alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential.



# United States **Court of Appeals** 
**for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

IN

- DEPTH TEST LLC, Plaintiff

- Appellant

v.

MAXIM INTEGRATED PRO DUCTS, INC. Defendant

- Appellee

______________________

2019

- 1409

______________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

District of Delaware in No. 1:14

- cv

- 00887

- CFC, Judge Colm F. Connolly.

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

IN

- DEPTH TEST LLC, Plaintiff

- Appellant

v.

VISHAY INTERTECHNOLO GY INC., SILICONIX INCORPORATED, Defendants

- Appellees

______________________

2019

- 1410

______________ ________Appeal from the United States District Court for the

District of Delaware in No. 1:14

- cv

- 00888

- CFC, Judge Colm F. Connolly.

______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

R OBERT G REENSPOON

, Flachsbart & Greenspoon, LLC, Chicago, IL, arg ued for plaintiff

- appellant. Also represented by D AVE R. G UNTER

, J ONATHAN T AD S UDER

, C ORBY
R OBERT V OWELL , Friedman, Suder & Cooke, Fort Worth,

TX.

D AVID M. B ARKAN

, Fish & Richardson, PC, Redwood City, CA, argued for all defendants

- appellees. Defendant

appellee Maxim Integrated Products, Inc. also represented by R OBERT M. O AKES , Wilmington, DE.

G REGORY S COTT B ISHOP , Pepper Hamilton LLP, Redwood City, CA, f or defendants

- appellees Vishay Intertechnology Inc., Siliconix Incorporated. Also represented by

C HARLES F OSTER K OCH

.

______________________

T HIS C AUSE ha ving been heard and considered, it is

O RDERED and A DJUDGED :

P ER C URIAM (L OURIE

, B RYSON

, and T ARANTO

, Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED. See Fed . Cir. R. 36.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURTDecember 6, 2019 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner

Date Peter R. Marksteiner

Clerk of Court
#### Leon DeLONES, Petitioner, v. Ann Mason DeLONES, Respondent.

No. 46142.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Dec. 6, 1974.

Certiorari denied. 297 So.2d 585.

ROBERTS, Acting C. J., and ERVIN, BOYD, McCAIN and OVERTON, JJ., concur.
#### Huey F. CARTER, Appellant, v. Geneva F. CARTER, Appellee.

No. T-314.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Dec. 31, 1974.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 10, 1975.

*588Brooks Taylor, Crestvicw, Frank A. Graham, Jr,, of Graham, Buford, Vossler & Schoditsch, Tallahassee, for appellant.

Louis F. Ray, Jr., Pensacola, for appel-lee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks reversal of a final judgment entered in a dissolution of marriage action. Several points are raised on appeal upon which appellant relies for reversal. Among these is appellant’s contention that the court erred in requiring him to make the mortgage payments on the marital residence, as well as the payment of taxes and insurance thereon, because such requirement in effect enhances the appellee’s equity in her half of the property which is now to be owned by both as tenants in common. Appellant relies on Maroun v. Maroun, 277 So.2d 572 (Fla. App.1973), in support of his contention. Maroun is not controlling in the case at bar. Here appellant occupies the former marital residence which is now owned by him and his former wife as tenants in common. While it is true that the mortgage payments made by him will serve to enhance her equity in the property, it is equally true that he is occupying her property. in addition to his own, since by the terms of the final judgment he was permitted to remain in possession of and enjoy the use of the former marital residence. In these circumstances, it cannot be said that the trial judge abused his discretion in the entry of the final judgment.

It appearing that the appellee has sufficient funds with which to discharge her own fee obligation to her attorney, motion for attorney’s fees filed by appellee is denied.

Accordingly, the judgment reviewed herein is affirmed.

SPECTOR, Acting C. J., and BOYER and McCORD, JJ., concur.
#### § 800.221 Foreign government.

