alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                                     Exhibit 3.1

                       CERTIFICATE OF LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
                                       OF
                       AMERICAN REAL ESTATE PARTNERS, L.P.

         This Certificate of Limited Partnership of American Real Estate
Partners, L.P. (the "Partnership"), dated February 13, 1987, is being duly
executed and filed by American Property Investors, Inc., as sole General
Partner, to form a limited partnership under the Delaware Revised Uniform
Limited Partnership Act (6 Del. C.ss.17-101 et seq.).

         1.   The name of the limited partnership formed hereby is American Real
              Estate Partners, L.P.

         2.   The address of the registered office of the Partnership in the
              State of Delaware is c/o The Corporation Trust Company, 1209
              Orange Street, Wilmington, New Castle County, Delaware 19801, and
              the name and address of the registered agent for service of
              process on the Partnership in the State of Delaware is The
              Corporation Trust Company, 1209 Orange Street, Wilmington, New
              Castle County, Delaware 19801.

         3.   The name and mailing address of the sole general partner of the
              Partnership is:

                           American Property Investors, Inc.
                           666 Third Avenue
                           New York, New York 10017

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate of
Limited Partnership as of the date first above written.


                                 GENERAL PARTNER

                                 AMERICAN PROPERTY INVESTORS, INC.

                                 By: /s/
                                     _________________________________
                                     Vice President
# C_2015389EN.01004501.xml

| 23.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 389/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.11.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 389/45

---

Judgment of the General Court of 24 September 2015 — Primagaz v OHIM — Reeh (PRIMA KLIMA)

(Case T-195/14) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark PRIMA KLIMA - Earlier Community figurative mark PRIMAGAZ - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Relevant public - Similarity of goods and services - Similarity of the signs - Distinctive character of a laudatory word element - Conceptual comparison - Distinctive character of the earlier mark - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 389/48)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Compagnie des gaz de pétrole Primagaz SA (Paris, France) (represented by: D. Régnier, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: M. Fischer, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Gerhard Reeh (Radnice, Czech Republic) (represented by: W. Riegger, lawyer)

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

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 7 January 2014 (Case R 2304/2012-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Compagnie des gaz de pétrole Primagaz SA and Mr Gerhard Reeh.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 7 January 2014 (Case R 2304/2012-1) in so far as the Board of Appeal dismissed the action before it as regards the goods ‘apparatus for lighting, heating, drying and ventilating; activated carbon filters for ventilation purposes’; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 7 January 2014 (Case R 2304/2012-1) in so far as the Board of Appeal dismissed the action before it as regards the goods ‘apparatus for lighting, heating, drying and ventilating; activated carbon filters for ventilation purposes’;

| 2. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Orders each party to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders each party to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 175, 10.6.2014.

1

---
---

---

Exhibit 14.1

CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by
reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-102288 and 333-92491)
pertaining to the Employee Stock Option plans of Ellomay Capital Ltd. (the
Company) and Forms F-3 (File Nos. 333-144171, 333-115826, 333-114428, 333-47842 and
333-92493) of the Company and in the related Prospectuses of our report dated March 31,
2009, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Ellomay Capital Ltd. and
its subsidiaries included in this Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December
31, 2008.

| |  | /s/ Kost Forer Gabbay & KasiererKOST FORER GABBAY & KASIERER
A Member of Ernst & Young Global
| |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tel Aviv, Israel
March 31, 2009



---

---
Top of page

Skip to main content

Library of Congress

              - Discover
              - Services
              - Visit
              - Education
              - Connect
              - Shop *external link*
              - Donate
              - About
              - Ask a Librarian
              - Help
              - Contact
              - Search Online Catalog
              - Copyright.gov
              - Congress.gov

Library of Congress
Digital Collections
Military Legal Resources
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE RESTATED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF HARBINGER CORPORATION FOR THE YEAR ENDED
DEC-31-1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          33,059
<SECURITIES>                                    59,248
<RECEIVABLES>                                   41,355
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,464
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               137,653
<PP&E>                                          45,280
<DEPRECIATION>                                  22,130
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 178,369
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           58,350
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             4
<OTHER-SE>                                     120,015
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   178,369
<SALES>                                         47,084
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               135,151
<CGS>                                            3,730
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   38,217
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               109,586
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  64
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (7,822)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       705
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (8,527)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 (6,185)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (14,712)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.35)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.35)


