alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SCAD-10-0000170
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI # I
OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner,

vs. MARK F. BUCKMAN, Respondent.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (ODC 10-073-8907)
ORDER OF PUBLIC CENSURE (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, and Duffy, JJ., and Intermediate Court of Appeals Chief Judge Nakamura,

assigned by reason of vacancy) Upon consideration of the Office of Disciplinary Counsel’s Petition for Issuance of Reciprocal Discipline Notice, our December 8, 2010 Notice and Order, Assistant Disciplinary Counsel’s affidavit regarding service of the notice and order, Respondent Mark F. Buckman’s lack of response thereto, and the record, it appears Respondent Buckman stipulated to, and the California State Bar Court imposed a public reproval with conditions, upon stipulation of misconduct in two cases wherein Respondent Buckman failed "to pay promptly, as requested by a client, funds in [his] possession [that] the client was entitled to receive," and "to maintain the respect due to the courts of Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCAD-10-0000170 09-MAR-2011 09:45 AMjustice and judicial officers." It further appears that such

conduct merits the substantially equivalent discipline of public censure in this jurisdiction. Therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Respondent Buckman is hereby publically censured.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent Buckman shall comply with the stipulated conditions imposed by the California State Bar Court and shall submit an affidavit of compliance to this court, under the case number on this order, after all conditions have been met.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai # i, March 9, 2011. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr. /s/ James E. Duffy, Jr. /s/ Craig H. Nakamura

2
Editorial Note on Part 886
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 886 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 886.1342 Strabismus detection device. ( a ) *Identification.* A strabismus detection device is a prescription device designed to simultaneously illuminate both eyes with polarized light for automated detection of strabismus by analyzing foveal birefringence properties.
( b ) *Classification.* Class II (special controls). The special controls for this device are: ( 1 ) Clinical performance testing must demonstrate the device performs as intended under anticipated conditions of use. Testing must be conducted in a representative patient population and clinical setting for the indicated use. Demonstration of clinical performance must include assessment of sensitivity and specificity compared to a clearly defined reference standard (e.g., comprehensive ophthalmological examination comprises age-appropriate visual acuity testing, examination of the external ocular adnexae and orbit, anterior segment evaluation, extraocular motility evaluation, assessment of stereopsis, cycloplegic refraction, and dilated fundus examination).
( 2 ) Non-clinical performance testing must demonstrate the device performs as intended under anticipated conditions of use. The following technical characteristics must be evaluated: ( i ) Verification of lowest detectable amount of deviation; and
( ii ) Validation of the accuracy and precision at the lowest detectable amount of deviation.
( 3 ) Software verification, validation, and hazard analysis must be performed.
( 4 ) Optical radiation safety testing must demonstrate the device is safe per the directions for use.
( 5 ) Performance testing must demonstrate the electromagnetic compatibility of the device.
( 6 ) Performance testing must demonstrate the electrical safety of the device.
( 7 ) Labeling must include the following: ( i ) Summaries of non-clinical and clinical performance testing;
( ii ) Instructions on how to correctly use and maintain the device;
( iii ) Instructions and explanation of all user-interface components; and
( iv ) Information related to electromagnetic compatibility and optical radiation classification.
[81 FR 65280, Sept. 22, 2016]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                          11,696
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,623,719
<ALLOWANCES>                                   146,000
<INVENTORY>                                  2,763,755
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,385,882
<PP&E>                                       8,910,755
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,184,476
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,514,383
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,722,311
<BONDS>                                      2,597,553
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           417
<OTHER-SE>                                  (4,332,763)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                10,514,383
<SALES>                                      8,906,174
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             8,906,174
<CGS>                                        8,159,723
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                8,159,723
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,558,013
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                45,531
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             331,330
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,267,344)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,267,344)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,267,344)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.05)
        

</TABLE>
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

                                    FORM 8-K

                                 CURRENT REPORT

     Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

        Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): August 5, 2003

                                  NUMEREX CORP.
                 (Exact Name of Issuer as Specified in Charter)

        Pennsylvania                    0-22920                  11-2948749
-----------------------------    ------------------------    -------------------
(State or other jurisdiction     (Commission File Number)     (I.R.S. Employer
      of incorporation)                                      Identification No.)

