds for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - No distinctive character acquired through use - Article 7(3)of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2016/C 038/65)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Fútbol Club Barcelona (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: J. Carbonell Callicó, lawyer)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 23 May 2014 (Case R 2500/2013-1) concerning an application for registration as a Community trade mark of a figurative sign representing the outline of a crest.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | The action is dismissed; |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed;

| 2. | Fútbol Club Barcelona is ordered to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Fútbol Club Barcelona is ordered to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 372, 20.10.2014.

1

---
##### 



Exhibit 32.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
  (1)
    
    the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
 (2)
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 May 10, 2007
    By:
    /s/ Charles F. ChampionCharles F. ChampionPresident and Chief Executive OfficerMay 10, 2007
    By:
    /s/ Gary W. SprouleGary W. SprouleChief Financial Officer and Treasurer
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

Linda Guillermina Pedroza,

 

 Appellant,

v.

Tenet Healthcare Corp.,

Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-16-00221-CV

Appeal from the

County Court at Law No. 5

of El Paso County, Texas 

(TC# 2015CCV01210)

O R D E R

Pending before the Court is Appellee’s motion to strike volume 2 of the supplemental 

clerk’s record filed on January 24, 2018. The motion to strike is GRANTED. Further, Appellant 

is instructed that she may not cause any additional supplemental clerk’s records to be filed 

without first obtaining leave of court by filing a motion to supplement the record.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 22

nd day of February, 2018.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez and Palafox, JJ.
PETITION FOR EXEMPTION/RULEMAKING

IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR EXEMPTION OF: Frank G. Harris LLC

FOR AN EXEMPTION SEEKING RELIEF FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF TITLE 14 OF 

THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS

SECTIONS 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 

91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), AND 91.417(a) & (b) CONCERNING COMMERCIAL OPERATION OF 

DJI PHANTOM 3 UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS

PURSUANT TO SECTION 333 OF THE FAA MODERNIZATION AND REFORM ACT OF 

2012 (PUBLIC LAW 112-95)

Frank Harris

7110 51st Place East

Bradenton, Florida 34203

Telephone: 941.962.3177

frank@lwrhome.com
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 Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration

          - [TA-W-72,041]

                    By application dated January 29, 2010, the petitioner requested administrative reconsideration of the negative determination regarding workers' eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) applicable to workers and former workers of the subject firm. The determination was issued on December 10, 2009 and the Notice of Determination was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on January 25, 2010 (75 FR 3932).                

The initial investigation resulted in a negative determination based on the findings that imports of aluminum blanks and hoops did not contribute importantly to worker separations at the subject firm and no shift of production to a foreign source occurred.

In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner provided additional information regarding customers of the subject firm.

The Department has carefully reviewed the request for reconsideration and the existing record, and has determined that the Department will conduct further investigation to determine if the workers meet the eligibility requirements of the Trade Act of 1974.

## Conclusion

                    After careful review of the application, I conclude that the claim is                           ( print page 9437)                        of sufficient weight to justify reconsideration of the U.S. Department of Labor's prior decision. The application is, therefore, granted.                

Signed at Washington, DC, this 18th day of February, 2010.

Elliott S. Kushner,

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. 

[FR Doc. 2010-4247 Filed 3-1-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
This is a request for a 333 exemption for use by a local agency and a state agency.

I personally own a DJI Phantom II Vision Drone. 

As Coroner, Chief Medical Examiner/ Investigator of Yazoo County, Mississippi. I am requesting the 

exemption to use my personal drone to assist in death investigations. I would like to be able to take Arial 

photographs as of automobile crashes and outdoor crime scenes that I am called upon to investigate. 

These photographs are an enhancement to me as well as law enforcement as I perform my duties in 

death investigations for the county,

I would also like to pursue further use of the drone in Search & Rescue operations of Yazoo County, 

Mississippi as I am also a volunteer member of our Overland Search & Rescue unit. This could prove 

helpful by having the ability to use my drone as an additional resource.

Further I am Central Team Leader for The Mississippi Mortuary Response Team. We are the state 

response unit for Mass Fatality Disasters. The drone could prove very beneficial for surveying a disaster 

location to assist in determining equipment and manpower needs, as well as where personnel need to 

be deployed.

Note that I monitor Medical Aircraft frequencies as well as serve as the Landing Zone coordinator for 

Yazoo County. This allows me to know when this type aircraft is in the area and therefore no flights will 

be conducted unless I know that all airspace is clear. 

The flights that will be taken for this purpose will mainly be around 50 feet unless the area needing to be 

photographed is of a severely large area then flights should not exceed 100 feet .

I am also well aware of aircraft operations as my father was a private pilot owning and flying A Cessna

172 when I was growing up in south Mississippi.

Your consideration for this exception is greatly appreciated. 

Also please find attached where I have registered with you for UAS Registry number FA3O3MFLEX

Sincerely; Ricky L. Shivers, Coroner, Chief Medical Examiner / Investigator Yazoo County Mississippi
UAS Registration Certificate

Federal Aviation Administration

Small UAS Certificate of Registration

CERTIFICATE HOLDER:

Ricky Shivers

UAS CERTIFICATE NUMBER:

FA3P3MFLEX

ISSUED: 12/22/2015 EXPIRES: 12/21/2018

For U.S. citizens, permanent residents, and certain non-citizen U.S. corporations, this document constitutes a Certificate of Registration. For all others, this document represents a recognition of 

ownership.