The term *foreign government* means any government or body exercising governmental functions, other than the U.S. Government or a subnational government of the United States. The term includes, but is not limited to, national and subnational governments, including their respective departments, agencies, and instrumentalities.
#### William PRESLEY v. Victor D. BRASWELL and James Fox.

No. 47739.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Oct. 7, 1974.

Laurel G. Weir, Philadelphia, for appellant.

Thornton & Dorrill, Kosciusko, Fair & Mayo, Louisville, for appellees.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Winston County; Marshall Perry, Judge.

Before RODGERS, P. J., and PATTERSON, SMITH, ROBERTSON and SUGG, JJ.

Affirmed.
#### Charlie TUCKER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 78-914.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 14, 1979.

*633Jack 0. Johnson, Public Defender, and James R. Wulchak, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and William I. Munsey, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

After reviewing the briefs and record on appeal, we find the appellant has failed to demonstrate reversible error; therefore, the judgment appealed is affirmed.

The only point which merits discussion is the propriety of the appellant’s sentence to confinement “at hard labor.” To be imprisoned “at hard labor” is improper because no existing state statute provides for its imposition as a sentence for any offense. *Speller v. State,*305 So.2d 231 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974).

Remanded for the purpose of striking the language “at hard labor” from the sentencing order; otherwise affirmed. Appellant need not be present for this purpose.

HOBSON, A. C. J., and SCHEB and RYDER, JJ., concur.
# C_2005229EN.01003002.xml

| 17.9.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 229/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.9.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 229/30

---

Action brought on 8 July 2005 by Raffaele Dalmasso against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-269/05)

(2005/C 229/65)

Language of the case: French

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 8 July 2005 by Raffaele Dalmasso, resident in Schaerbeek (Belgium), represented Lucas Vogel, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the decision adopted by the Authority Responsible for Concluding Contracts of Employment on 21 March 2005 by which it dismissed the applicant's application of 7 December 2004, reclassified as a claim, against the decision fixing the grade and remuneration determined for the applicant in his capacity as contract staff under the terms of the contract which entered into effect on 16 September 2004; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision adopted by the Authority Responsible for Concluding Contracts of Employment on 21 March 2005 by which it dismissed the applicant's application of 7 December 2004, reclassified as a claim, against the decision fixing the grade and remuneration determined for the applicant in his capacity as contract staff under the terms of the contract which entered into effect on 16 September 2004;

| — | in so far as necessary, annul also the original decision, by which the grade and remuneration were fixed for the applicant in his capacity as a contract staff under the terms of the contract which entered into effect on 16 September 2004; |
| --- | --- |

—

in so far as necessary, annul also the original decision, by which the grade and remuneration were fixed for the applicant in his capacity as a contract staff under the terms of the contract which entered into effect on 16 September 2004;

| — | order the defendant to pay EUR 25 000 by way of damages, subject to an increase or decrease or further specifications; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay EUR 25 000 by way of damages, subject to an increase or decrease or further specifications;

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

—

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are identical to those put forward in Case T-253/05 Fernandez Tunon v Commission.

Fernandez Tunon

Commission

---
#### Sophia L. Mattern, Appellant, *against*Russell Sage, Respondent.

(Decided April 7th, 1890.)

A broker holding stock as partial security for a debt, with the right to sell it at any time to protect himself, is not legally obligated to sell and realize" ' upon it before bringing action or counterclaiming upon the debt, where the debtor has not directed a sale.

Appeal from a judgment of this court entered upon the report of a referee.

The facts are stated in the opinion.

*Ira*Shafer, for appellant.

*Henry S. Bennett,*for respondent.

Larremore, Ch. J.

The main controversy in this action was on the facts. There Was a direct conflict of evidence between the parties upon all the material facts, but, as defendant was corroborated in so many important points by plaintiff’s own letters, we do not see how the learned referee could .have reached any other conclusions than those embodied in his report.