</TABLE>
# C_2015089EN.01002302.xml

| 16.3.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 89/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.3.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 89/23

---

Judgment of the General Court of 29 January 2015 — Blackrock v OHIM (INVESTING FOR A NEW WORLD)

(Case T-59/14) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Application for the Community word mark INVESTING FOR A NEW WORLD - Mark consisting of an advertising slogan - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 089/27)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Blackrock, Inc. (Wilmington, Delaware, United States) (represented by: S. Malynicz, Barrister, and K. Gilbert and M. Blair, Solicitors)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: L. Rampini, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 31 October 2013 (Case R 573/2013-1), concerning an application for registration of the word sign INVESTING FOR A NEW WORLD as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Blackrock, Inc. to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Blackrock, Inc. to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 129, 28.4.2014.

1

---
§ 520.1760 Phenylpropanolamine. ( a ) *Specifications.* ( 1 ) Each chewable tablet contains 25, 50, or 75 milligram (mg) phenylpropanolamine hydrochloride.
( 2 ) Each extended-release tablet contains 18, 38, 74, or 145 mg phenylpropanolamine hydrochloride.
( b ) *Sponsors.* See No. 055246 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter.
( c ) *Conditions of use in dogs* — ( 1 ) *Amount.* Administer orally as follows: ( i ) Chewable tablet: 2 mg/kg of body weight twice daily.
( ii ) Extended-release tablet: 2 to 4 mg/kg of body weight once daily with food.
( 2 ) *Indications for use.* For the control of urinary incontinence due to urethral sphincter hypotonus in dogs.
( 3 ) *Limitations.* Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.
[77 FR 15961, Mar. 19, 2012, as amended at 84 FR 39183, Aug. 9, 2019]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE FORM
10-Q FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          11,845
<SECURITIES>                                    15,548
<RECEIVABLES>                                   17,674
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,253
<INVENTORY>                                     20,581
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                67,736
<PP&E>                                          30,163
<DEPRECIATION>                                  16,529
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 244,357
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           25,738
<BONDS>                                            202
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           427
<OTHER-SE>                                     196,327
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   244,357
<SALES>                                         53,085
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                53,085
<CGS>                                           30,894
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   75,761
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   232
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    13
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 196
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (21,392)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       157
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (21,549)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (21,549)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.61)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.61)


</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1

                                  EXHIBIT 21.1

As of December 31, 1998 Citizens Bancorp's only subsidiary was Citizens Bank, 
which is wholly-owned by Citizens Bancorp.
Editorial Note on Part 73
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 73 appear at 66 FR 66742, Dec. 27, 2001.

§ 73.3128 Mica-based pearlescent pigments. ( a ) *Identity and specifications.* The color additive is formed by depositing titanium or iron salts from a basic solution onto mica, followed by calcination to produce titanium dioxide or iron oxides on mica. Mica used to manufacture the color additive shall conform in identity and specifications to the requirements of § 73.1496(a)(1) and (b).
( b ) *Uses and restrictions.* ( 1 ) Mica-based pearlescent pigments listed in paragraph (a) of this section may be used as a color additive in contact lenses in amounts not to exceed the minimum reasonably required to accomplish the intended coloring effect.
( 2 ) Authorization and compliance with this use shall not be construed as waiving any of the requirements of sections 510(k), 515, and 520(g) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act) with respect to the contact lenses in which the additive is used.
( c ) *Labeling.* The label of the color additive shall conform to the requirements in § 70.25 of this chapter.
( d ) *Exemption from certification.* Certification of this color additive is not necessary for the protection of the public health, and therefore batches thereof are exempt from the certification requirements of section 721(c) of the act.
[67 FR 65312, Oct. 24, 2002]
1... See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.

COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 2-09-051-CR

ZACHARIAH ELIAS VANDERBURG APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE

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

FROM THE 355TH DISTRICT COURT OF HOOD COUNTY

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

Appellant Zachariah Elias Vanderburg attempts to appeal from the trial

court’s judgments sentencing him to two years’ imprisonment for one count of

sexual assault and six years’ community supervision for a second count of

sexual assault. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

Vanderburg’s sentence was imposed on November 21, 2008.

