alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2014261EN.01004801.xml

| 11.8.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 261/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.8.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 261/48

---

Action brought on 25 June 2014 — Cesáreo Martín-Sanz and Others v Commission

(Case T-474/14)

2014/C 261/76

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Cesáreo Martín-Sanz, SA Transportes (Madrid, Spain); Transportes y Servicios de Minería, SA (Madrid); Inauto, Industrias del Automóvil, SA (Madrid); Premium Quality Investments, SL (Madrid); and Naviera Ispaster, AIE (Madrid) (represented by: J.L. Buendía Sierra, E. Abad Valdenebro, R. Calvo Salinero and A. Lamadrid de Pablo, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the General Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision in so far as it categorises the measures which, according to that decision, together constitute the ‘Spanish Tax Lease System’ as new State aid that is incompatible with the internal market; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision in so far as it categorises the measures which, according to that decision, together constitute the ‘Spanish Tax Lease System’ as new State aid that is incompatible with the internal market;

| — | in the alternative, annul Articles 1 and 4 of the contested decision, which identify the investors in the Economic Interest Groupings (EIGs) as the beneficiaries of the alleged aid and as the sole addressees of the order for recovery; |
| --- | --- |

—

in the alternative, annul Articles 1 and 4 of the contested decision, which identify the investors in the Economic Interest Groupings (EIGs) as the beneficiaries of the alleged aid and as the sole addressees of the order for recovery;

| — | in the alternative, annul Article 4 of the contested decision, in so far as it orders recovery of the alleged aid; |
| --- | --- |

—

in the alternative, annul Article 4 of the contested decision, in so far as it orders recovery of the alleged aid;

| — | annul Article 4 of the contested decision, in so far as it makes a determination as to the lawfulness of private contracts between the investors and other entities; and |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Article 4 of the contested decision, in so far as it makes a determination as to the lawfulness of private contracts between the investors and other entities; and

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs of these proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs of these proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are those raised in Case T-700/13 Bankia v Commission.

Bankia

Commission

---
# C_2014282EN.01005001.xml

| 25.8.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 282/50 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.8.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 282/50

---

Action brought on 26 June 2014 — Mdr Inversiones v Commission

(Case T-488/14)

2014/C 282/65

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Mdr Inversiones, SL (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: M. Linares Gil, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision in so far as it categorises the measures which, according to that decision, together constitute the ‘Spanish Tax Lease System’ as new State aid that is incompatible with the internal market; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision in so far as it categorises the measures which, according to that decision, together constitute the ‘Spanish Tax Lease System’ as new State aid that is incompatible with the internal market;

| — | in the alternative, annul Articles 1 and 4 of the contested decision, which identify the investors in the Economic Interest Groupings (EIGs) as the beneficiaries of the alleged aid and as the sole addressees of the order for recovery; |
| --- | --- |

—

in the alternative, annul Articles 1 and 4 of the contested decision, which identify the investors in the Economic Interest Groupings (EIGs) as the beneficiaries of the alleged aid and as the sole addressees of the order for recovery;

| — | in the alternative, annul Article 4 of the contested decision, in so far as it orders recovery of the alleged aid in clear breach of the principle of legal certainty; and |
| --- | --- |

—

in the alternative, annul Article 4 of the contested decision, in so far as it orders recovery of the alleged aid in clear breach of the principle of legal certainty; and

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs of these proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs of these proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those raised in Case T-700/13 Bankia v Commission.

Bankia

Commission

The applicant alleges, in particular, that the Commission erred in characterising as State aid the ‘Spanish Tax Lease System’ as a whole, as well as the individual measures; that it erred in its identification of the beneficiary of the measures; and that it acted in breach of the principle of legal certainty.

---
Editorial Note on Part 872
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 872 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 872.1850 Lead-lined position indicator. ( a ) *Identification.* A lead-lined position indicator is a cone-shaped device lined with lead that is attached to a dental x-ray tube and intended to aid in positioning the tube, to prevent the misfocusing of the x-rays by absorbing divergent radiation, and to prevent leakage of radiation.
( 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 § 872.9.
[52 FR 30097, Aug. 12, 1987, as amended at 61 FR 1121, Jan. 16, 1996; 66 FR 38797, July 25, 2001]
[if !vml]>[endif]>
[if !vml]>[endif]>
Youhave reached the Federal Depository Library Program Electronic Collection(FDLP/EC) Archive. This archive assures ongoing access to publications in theFDLP/EC. Access to publications in the archive is available through GPO's suiteof cataloging and locator services, including the Catalog of U.S. GovernmentPublications (CGP).
**Title:****Military contingencies in megacities andsub-megacities
 
