alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2006086EN.01003401.xml

| 8.4.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 86/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 86/34

---

Action brought on 24 January 2006 — Procter & Gamble v OHIM

(Case T-30/06)

(2006/C 86/69)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: The Procter & Gamble Company (Cincinnati, USA) [represented by: G. Kuipers, lawyer]

Applicant:

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 the OHIM of 21 November 2005 (Case R 1072/2004-1), which was notified to P&G by letter of 5 December 2005, in so far as it finds that the mark does not satisfy the conditions as laid down in Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94; and |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the OHIM of 21 November 2005 (Case R 1072/2004-1), which was notified to P&G by letter of 5 December 2005, in so far as it finds that the mark does not satisfy the conditions as laid down in Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94; and

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

—

order the OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: Three dimensional mark in form of a square white tablet showing a blue four petalled floral design for goods in class 3 (washing and bleaching preparations and other substances for laundry use; cleaning, polishing, scouring and abrasive preparations; preparations for the washing, cleaning and care of dishes; soaps) — application No 1 683 408

Community trade mark concerned:

Decision of the examiner: Refusal of the application

Decision of the examiner:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: Violation of Article 7(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 40/94.

Pleas in law:

---
# C_2006078EN.01000101.xml

| 31.3.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 78/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.3.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78/1

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

30 March 2006

(2006/C 78/01)

1 euro=

1 euro

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2096 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 141,90 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4618 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,69460 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,4163 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,5746 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 85,14 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,9770 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CYP | Cyprus pound | 0,5760 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 28,615 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 265,40 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,6960 |
| MTL | Maltese lira | 0,4293 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,9262 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 3,5201 |
| SIT | Slovenian tolar | 239,61 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 37,670 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,6285 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6962 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4108 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,3870 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,9840 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,9589 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 180,69 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 7,5324 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 9,7095 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3308 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 11 049,70 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,464 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 61,992 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 33,5590 |
| THB | Thai baht | 46,991 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2096

JPY

Japanese yen

141,90

DKK

Danish krone

7,4618

GBP

Pound sterling

0,69460

SEK

Swedish krona

9,4163

CHF

Swiss franc

1,5746

ISK

Iceland króna

85,14

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,9770

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CYP

Cyprus pound

0,5760

CZK

Czech koruna

28,615

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

265,40

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,6960

MTL

Maltese lira

0,4293

PLN

Polish zloty

3,9262

RON

Romanian leu

3,5201

SIT

Slovenian tolar

239,61

SKK

Slovak koruna

37,670

TRY

Turkish lira

1,6285

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6962

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4108

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,3870

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,9840

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,9589

KRW

South Korean won

1 180,69

ZAR

South African rand

7,5324

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

9,7095

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3308

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

11 049,70

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,464

PHP

Philippine peso

61,992

RUB

Russian rouble

33,5590

THB

Thai baht

46,991

---

(1)

1

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Source:

---
# cc: Hon. Gloria Sturman, District Judge Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, LLP/Las Vegas Cobeaga Law Firm Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 

# 2
(0) 1947A .02Ado
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM NORWEST
FINANCIAL INC AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                          72,991
<SECURITIES>                                   757,291
<RECEIVABLES>                                5,834,844
<ALLOWANCES>                                   158,618
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                         158,222
<DEPRECIATION>                                  94,334
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,539,259
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                      6,040,014<F2>
<COMMON>                                         3,855
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,033,742
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,539,259
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,419,358
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               501,147
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               143,318
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             359,079
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                415,814
<INCOME-TAX>                                   147,873
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   267,941
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>NORWEST FINANCIAL INC HAS A NON-CLASSIFIED BALANCE SHEET
SO THIS INFORMATION IS UNAVAILABLE.
<F2>INCLUDES $2.0 BILLION OF SHORT-TERM LOANS
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Juan Enriquez v. Ahmed A. Morsy

, M.D.