Vanderburg filed a motion for new trial, so his notice of appeal was due within
2... Because we lack jurisdiction over the appeal, we take no action on

Vanderburg’s counsel’s motion to withdraw that was filed on March 16, 2009.

2

ninety days—that is, on or before February 19, 2009. See Tex. R. App. P.

26.2(a)(2). Vanderburg did not file his notice of appeal until February 24,

2009.

We sent notice to Vanderburg on March 26, 2009, stating that because

of the apparent untimeliness of his notice of appeal, we would dismiss the

appeal unless he or any party desiring to continue the appeal responded by April

6, 2009, and showed grounds for continuing the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P.

9.2(b)(1)–(2). We received no response.

The lack of a timely notice of appeal deprives this court of jurisdiction.

See State v. Riewe, 13 S.W.3d 408, 410 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000); Olivo v.

State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522–23 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996); Williams v. State, 76

S.W.3d 207, 209 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2002, no pet.). Therefore, because

Vanderburg failed to timely file his notice of appeal and failed to provide us with

grounds for continuing his appeal, we must dismiss the appeal for want of

jurisdiction.2 See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f).

PER CURIAM

PANEL: WALKER, MCCOY, and MEIER, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: April 30, 2009
Spr ni gerville R

D

Quemado R

D

Reserve RD

Quemado RD

Quemado RD

Glenwood RD

Smith

Cr.

Romero Cr.

Noland Cr.

S A Cr.

Jenkins Cr.

æäAP

4225

¬«435

¬«12

Apache County

Catron County Catron County

Green el e County

Þ¿49

Þ¿4000M

Þ¿545

Þ¿306

Þ¿35

Þ¿209

2Þ¿

36Þ¿

20

çå141

çå385

æäB

012

æäB

080

æäB

024

æäB

007

æäB

002

æäB

003

æäB

026

æäB

025

æäB

083

æäB

013

æäB

009

æäB

089

æäB

029

Lower

San Francisco

Plaza

Luna

Reserve

San Francisco

Plaza

(/180

(/180

White

Bluff

7241

Maverick

Peak

7881

Dillon

Mountain

8694

Turner

Peak

9429

Maness

Mountain

8094

Mess Box

Mesa

7743

Black Bull

Peak

8369

Black

Peak

9006

San Francisco

Mountains

8465

Jones

Peak

9022

Hell Roaring

Mesa

8514

Freeman

Mountain

8773

Maness

Peak

8258

Higgins

Mountain

6486

Bishop

Peak

8855

Prairie

Point Peak

8333

Negrohead

Butte

7887

Maness

Mountain

7995

Monument

Mountain

8333

Horse

Mesa

8438

Jim Smith

Peak

9252

Joe Green

Peak

7897

Bill Lewis

Mesa

7260

Hellroaring

Mesa

7858

Bill Lee

Mesa

8219

Bar N L

Mesa

8136

Red Butte

8123

Turner

Peak

9170

Leggett

Peak

7930

Bar NL

Mesa

7644

§¦180

2

æäAP

2310

æäGR

67004

124

63

1261

769

62

351

33

762

36

9

515

125

21

34

35

119

761

126

109

64

956

61

çå275

Coyote

Cr.

San Francisco R.

Centerfire

Cr.

San

Francisco R.

San

Francisco R.

CoyoteCr.

Dry Blue

Cr.

Blue

R.

Dry Blue

Cr.

Tularosa

R.

Pace

Cr.

San

Francisco R.

Coyote Cr.

Ston

Ce

r.

Dillman Cr.

Coyote

Cr.

Coyote

Cr.

San

Francisco R.

Coyote

Cr.

Trou

Cr

t

.

LUNA RESTORATION PROJECT: FIGURE 5

0 1 2 4

Miles

Created On: 5/11/2016 1:43:15 PM

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 12NTransverse Mercator

o 1 in = 2 miles

1:125,000

(printed on 11" x 17" portrait layout)

Created By: jjelacic

The USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender

Figure 5: Location of prescribed fire

proposed treatment areas.

Luna Planning Area

Luna (185,586 ac.)

! City/Town

Stream

Highway

Improved Road, Paved

Improved Road, Gravel

Improved Road, Dirt

Unimproved Road

Non-motorized Trail

Motorized Trail

H Transmission Line

Ranger District Boundary

County Boundary

US Forest Service

Bureau of Land Mgmt.