                              1600 Parkwood Circle
                                    Suite 200
                                Atlanta, Georgia
                    (Address of principal executive offices)

                                   30339-2119
                                   (Zip code)

                                 (770) 693-5950
              (Registrant's telephone number, including area code)


<PAGE>

Item 5. Other Events and Regulation FD Disclosure

      On August 5, 2003, Numerex Corp. issued a press release announcing its
financial results for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2003. The
press release is filed as Exhibit 99.1 hereto and incorporated herein by
reference.

      This information is being furnished pursuant to Item 12 of Form 8-K and is
being presented under Item 9 as provided in the Commission's interim guidance
regarding Form 8-K Item 11 and Item 12 filing requirements (Release No.
34-47583).

Item 7. Financial Statements and Exhibits

      (c) Exhibits

      99.1 Text of Press Release, dated August 5, 2003.

                                   SIGNATURES

      Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned hereunto duly authorized.

                                    NUMEREX CORP.
                                    (Registrant)

                                    /s/ Stratton J. Nicolaides
                                    -------------------------------------
                                    Stratton J. Nicolaides, Chairman and
                                    Chief Executive Officer

Date: August 5, 2003
# C_2014223EN.01001301.xml

| 14.7.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 223/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.7.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 223/13

---

Action brought on 13 March 2014 — Søndagsavisen A/S v European Commission

(Case T-167/14)

2014/C 223/17

Language of the case: Danish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Søndagsavisen A/S (Søborg, Denmark) (represented by: M. Honoré and C. Fornø)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the Commission’s decision of 20 November 2013 not to raise objections to Denmark’s production and innovation aid for written media (SA.36366); |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the Commission’s decision of 20 November 2013 not to raise objections to Denmark’s production and innovation aid for written media (SA.36366);

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant, a competitor of the recipients of the aid, submits that the Commission ought to have found that there was doubt as to the compatibility of the reported measure with the internal market and that the Commission therefore ought to have adopted a decision to open the formal investigation procedure: see Article 108(2) TFEU and Article 4(4) of the procedural regulation. (1) In failing to do so, the Commission has disregarded the applicant’s procedural rights under Article 108(2) TFEU.

1

In support of the argument that there was reasonable doubt as to the scheme’s compatibility with the internal market, the applicant relies on three pleas in law:

| — | the Commission failed entirely to examine whether the scheme was suitable for ensuring the expansion of news content provided to the Danish people, thereby supporting the democratic process; |
| --- | --- |

—

the Commission failed entirely to examine whether the scheme was suitable for ensuring the expansion of news content provided to the Danish people, thereby supporting the democratic process;

| — | the contested decision in any event lacks a sufficient statement of reasons with regard to suitability; and |
| --- | --- |

—

the contested decision in any event lacks a sufficient statement of reasons with regard to suitability; and

| — | the Commission failed to examine the competition-distorting effects of the scheme in the relationship between free newspapers and newspapers sold for money. |
| --- | --- |

—

the Commission failed to examine the competition-distorting effects of the scheme in the relationship between free newspapers and newspapers sold for money.

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 108 of the treaty on the functioning of the European Union (OJ 1999 L 83, p. 1).

1

---
#### Meyer et al. *v.*Meyer.

[No. 18,862.

Filed December 12, 1900.]

Appeal and *Error.*— Joint *Assignment of Error.*— A joint assignment of error based upon the action of the court in overruling a motion for a new trial cannot be considered on appeal, where the only motion for a new trial appearing in the record was the sole and separate motion of one of the appellants.

Erom the Porter Circuit Court.

*Affirmed.*

*A. D. Bartholomew,*for appellants.

*Grant*Crumpacker, *E. D.*Crumpacker, *N. L. Agnew*and *D. E.*Kelly, for appellee.

Hadley, J.

— Appellee, as plaintiff, in his suit to contest the will of Heinrich W. Meyer, made appellant, Margaretha Meyer, and ten others, defendants, alleging that said defendants were all beneficiaries under said will. Verdict and judgment that the will was void and that the probate thereof be annulled. Margaretha Meyer filed her separate motion for a new trial, which was overruled, to which ruling she excepted. In this court the only error assigned is in the following words: “Margaretha Meyer, Harry Robert Meyer [Nine other names follow.], appellants, v. Christian Meyer, appellee. The appellants say that there is manifest error in the proceedings and judgment in said *570cause, and. they specially assign the following: The court erred in overruling appellants’ motion for a new trial.”