For all holders, for all operations other than as a model aircraft under sec. 336 of Pub. L. 112-95, additional safety authority from FAA and economic authority from DOT may be required.

Safety guidelines for flying your unmanned aircraft:

 Fly below 400 feet

 Never fly near other aircraft

 Keep your UAS within visual line of sight

 Keep away from emergency responders

 Never fly over stadiums, sports events or groups of people

 Never fly under the influence of drugs or alcohol

 Never fly within 5 miles of an airport without first contacting air traffic control and airport authorities

View Profile

Print
Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record

Plant ID 08493

Removed 

from Public 

(Non-CBI) 

Docket1

Copyright 

Flag2File Name Description

08493\08493_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted

x 08493\08493_PartA.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 08493\08493_PartE.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 08493\08493_PartH.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 08493\08493_PlantID_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

08493\08943_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist

08493\Certification Statement Plant ID_08493.pdf Plant certification statement

x 08493\Supporting Documentation\08493_Choctaw_A5-3_Water Balance.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

08493\Supporting Documentation\08493_Choctaw_MAP_1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 08493\Supporting Documentation\08493_Choctaw_MAP_2.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

1

 Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database . 

2

 Copyright documents are available from the docket.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 38 (Friday, February 26, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 9001]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-3972]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Advisory Committee for Environmental Research and Education; 
Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Public Law 
92-463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting:

    Name: Advisory Committee for Environmental Research and Education 
(9487).
    Dates: March 18, 2010, 8:30 a.m.-5 p.m. March 19, 2010, 8:30 a.m.-1 
p.m.
    Place: Stafford I, Room 375, National Science Foundation, 4201 
Wilson Blvd., Arlington, Virginia 22230.
    Type of Meeting: Open.
    Contact Person: Melissa Lane, National Science Foundation, Suite 
705, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, Virginia 22230. Phone 703-292-8500.
    Minutes: May be obtained from the contact person listed above.
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice, recommendations, and 
oversight concerning support for environmental research and education.

Agenda

March 18, 2010

    <bullet> Update on recent NSF environmental activities.
    <bullet> Discussion of Approaches to Managing Interdisciplinary 
Research at NSF.
    <bullet> Meeting with the Director.

 March 19, 2010

    <bullet> Discussion on Expanding NSF Research Portfolio for 
Science, Engineering and Education for Sustainability (SEES).
    <bullet> Discussion of NSF FY 2010 Climate Research Solicitations.

    Dated: February 23, 2010.
Susanne Bolton,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2010-3972 Filed 2-25-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-6165

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JOSHUA JIMENEZ,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. 

(1:10-cr-00633-CCB-1; 1:13-cv-01610-CCB)

Submitted: May 22, 2014 Decided: May 29, 2014

Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and HAMILTON and DAVIS, Senior 

Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joshua Jimenez, Appellant Pro Se. Benjamin M. Block, OFFICE OF 

THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Joshua Jimenez seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. 

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge 

issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not 

issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the 

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional 

claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 

484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 

(2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural 

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive 

procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a 

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 

529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude 

that Jimenez has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, 

we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
# C_2014292EN.01006201.xml

| 1.9.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 292/62 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.9.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 292/62

---

Action brought on 22 May 2014 — ZZ and Others v Parliament

(Case F-49/14)

2014/C 292/80

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicants: ZZ and Others (represented by: M.C. García-Hirschfeld, lawyer)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Parliament

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Application for annulment of the decision appointing the applicants’ initial assessor for the reporting year for 2013.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of 4 March 2013, confirmed by letter of 8 April 2014, in which the applicants were informed of the appointment of Mr X as initial assessor; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of 4 March 2013, confirmed by letter of 8 April 2014, in which the applicants were informed of the appointment of Mr X as initial assessor;

| — | If necessary, suspend the 2013 staff reporting procedure; |
| --- | --- |

—

If necessary, suspend the 2013 staff reporting procedure;

| — | Suspend Ms X from all her duties with immediate effect; |
| --- | --- |

—

Suspend Ms X from all her duties with immediate effect;

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

—

Order the Parliament to pay the costs.

---
§ 315.4 Indications. ( a ) For diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals, the categories of proposed indications for use include, but are not limited to, the following: ( 1 ) Structure delineation;
( 2 ) Functional, physiological, or biochemical assessment;
( 3 ) Disease or pathology detection or assessment; and
( 4 ) Diagnostic or therapeutic patient management.
( b ) Where a diagnostic radiopharmaceutical is not intended to provide disease-specific information, the proposed indications for use may refer to a biochemical, physiological, anatomical, or pathological process or to more than one disease or condition.
#### Lomas and Nettleton Company *v.*Martin B. Gant et al.

*Jules Lang,*for the appellee (plaintiff).

*William J. Egan,*for the appellants (defendants).

Argued October 7

decided October 7, 1969

The motion by the plaintiff to dismiss the appeal from the Superior Court in Fairfield County at Stamford is granted.