Appellate case number: 01

- 22

- 00622

- CV

Trial court case number: 18

- CV

- 0884

Trial court: 10th District Court of Galveston C ou nty

Appellant, Juan Enr iquez, has filed an appeal of the trial court ’ s July 28, 2 022 order sealing certain records. Appellee, Ahmed A. Morsy

, M.D ., has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, asserting t hat because the order is an “ incidental ruling ” and not a final judgment, this Court lacks jurisdiction over the appeal.

Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 76a governs the sealing of trial court records. It st ates in

part:

Appeal. Any order (or portion of an order or judgment) relating to sealing or unsealing cou rt records shall be deemed to be severed from the case and a final judgment which may be appealed by any party or intervenor who participated in the hearing preceding issuance of such order.

T EX

. R. C IV

. P. 76a (8)

. 1 Accordingly , the July 28 , 2022 order sealing the records is immediately appealable. S ee Jack B. A nglin Co., Inc. v. Tipps , 842 S.W.2d 266, 272 n.13 (Tex. 1992) ( “ This court has, however, deemed orders relating to sealing or unsealing court records to be final,

appea lable judgments

. ”) ; Stacey v. Shadd , No. 03

- 20

- 00126

- CV, 2020 WL 7640041, at *4 (Tex. App.

— Austin Dec. 23, 2020, no pet.) (mem. op.) ( Rule 76a ’s “language provides appell ate jurisdiction over the disputed order ” that related to sealing records) ; Kallergis v. Brupbacher

, No. 14

- 19

- 00470

- CV, 2021 WL 506081, at *2 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] Feb. 11, 2021,

no pet. h. ) ( Rule 76a(8) authorizes such an [interlocutory] appeal

. ”)

. Appellee ’ s motion to dismiss is denied.

It is so ORDERED.

1 The reporter ’s record indicates appellant participated in the July 15, 2022 hearing on the sealing

of the records.Judge’s signature:

_____ ______ /s/ Julie Countiss

__ ________ A cting individually

Date: October 6, 2022
#### Arthur L. ARNOLD, as Trustee, et al., Appellants, v. LEE TURZILLO CONTRACTING CO., a foreign corporation, Appellee.

No. 74-214.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 17, 1974.

Appeal dismissed.
EXHIBIT 11
      
         STATEMENT RE: COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS


<PAGE>

                Computation of Per Share Earnings


                                                     Twelve Months Ended
                                                         December 31
                                                     --------------------

                                                     1998            1997   
                                                 ----------       ----------
Basic:

Average shares outstanding:                       1,767,064        1,766,007
                                                 ==========       ==========

Net Income                                       $2,331,518       $2,397,560
                                                 ==========       ==========

Net income per share                                  $1.32            $1.36
                                                 ==========       ==========



Diluted:

Average shares outstanding:                       1,767,064        1,766,007

Net effect of the assumed exercise of
stock options based on the treasury
stock method using average market price.              1,636            1,101
                                                 ----------       ----------

Total                                             1,768,700        1,767,108
                                                 ==========       ==========

Net income                                       $2,331,518       $2,397,560
                                                 ==========       ==========

Net income per share                                  $1.32            $1.36
                                                 ==========       ==========
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 175 (Friday, September 11, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 46755]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-21871]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2611-071]


Madison Paper Industries, Hydro Kennebec LLC; Notice of 
Application for Transfer of License and Soliciting Comments and Motions 
To Intervene