The only motion for a new trial. that appears in the record is the sole and separate motion of Margaretha Meyer. Her code'fendants not having participated in the request for, a new trial cannot he heard to complain that the motion was not granted. The error assigned is joint and not the separate assignment of Margaretha Meyer.

It is a well settled rule of appellate procedure that a joint assignment of error must he good as to all who unite in it, or it will be good as to none. Ewbank’s Manual, §138; Elliott’s App. Proc., §318; *Earhart*v. *Farmers, etc., Co.,*148 Ind. 79.

Judgment affirmed.
Editorial Note on Part 880
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 880 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 880.6085 Hot/cold water bottle. ( a ) *Identification.* A hot/cold water bottle is a device intended for medical purposes that is in the form of a container intended to be filled with hot or cold water to apply heat or cold to an area of the body.
( b ) *Classification.* Class I (general controls). The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter, subject to the limitations in § 880.9. The device is also exempt from the current good manufacturing practice requirements of the quality system regulation in part 820 of this chapter, with the exception of § 820.180, with respect to general requirements concerning records, and § 820.198, with respect to complaint files.
[45 FR 69682, Oct. 21, 1980, as amended at 66 FR 38805, July 25, 2001]
#### § 720.7 Notification of person submitting cosmetic product ingredient statement.

When Form FDA 2512 is received, FDA will either assign a permanent cosmetic product ingredient statement number or a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reference number in those cases where a permanent number cannot be assigned. Receipt of the form will be acknowledged by sending the individual signing the statement an appropriate notice bearing either the FDA reference number or the permanent cosmetic product ingredient statement number. If the person submitting Form FDA 2512 has not complied with §§ 720.4 (b)(1) and (b)(2), the person will be notified as to the manner in which the statement is incomplete.

[57 FR 3130, Jan. 28, 1992]
Webinar Attendees: Energy Conservation Standards Rulemaking Framework Document for Residential Dehumidifiers MeetingMeeting Date: Monday, September 24, 2012Name Title Organization Street CityStateZip Phone Fax EmailComstock, Owen Residential Analyst U.S. Energy Information Administration 1000 Independence AveSWWashington DC 20585 N/A N/A owen.comstock@eia.govDougherty, Brian P Mechanical EngineerBuilding and FireResearch LaboratoryUnited States Department of CommerceNational Institute of Standards and Technology(NIST)100 Bureau Drive, Stop8632Bldg. 226, Room B-309Gaithersburg MD 20899-8632 301-975-6396 301-975-5433 brian.dougherty@nist.govKar, Raul Consultant Navigant Consulting, Inc. 77 S Bedford Street Burlington MA 02476 N/A N/A rahul.kar@navigant.comKim, David Energy ProgramSpecialistLG Electronics USA 1000 Sylvan Avenue EnglewoodCliffsNJ 07632 201-408-9105 N/A david2.kim@lge.comKwatra, Sameer Senior Analyst ACEEE 529 14th St NW Washington DC 20045 N/A N/A skwatra@aceee.orgMortazavi, Renata Senior StandardsEngineerNatural Resources Canada 580 Booth Street Ottawa ON K1A 0E4 N/A N/A remortaz@nrcan.gc.caStephens, Charlie Senior Energy Codes &Standards EngineerNorthwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA) 421 SW Sixth Avenue,Suite 600Portland OR 97204 503-688-5457 503-688-5447 cstephens@neea.orgStrait, Peter Associate EnergySpecialistCalifornia Energy Commission (CEC) 1516 9th Street Sacramento CA 95814 916-651-9375 916-654-4304 PStrait@energy.state.ca.usSutherland,TimothyManaging Consultant Navigant Consulting Inc. 77 South Bedford St, Suite400Burlington MA 01803 781-270-0101 781-270-0418 timothy.sutherland@navigant.comTremel, Curt Director of PerformanceLabUL - Springboard Engineering 3020 1st Avenue E. Newton IA 50208 641-787-8812 N/A ctreme@springboardengineering.comcurtis.tremel@ul.comWilliams, Yoolanda Program Manager -Regulatory andComplianceGeneral Electric AP2-126, Appliance Park Louisville KY 40225 N/A N/A yoolanda.williams@ge.comWilson, Linda Environmental Scientist New York State Office of the Attorney General 120 Broadway New York NY 10271 212-416-8948 212-416-6007 Linda.Wilson@ag.ny.govWoodford, Michael Vice President,StandardsAir-Conditioning, Heating & RefrigerationInstitute (AHRI)2111 Wilson Boulevard,Suite 500Arlington VA 22201 703-600-0328 703-528-3816 mwoodford@ahrinet.orgYoung, Daniel Project Manager Energy Solutions 1610 Harrison Street Oakland CA 94612 510-482-4420x 246510-482-4421 dyoung@energy-solution.com
# C_2015389EN.01005901.xml

| 23.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 389/59 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.11.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 389/59