PDF | MOBI | EPUB
 
SuDoc Number:D 101.146:M 47/2
Item Number:0307-A-31 (online)
CGP System Number:001017404
 
 
 
** 
**Permanent Public Access
** 
Title 44 of  the United States Code (44 U.S.C. Section 1911) stipulates that public access  to official Government information products disseminated through the Federal  Depository Library Program (FDLP) must be maintained permanently in regional  depository libraries and by depository libraries not served by a regional  library. Since online products are not physically distributed to depository  libraries for retention, GPO has assumed responsibility for the provision of  permanent access to Government information products residing on FDsys  servers.
GPO's  permanent public access commitment is also met by bringing agency-disseminated  Internet resources under the purview of GPO and incorporating them into a  digital archive. GPO captures copies of agency electronic information  products, and creates PURLs so that users will be automatically redirected to  the archived products if the information is no longer accessible on the  agency Web site. Please refer to the report Managing the FDLP Electronic  Collection: A Policy and Planning Document for more information.
 
August 25, 2017********
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 4.10

                                CORECOMM HOLDCO
                              ASSUMPTION OF EACH OF
                    WARRANT NO. CCL-1A AND WARRANT NO. CCL-1B
                                   ISSUED TO
                              CHASE SECURITIES INC.
                                  TO PURCHASE
                   SHARES OF COMMON STOCK OF CORECOMM LIMITED

         As part of the merger of CoreComm Merger Corp., a Delaware corporation,
with and into CoreComm Limited, a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), which
will result in Limited becoming a wholly-owned subsidiary of CoreComm Holdco,
Inc., a Delaware corporation ("Holdco"), and pursuant to each of Warrant No.
CCL-1A, dated April 12, 2001, and Warrant No. CCL-1B, dated April 12, 2001
(together, the "Warrants"), that you currently hold to purchase shares of common
stock of the Company, Holdco will assume the due and punctual observance and
performance of each and every covenant and condition of the Warrants to be
performed and observed by the Company, as well as all of the obligations and
liabilities under the Warrants. The Warrants will automatically be converted
into warrants to purchase the number of shares of common stock of Holdco, at the
exercise prices, set forth in the officer's certificate attached hereto as Annex
A, which shares of Holdco common stock Holdco agrees to provide upon exercise of
the Warrants.

         This assumption agreement shall be governed by and construed and
enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of New York. All actions or
proceedings arising in connection with this assumption agreement shall be tried
and litigated only in the federal or state courts located in the County of New
York, State of New York, which shall have exclusive jurisdiction of for the
purpose of any such action or proceeding.

<PAGE>

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this assumption
of warrants as of this 1st day of July, 2002.

                                    CORECOMM HOLDCO, INC.

                                    By: /s/ Michael A. Peterson
                                       ---------------------------------
                                       Name: Michael A. Peterson
                                       Title: Executive Vice President -
                                              Chief Operating Officer and
                                              Chief Financial Officer

                                       2
Order entered January 9 , 2023

In The 

### Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**
No. 05
- 22
- 00961
- CR
EX PARTE SHANIAYA JARVIS On Appeal from the 86th Judi cial District Court Kaufman County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 111585
- 86
O RDER Appellant is appealing the trial court ’ s order denying relief on her pretrial application for writ of habeas corpus seeking a reduction in her bond. Appellant ’ s brief was due on November 2, 2022. On November 4, 2022, after appellant failed to file a timely brief, the Clerk of the Court notified appellant that the time for filing appellant ’ s brief had expired and directed appellant to file the brief and a n extension mot ion within ten days. On November 8, 2022, ap pellant ’ s counsel filed a motio n to withdraw t he appeal signed only by counsel

. By order entered November 15, 2022, the Court denied the motion to dismiss for noncompliance with rule 42.2(a). See T EX
. R. A PP
.– 2

– P. 42.2(a) (requiring both counsel and the appe llant to sig n a motion to dismiss an appeal ). The Court ordered appellant to file an amended motion to dismiss , signed by both counsel and appellant , within fourteen days of the date of the order. To date, appellant has n either filed a n amended motion nor co mmunicated with the
Court.
We ORDER the trial court to conduct a hearing t o determine the status of this appeal. T he trial court shall make appropriate findings and recommendations and determine whether subsequent developments in the case have rendered the appeal moot, whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal , why appellant ’ s brief has not been filed, wheth er appellant is i ndigent, or if not i ndigen t, wheth er retained counsel has abandoned the appeal

. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 3 8.8(b). If the trial

co urt cannot obtain appellant’s presence at the hearing, the trial court shall conduct the hearing in appellant’s a bsence. See Meza v. State , 742 S.W.2 d 708 (Te x. App.