The defendant was not legally obligated to sell and realize upon the stock he holds as partial security for the debt, before counterclaiming and demanding judgment for the whole amount. Defendant claims, and the referee has found, that defendant has been holding this stock for plaintiff’s account for several years, and plaintiff has never directed a sale thereof. Because a broker lias the right to sell stock out at any time to protect himself, it does not follow that he is obliged to follow this course if he chooses to take the risk of his principal’s eventually making good any loss that may occur (See *First National Bank*v. *Wood,*71 N. Y. 409). In the ■ case at bar it appears that the stock has been held for such a *143long period with full knowledge and by mutual arrangement of the parties, presumably in the expectation of a rise. It is therefore equitable, as well as legally justifiable, that when the broker is sued by his principal on account of this and other transactions, he should be allowed to counterclaim whatever indebtedness exists at the time, without, in default of a direct order, being obliged to depart from the former arrangement.

The judgment appealed from should be affirmed, with costs.

Bischoee, J., concurred.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
# C_2005281EN.01002802.xml

| 12.11.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 281/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.11.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 281/28

---

Action brought on 1 September 2005 — IKEA/OHIM

(Case T-331/05)

(2005/C 281/53)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant(s): Inter IKEA Systems B.V. (Delft, The Netherlands) [represented by: J. Gulliksson, J. Olsson, lawyers]

Applicant(s):

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the Decision of the First Board of Appeal of July 1, 2005 in case R 799/2004-1, and |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the Decision of the First Board of Appeal of July 1, 2005 in case R 799/2004-1, and

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

—

Order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: A figurative mark consisting of the colour combination blue and yellow for goods and services in classes 20 and 35 (furniture, advertising etc.) — application No 3 160 363

Community trade mark concerned:

Decision of the examiner: Refusal of the application for all goods and services

Decision of the examiner:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and Article 7(3) of Council Regulation No 40/94 as the trade mark is sufficiently distinctive per se to be registrable and further has acquired distinctiveness through use in Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden.

Pleas in law:

---
§ 412.374 Payments to hospitals located in Puerto Rico. ( a ) *FY 1998 through FY 2004.* Payments for capital-related costs to hospitals located in Puerto Rico that are paid under the prospective payment system are equal to the sum of the following: ( 1 ) 50 percent of the Puerto Rico capital rate based on data from Puerto Rico hospitals only, which is determined in accordance with procedures for developing the Federal rate; and
( 2 ) 50 percent of the Federal rate, as determined under § 412.308.
( b ) *FY 2005 through FY 2016.* For discharges occurring on or after October 1, 2004 and on or before September 30, 2016, payments for capital-related costs to hospitals located in Puerto Rico that are paid under the prospective payment system are equal to the sum of the following: ( 1 ) 25 percent of the Puerto Rico capital rate based on data from Puerto Rico hospitals only, which is determined in accordance with procedures for developing the Federal rate; and
( 2 ) 75 percent of the Federal rate, as determined under § 412.308.
( c ) Effective for fiscal year 1998, the Puerto Rico capital rate described in paragraph (a) of this section in effect on September 30, 1997, is reduced by 15.68 percent.
( d ) For discharges occurring on or after October 1, 1997 through September 30, 2002, the Puerto Rico capital rate described in paragraph (a) of this section in effect on September 30, 1997 is further reduced by 2.1 percent.
( e ) *FY 2017 and subsequent fiscal years.* For discharges occurring on or after October 1, 2016, payments for capital-related costs to hospitals located in Puerto Rico that are paid under the prospective payment system are based on 100 percent of the Federal rate, as determined under § 412.308.
[62 FR 46032, Aug. 29, 1997, as amended at 69 FR 49250, Aug. 11, 2004; 81 FR 57268, Aug. 22, 2016]
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. 

# Wntteb**~tate~ ~ourt**  

# of**§ppeaI~** 

# fortbe jf

# eberaI(!Circuit

JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. AND 

### JOHNSON & 

### JOHNSON PHARMACEUTICAL RESEARCH & 

### DEVELOPMENT, LLC, Plaintiffs-Appellees,


### v. WATSON LABORATORIES, INC. AND 

### SANDOZ, INC., Defendants, AND 

### LUPIN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. AND 

### LUPIN LTD., Defendants-Appellants.

2012-1693
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey in consolidated case no. 08-CV5103, Judge Stanley R. Chesler.