Private

State

Prescribed Burning of Natural and

Activity Fuels

Prescribe Burning Only
DISMISS and Opinion Filed December 13, 2022 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-22-00873-CV 

DAVID LEE DANIELS III, Appellant 

V. 

KATINA SNOW, CHILD SUPPORT AGENCY, ATWORK GROUP, 

NANCY DELGADO, JAZMINE WELLS CASTILLO, MARITZA DE 

JESUS, MARIA CARRILLO, AMANDA ALVEY, AND 

KR YOUNG STAFFING TX557, Appellees 

On Appeal from the 134th Judicial District Court 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. DC-22-05096 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Chief Justice Burns, Justice Molberg, and Justice Goldstein 

Opinion by Chief Justice Burns 

We questioned our jurisdiction over this appeal from the trial court’s August 

18, 2022 dismissal order as it did not appear the order disposed of all parties and 

claims or that the order was otherwise appealable. See Jack B. Anglin Co., Inc. v. 

Tipps, 842 S.W.2d 266, 272 (Tex. 1992) (appeal may only be taken from final 

judgments that dispose of all parties and claims or interlocutory orders authorized 

by statute). As reflected in the record, appellant filed the underlying suit against 

Katina Snow, Child Support Agency, AtWork Group, Nancy Delgado, Jazmine 
 –2– 

Wells Castillo, Maritza De Jesus, Maria Carrillo, Amanda Alvey, and KR Young 

Staffing TX557. The appealed order dismissed the claims against KR Young 

Staffing, AtWork Group, Delgado, Castillo, De Jesus, Carrillo, and Alvey by 

granting their Rule 91a motion, see TEX. R. CIV. P. 91a (concerning baseless causes 

of action), but did not address the claims against Snow and the Child Support 

Agency. Although we directed appellant to file a letter brief addressing our concern 

and cautioned appellant that failure to comply could result in the appeal being 

dismissed, see TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a),(c), more than ten days have passed and 

appellant has not complied. Accordingly, on the record before us, we dismiss the 

appeal. See id. 42.3(a); see also Koenig v. Blaylock, 497 S.W.3d 595, 598 n.4 (Tex. 

App.—Austin 2016, pet. denied) (noting no statute authorizes interlocutory appeal 

from order denying Rule 91a motion). 

220873F.P05 

 

/Robert D. Burns, III/

ROBERT D. BURNS, III 

CHIEF JUSTICE 
 –3– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

DAVID LEE DANIELS III, 

Appellant 

No. 05-22-00873-CV V. 

KATINA SNOW, CHILD 

SUPPORT AGENCY, ATWORK 

GROUP, NANCY DELGADO, 

JAZMINE WELLS CASTILLO, 

MARITZE DE JESUS, MARIA 

CARRILLO, AMANDA ALVEY, 

AND KR YOUNG STAFFING 

TX557, Appellees 

 On Appeal from the 134th Judicial 

District Court, Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. DC-22-05096. 

Opinion delivered by Chief Justice 

Burns, Justices Molberg and 

Goldstein participating. 

 In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal. 

Judgment entered December 13, 2022.
From: Thomas Andersen [mailto:tandersen@shin-tech.com] 

Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2014 5:57 PM 

To: Howard, Jodi 

Subject: EDC/VCM test data - THC results 2011 per 114D request 

Jodi

Here is the 2011 Test data that I spoke about on the phone. Also 

attached are three PDFs:

* One is an e-mail to you from James Bell showing submission of 

the data

* The second is the original information request to Mark Garza

* The last pdf is an excerpt from the stack test conducted by ETS

In reviewing the data submission, it appears there was an error in the 

reporting. It appears that NMHC 

results were reported versus the THC data – please see the excerpt pdf 

for confirmation.

I will also send the 2010 THC data along (separate e-mail) with diagrams 

depicting our incinerator, 

scrubber and SCR treatment process versus the standard for the industry. 

Please let me know when we can discuss our situation further.

Thanks

Thomas S. Andersen

Environmental Manager

Shintech, Inc.

5618 East Hwy 332

Freeport, TX 77541

979 233 7861 ext 398

979 236 5641 (c)