– Corpus Christi 1987, no pet.) (per curiam). If appellan t is indigen t, the trial court is
O RDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective representation, which may inclu de appointm ent of new counsel.
We ORDER the tri al court t o transm it a record of the proceedings, which shall include wri tten finding s and recommendations, to this Court within THIRTY
DAYS of the date of this order.– 3

– This appeal is ABATED to allow the tria l court to comply with the abo ve order. The app eal shall be reins tated when the findings are received or at such other tim e as the Cou rt deems appropriate.
We DIRECT the Clerk to transmit a copy of this order to the Honorable Casey Blair , Presiding Judge, 86th Judicial D istrict Court; a nd to counse l for the parties.

/s/ BONNIE LEE GOLDSTEIN JUSTICE
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          32,310
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  219,389
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    124,597
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               414,976
<PP&E>                                         408,037
<DEPRECIATION>                               (127,698)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 905,416
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          146,224
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       204,304
<OTHER-SE>                                     236,783
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   905,416
<SALES>                                        375,415
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               375,415
<CGS>                                          202,802
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  202,802
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (7,396)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 38,257
<INCOME-TAX>                                    14,514
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             23,743
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    23,743
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.35
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.35


</TABLE>
#### Rigdon *v.*Rigdon.

No. 8899.

June 16, 1932.

*Love & Fort*and *A. W. & John G. Cozart,*for plaintiff in error.

*George G. Palmer,*contra.

Beck, P. J.

Where a suit for divorce is filed by the husband against the wife, or by the wife against the husband, temporary alimony is awarded to afford the wife the means of contesting the issues in the case between herself and her husband, and the grant or refusal of temporary alimony and the amount thereof, where alimony is allowed, are matters resting in the sound discretion of the judge; and where temporary alimony is allowed, the judgment allowing it will not be interfered with by this court, unless there is a manifest abuse of discretion. Upon a review of this record, it can not be held that the judge abused the discretion vested in him by law.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Bussell, G. J., and Atkinson, Hill, and Gilbert, JJ., concur.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                             105
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   36,467
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,526
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                38,805
<PP&E>                                          13,994
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,789
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  48,604
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           17,604
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        21,558
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,481
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    48,604
<SALES>                                         32,218
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                32,218
<CGS>                                           19,512
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   19,512
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                10,100
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    23
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 102
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,528
<INCOME-TAX>                                       986
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,542
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,542
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.11
        

</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 874
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 874 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 874.5550 Powered nasal irrigator. ( a ) *Identification.* A powered nasal irrigator is an AC-powered device intended to wash the nasal cavity by means of a pressure-controlled pulsating stream of water. The device consists of a control unit and pump connected to a spray tube and nozzle.
( 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 § 874.9.
[55 FR 48440, Nov. 20, 1990, as amended at 65 FR 2316, Jan. 14, 2000]
1

The Honorable William R. Wilson, United States District Judge for the Eastern

District of Arkansas.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 08-2130

___________

Carolyn Miles, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Eastern District of Arkansas.

University of Arkansas System, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellee. *

___________

Submitted: October 6, 2009

Filed: October 8, 2009

___________

Before BYE, BOWMAN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Carolyn Miles appeals the District Court’s1

 adverse grant of summary judgment

in her employment-discrimination suit. After de novo review, see Johnson v. Blaukat,

453 F.3d 1108, 1112 (8th Cir. 2006), we conclude that summary judgment was proper

for the reasons stated by the District Court. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R.

47B.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     (Replace this text with the legend)
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000854858
<NAME>                        Ajay Sports, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. Dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1.000
<CASH>                                           463
<SECURITIES>                                     484
<RECEIVABLES>                                  4,214
<ALLOWANCES>                                       0
<INVENTORY>                                    4,942
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              10,294
<PP&E>                                         1,754
<DEPRECIATION>                                   101
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                25,600
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         12,602
<BONDS>                                            0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          2,702
<PREFERRED>                                    1,250
<COMMON>                                          40
<OTHER-SE>                                     2,325
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  25,600
<SALES>                                        4,560
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               4,560
<CGS>                                          4,043
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    985
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               275
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (787)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    (275)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (512)
<DISCONTINUED>                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (512)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.00




</TABLE>