---

Order of the General Court of 6 October 2015 — GEA Group v OHIM (engineering for a better world)

(Case T-545/14) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark engineering for a better world - Merely confirmatory decision - Finality of the confirmed decision - Finding of the Court of its own motion - Inadmissibility))

(2015/C 389/67)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: GEA Group AG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: J. Schneiders, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented: initially by A. Pohlmann and subsequently by S. Hanne, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 2 June 2014 (Case R 303/2014-4) concerning an application for registration of the word sign ‘engineering for a better world’ as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

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

1.

The action is dismissed.

| 2. | GEA Group AG shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

GEA Group AG shall pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 339, 29.9.2014.

1

---
|   | 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 operation of the      Company |
|--------|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:  |  August      14 , 2008 |   | By:    | /s/      Edward P. Smolyansky                                                                 |   |
|--------|-----------------------------|--------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |                        |   |   | Edward      P. SmolyanskyChief      Financial  and Accounting Officer and Treasurer |   |
# C_2015056EN.01002102.xml

| 16.2.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 56/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.2.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 56/21

---

Order of the General Court of 12 December 2014 — CR v Parliament and Council

(Case T-342/14 P) (1)

1

((Appeal - Civil Service - Officials - Remuneration - Family allowances - Dependent child allowance - Recovery of overpayments - Plea of illegality raised in relation to paragraph 2 of Article 85 of the Staff Regulations - Legal certainty - Proportionality - Obligation to state reasons - Appeal manifestly unfounded))

(2015/C 056/30)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Appellant: CR (Malling, France) (represented by: A. Salerno, lawyer)

Appellant:

Other parties to the proceedings: European Parliament (represented by: V. Montebello-Demogeot and E. Taneva, acting as Agents) and Council of the European Union (represented initially by M. Bauer and A. Bisch, and subsequently by M. Bauer and E. Rebasti, acting as agents)

Other parties to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (Third Chamber) of 12 March 2014 in CR v Parliament (F-128/12, ECR-SC, EU:F:2014:38), seeking to have that judgment set aside.

CR

Parliament

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The appeal is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The appeal is dismissed.

| 2. | Mr CR shall bear his own costs and those incurred by the European Parliament in the present proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mr CR shall bear his own costs and those incurred by the European Parliament in the present proceedings.

| 3. | The Council of the European Union shall bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The Council of the European Union shall bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 212, 7.7.2014.

1

---
§ 607.37 Public disclosure of establishment registration and blood product listing information. ( a ) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, all registration and listing information obtained under §§ 607.25, 607.26, and 607.30 will be made available for public disclosure through the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) Blood Establishment Registration Database Web site by using the CBER electronic Web-based application or by going in person to the Food and Drug Administration, Division of Freedom of Information Public Reading Room (see addresses in § 20.120(a) of this chapter).
( b ) FDA may find, in limited circumstances and on a case-by-case basis, that it would be consistent with the protection of the public health to exempt from public disclosure specific listing information obtained under § 607.25 or § 607.30.
( c ) Other requests for information regarding blood establishment registrations and blood product listings should be directed to the Food and Drug Administration, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research Office of Communication, Outreach, and Development, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 3103, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002.
[81 FR 60223, Aug. 31, 2016]
§ 514.105 Approval of applications. ( a ) The Commissioner shall forward for publication in the Federal Register a regulation prescribing the conditions under which the new animal drug may be used, including the name and address of the applicant; the conditions and indications for use covered by the application; any tolerance, withdrawal period, or other use restrictions; any tolerance required for the new animal drug substance or its metabolites in edible products of food-producing animals; and, if such new animal drug is intended for use in animal feed, appropriate purposes and conditions of use (including special labeling requirements) applicable to any animal feed; and such other information the Commissioner deems necessary to assure safe and effective use.
( b ) He shall notify the applicant by sending him a copy of the proposed publication as described in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
[40 FR 13825, Mar. 27, 1975, as amended at 51 FR 7392, Mar. 3, 1986; 64 FR 63203, Nov. 19, 1999]