September 3, 2009.
    On September 1, 2009, Madison Paper Industries (transferor) and 
Hydro Kennebec LLC (transferee) filed an application for transfer of 
license of the Hydro Kennebec Project located in Kennebec and Somerset 
Counties, Maine, on the Kennebec River.
    Applicants seek Commission approval to transfer the license for the 
Hydro Kennebec Project from the transferor to the transferee.
    Applicant Contact: Transferor: Madison Paper Industries--Ms. Sarah 
A. Verville, Pierce Atwood LLP, One Monument Square, Portland, ME 
04101, (207) 791-1100 e-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#413237243337282d2d24013135243322242035362e2e256f222e2c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e596938097938c898980a59591809786808491928a8a81cb868a88">[email protected]</span></a>. Transferee: 
Hydro Kennebec LLC--Mr. Douglas W. Everette, Patton Boggs LLP, 2550 M 
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20037, phone (202) 457-5618, e-mail: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#cda9a8bba8bfa8b9b9a88dbdacb9b9a2a3afa2aaaabee3aea2a0"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="2c48495a495e495858496c5c4d585843424e434b4b5f024f4341">[email protected]</span></a>.
    FERC Contact: Patricia W. Gillis, (202) 502-8735.
    Deadline for filing comments and motions to intervene: October 1, 
2009. Comments and motions to intervene may be filed electronically via 
the Internet. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii)(2008) and the instructions 
on the Commission's Web site under the ``e-Filing'' link. If unable to 
be filed electronically, documents may be paper-filed. To paper-file, 
an original and eight copies should be mailed to: Kimberly D. Bose, 
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426. For more information on how to submit these types 
of filings please go to the Commission's Web site located at http://www.ferc.gov/filing-comments.asp. More information about this project 
can be viewed or printed on the eLibrary link of the Commission's Web 
site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket 
number (P-2611-071) in the docket number field to access the document. 
For assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3372.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-21871 Filed 9-10-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3253 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3253

 To name the Department of Veterans Affairs medical center in Jackson, 
 Mississippi, as the ``G. V. (Sonny) Montgomery Department of Veterans 
                       Affairs Medical Center''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 16, 1996

  Mr. Parker (for himself, Mr. Wicker, Mr. Taylor of Mississippi, Mr. 
 Thompson, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Cooley of Oregon, Mr. Everett, Mr. Doyle, 
 Mr. Hutchinson, Mr. Clement, Mr. Smith of New Jersey, Mr. Evans, Mr. 
       Mascara, Ms. Brown of Florida, Mr. Filner, Mr. Kennedy of 
 Massachusetts, Mr. Tejeda, Ms. Waters, Mr. Ney, Mr. Clyburn, and Mr. 
   Emerson) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To name the Department of Veterans Affairs medical center in Jackson, 
 Mississippi, as the ``G. V. (Sonny) Montgomery Department of Veterans 
                       Affairs Medical Center''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. NAME OF DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER, 
              JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI.