### ON MOTION

ORDER Case: 12-1693 Document: 9 Page: 1 Filed: 10/09/2012JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS V. WATSONLABORATORIES 2 Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al. (Lupin) moves to expedite the appeal, briefing, and oral argument. Lupin states that Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al. (Janssen) oppose. Upon consideration thereof, 

### ITIs ORDERED

### THAT: The motions are granted to the following extent: Lupin's opening briefis due no later than October 26, 2012; Janssen's brief is due no later than November 30, 2012; Lupin's reply briefand thejoint appendix are due no later than December 10, 2012. No extensions oftime should be anticipated. Oral argument will be scheduled by subsequent order.
FOR THE COURT

/s/Jan Horbaly Jan Horbaly Clerk s8 Case: 12-1693 Document: 9 Page: 2 Filed: 10/09/2012
#### Roger A. BROWN, Petitioner, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent.

No. 46538.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Jan. 16, 1975.

Certiorari denied.

ADKINS, C. J., and ROBERTS, ERVIN, McCAIN and OVERTON, JJ., concur.
#### Jerry Daniel FERGUSON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 74-11.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Aug. 20, 1974.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.

STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Arthur Franklin EDWARDS, Appellee.

No. 74-1032.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Aug. 21, 1974.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Brevard County; Volie A. Williams, Jr., Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
# C_2005308EN.01001701.xml

| 6.12.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 308/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.12.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 308/17

---

NEW NATIONAL SIDES OF EURO CIRCULATION COINS

NEW NATIONAL SIDES OF EURO CIRCULATION COINS

(2005/C 308/08)

Image

Euro circulation coins have legal tender status throughout the euro area. The Commission publishes all new euro coin designs (1) with a view to informing the parties required to handle coins on a regular basis and the public at large.

1

Issuing State: Vatican City State

Approximate issue period: April 2005

Description of the designs: All denominations

All denominations

The inner part of the coin shows the coat of arms of Cardinal Chamberlain, the interim leader of the Vatican City State, with the emblem of the Apostolic Chamber in the upper part of the design. The words ‘SEDE VACANTE’ form a quasi-semicircle along the upper left edge of the inner part. The year of mintage, ‘MMV’, appears in Roman numerals along the right-hand edge of the inner part. Between the coat of arms and the year of mintage is the mintmark ‘R’. The designer's initial and surname, ‘D. LONGO’, appear on the lower left-hand side along the edge of the inner part. The engraver's initials appear on the lower right-hand side of the design along the edge of the inner part: ‘MAC inc’ (1-cent, 20-cent); ‘LDS inc’ (2-cent, 50-cent); ‘ELF inc’ (5-cent, 1-euro); ‘MCC inc’ (10-cent, 2-euro). Twelve stars in a quasi-semicircle are shown on the upper half of the outer ring. On the lower part of the outer ring the words ‘CITTÀ DEL VATICANO’ form a semicircle.

Edge lettering of the 2-euro coin: 2 *, repeated six times, alternately upright and inverted.

---

(1)  See OJ C 373 of 28.12.2001, pp. 1-30 for a reference to all national sides that were issued in 2002.