    (a) Name.--The Department of Veterans Affairs medical center in 
Jackson, Mississippi, shall be known and designated as the ``G. V. 
(Sonny) Montgomery Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center''. Any 
reference to such medical center in any law, regulation, map, document, 
record, or other paper of the United States shall be considered to be a 
reference to the G. V. (Sonny) Montgomery Department of Veterans 
Affairs Medical Center.
    (b) Effective Date.--Subsection (a) shall take effect at noon on 
January 3, 1997.
                                 <all>
```
#### The Atlantic Industrial Bank *v.*Marguerite R. Centonze et al.

Maltbie, C. J., Brown, Jennings, Ells and Dickenson, Js.

Argued March 5

decided March 26, 1943.

*Frank Rich,*for the appellants (defendants).

*Joseph P. Zone,*for the appellee (plaintiff).

Per Curiam.

The defendants gave the plaintiff their note, dated September 19, 1939, for $739.88, for which they received the sum of $695.45, the difference, .$44.43, representing interest. paid in advance. The .parties- orally agreed that the makers were to pay the *19face of the note in fifty-two equal weekly payments, the first payment to be made one week from the date of the note. This the defendants failed to do and the plaintiff brought this action for the balance and for an attorney’s fee provided for in case of nonpayment of the note. Judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiff from which the defendants have appealed.

The assignments of error are in substance that the trial court could not on the evidence find that the rate of interest charged was less than 12 per cent per annum or that the plaintiff was an industrial bank exempted from the provisions of General Statutes, § 4732, by § 1239e of the Cumulative Supplement of 1939. The plaintiff produced in evidence a certificate dated August 12, 1926, bearing the signatures of the members of the banking commission of the state and its seal, stating that The Italian Loan Association was authorized to transact business as an industrial bank, and a copy of a certificate dated December 2, 1940, authenticated as a true copy by the secretary of the state, having upon it the seal of the banking commission and apparently the actual signatures of the members of the commission, authorizing the association to change its name to The Atlantic Industrial Bank. Under the statutes in force in 1926, the banking commission was empowered to issue a certificate of authority to a corporation to do business as an industrial bank. Public Acts, 1919, Chap. 196, § 9 (General Statutes, § 4038, Cum. Sup. 1935, § 1511c). Under the statutes in force in 1940, the banking commission was empowered to issue a certificate authorizing an industrial bank to change its name, the certificate to be filed in the office of the secretary of the state. General Statutes, Cum. Sup. 1935, §§ 1515c, 1450c. Courts take judicial notice of the seals and signatures of the heads of departs ments of the state government. *Cary*v. *State,*76 Ala. *2078, 83; 1 Chamberlayne, Evidence, § § 655, 657; 1 Jones, Evidence (4th Ed.), §111; 7 Wigmore, Evidence (3d Ed.), § 2161. The certificates in evidence were properly authenticated and in the absence of any countervailing evidence were sufficient to justify the court in finding that the plaintiff was an industrial bank, The plaintiff, being an industrial bank, was entitled to charge interest in the manner and amount that it did. General Statutes, Cum. Sup. 1939, § 1239e; *Columbus Industrial Bank*v. *Miller,*125 Conn. 313, 319, 6 Atl. (2d) 42.

There is no error.
§ 417.410 Qualifying conditions: General rules. ( a ) *Basic requirement.* In order to qualify for a contract with CMS under this subpart, an HMO or CMP must demonstrate its ability to enroll Medicare beneficiaries and other individuals and groups and to deliver a specified comprehensive range of high quality services efficiently, effectively, and economically to its Medicare enrollees.
( b ) *Other qualifying conditions.* An HMO or CMP must meet qualifying conditions that pertain to operating experience, enrollment, range of services, furnishing of services, and a quality assurance program.
( c ) *Standards.* Generally, each qualifying condition is interpreted by a series of standards that are used in surveying an HMO or CMP to determine its qualifications for a Medicare contract.
( d ) *Application of standards.* Application of the standards enables the surveyor to determine— ( 1 ) The HMO's or CMP's activities;
( 2 ) The extent to which the HMO or CMP complies with each condition;
( 3 ) The nature and extent of any deficiencies; and
( 4 ) The need for improvement if CMS should enter into a contract with the HMO or CMP.
( e ) *Requirements for a risk contract.* An HMO or CMP may enter into a risk contract with CMS if it— ( 1 ) Meets all the applicable requirements in the statute and regulations;
( 2 ) Has at least 5,000 enrollees or 1,500 enrollees if it serves a primarily rural area as defined in § 417.413(b)(3);
( 3 ) Has at least 75 Medicare enrollees or has an acceptable plan to achieve this Medicare membership within 2 years;
( 4 ) Satisfies CMS that it can bear the potential losses of a risk contract; and
( 5 ) Has not previously terminated or failed to renew a risk contract within the preceding 5 years, unless CMS determines that circumstances warrant special consideration.
( f ) *Requirements for a reasonable cost sontract.* An HMO or CMP may enter into a reasonable cost contract if it meets one of the following: ( 1 ) The HMO or CMP qualifies for a risk contract, but chooses a reasonable cost contract.
( 2 ) The HMO or CMP meets the conditions for entering into a risk contract specified in paragraph (e) of this section except that CMS does not judge the HMO or CMP capable of bearing the potential losses of a risk contract.
( g ) Regulations on reasonable cost and risk reimbursement are set forth in subparts O and P of this part.
[50 FR 20570, May 17, 1985, as amended at 58 FR 38078, July 15, 1993; 60 FR 45676, Sept. 1, 1995]