1

---
p. 1 

# OAR Box 1781 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 111 ) IV-C-2

5 Docket Number: 

# A-90-3 7

Printed 10/29/2008 10:46:23 AM Sheet 111 of 142P. 2

_*_ r , UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y 

# H 

# -c- 2 5 RESEARC H TRIANGL E PARK , N C 2771 1

OFFIC E O F AI R QUALIT Y PLANNIN G T T ,._,,.,... . . | | | AN D STANDARD S Honorable Barbar

aMikulsk i United State s Senat

e Washington , D C 20510-200 3 Dea r Senato r Mikulski : Than k you fo r your letter o f July 13,1999 , i

n suppor t o f ou r efforts t o simplif

y an d streamline th e ne

w sourc e revie w (NSR) program . Yo u indicate d tha

t som e o f your constituent s believ e tha t "...th e uncertaint

y o f th e NS R progra

mstifle s innovatio n an

d threaten s th e globa

l competitivenes s o f

ou r manufacturing sector

fo r littl e environmenta

l benefit. " Further , you indicated tha

t thes e constituent s believ e tha t "EP A i s focusin

g to o much o n th e detail s o f specifi c operation s a

t individua l companies , rathe

r tha n focusin g on th e installatio n o f

ne w technolog y to mee t Clea n Ai r goals. " W e hav e mad

e aspecia l effor t ove r th e pas t yea r to see k furthe r input fromal l stakeholder s o

n new approache s tha

t will hel p achiev e ou

r goal s o f providin g mor

e flexibility fo

r industr y an d streamlinin g th e permittin g process , whil e preservin g ui e environmenta l protectio n called fo r by th e Clea

n Air Act . Ou r next serie s o f meeting s wit

h stakeholder s ar

e bein g scheduled fo

r thi s Augus t

an d September . W

e ar e hopefu l tha t w e ca n com e t o awidel

y accepted se t o f progra mreform s tha

t allow s source s t o manag e emission s reduction s wit h their plan s fo r growt h an d change s neede d t o mee

t ne w marke

t demands . W

e expec t t o hav e resolutio n on mos t issue s b y lat e thi s fall . W

e ar e als o investigatin g sector-base d approache s fo r industria l groups , suc h a s utilities , tha

t hav e simila

r manufacturing an

d emission s characteristics . Thi s effor t will requir e aconsiderabl e investmen

t o f time an d energy o n th e par t o f stakeholders , a s well a s EP A staff , bu t will yiel d importan

t dividend s i f

th e lega l an d polic y issue s ca

n b e resolved . Again , than

k yo u fo r you r concer n an d comments . If

I ca n b e o f furthe r service , pleas e d

o not hesitat e to contac t

me . 

# OrlWa S S^ne d B y Rober t O . Brenne r Rober t Perciasep e Assistan t Administrator OAR:OAQPS:ITPID:IIG:DCrumper:ybthorpe:NCMU:MD-12:919-541-087 1 CONTRO L NO . AL-990165 1 Due Date : 8/3/9 9

Recycled/Recyclabl e • Printe d wit h Vegetabl e Oi l Base d Ink s o n 100 % Recycle d Pape r (40 % Postconsumer ) •P
BEFORE THE 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Agreements Adopted by the Tariffs Conference 

International Air Transport Association 

Docket OST-2006- 24805 

APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF AGREEMENTS 

BY THE 

INTERNATIONAL AIR TRANSPORT ASSOCL\TION 

REQUEST TO WITHDRAW 

PENDING AGREEMENT FROM DOCKET 2005-21503 

TECHNICAL CORRECTION TO DOCKET 2006-24805 

Correct Memo PTC31 South 0177 attached 

lATA REQUEST TO WITHDRAW AGREEMENT APPROVED 

DOCKET OST-05-21503 ACTION DATE September 23.2011 

This approval and grant of antitrust immunity is subject, where applicable, 

to conditions previously imposed. 

This action is effective after 7 days unless a petition is filed under 14 CFR 385.30 

or a review is undertaken on the Department's own motion. In view of the 

agreement's noncontroversial nature and the availability of the above procedures, 

the 21-day p«ripd in 14 CFa30;^42 i 

BY: i=td X.^^\ 

tor, Office of InterriatioiTal Aviation 

17 May 2006 

Communications with respect to 

this document should be sent to: 

Douglas Lavin 

Regional Vice President - North America 

International Air Transport Association 

1750 K St. N.W. #12* Floor 

Washington, D.C. 20006 

(202) 293-9292