alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Julius Marcus, Respondent, *v.*Joseph Hollander, as Executor, Etc., Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment in favor of plaintiff, entered upon a verdict.

James Ridgway, for appellant.

Wise *&*Lichtenstein (Morris S. Wise, of counsel), for respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

The testimony justified the finding of the money, that defendant agreed to pay plaintiff a commission of $2 on each barrel sold to Oook & Bernheimer, amounting to 126 barrels of whiskey. Ho error was committed at the tidal.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Present: Fitzsimoks, Oh. J.; McCarthy and Hascall, JJ.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
90HN x., EmEl. AUSTIN.TEXAR 78711

January 2, 1976

p. 3200IheHonorebleBobBullock - page 2 (H-757)

pmvided,kwever,thatallmxhbquestsand giftsof mxeys, except thoseto the hpartmnt of&ntalnealthendMsntal~tionarld institutionsunderitajurb3dicticmreceived franprivate

scurces,

a&toagenciesand instituticnsnamdinArticleIVofthisAct, shallbs~itedinibJthestateTmasuryand &allbeexpendedinaccon%um with * prQv.isims f5his Act. Acts 1975,64th leg.,ch. 743,at

. Ithaebsen~~thatsalary~l~~rradewithgift~ aremtaNemdbyseckbll(q)sincethcsefLmdsareaFpmpriatedbysectFon190farticleVofthsAdandthuearenotn~than~iated fuds."

. . ~thezquimmntsofastatutetkintentofthe rJ@szture rmst bs tb Y~E%$ZkiEZFi9%- s.w.zd 112 (!lkx.

Sup. 1971). VihereTGC bytkeechazgedwithitsafhinistration dhaskeen- by tb Legisleture without

change it is pesuned thatttnzfsgislaturewasawsreofanda&p+xdthatconsixucti~. Humble 8. v. Calve&, 414 S.W.Zd 172 (Tex.

Sup. 1967);

SB i?+3ie-- s.w.2azTwK. sup. 1944); Railxoad

cuanission

v. Texas -- &taworleansR. co., 42 S.W.2d 1091 (Tex.

civ. - Austin

1931, ii%E-ZTNti identical to article

V, section.9

l(q)and 18 of ~the currentAppropriatimsIkctamalso famdinthe 1973GeneralAppmpriations Act,Acts 1973,63rdIeg., .A 659, p. 1786 [secticn

l(q) at 2195;secticn

18 at 22091. A search of the salary

supplaaent

files intboffice of the hcmtaryof State remals thatstateagencies have constrmd this lsnguAga; to rowire ?xporeg of gift funds. Ilhed, to amstrm the provish aa not applybg to **gift fur&**  **wxld give**  **8ectim** l(q) little,

if any,meaning. sincethsLe&slature ispresmsdtohave usedevexywxdandsectionforapurpoee,'wecannotadcptacmstzuction thetwmldmake this seckionnwningless. Perkins v. State,

367 S.W.2d 140 (lbx.

Sup. 196311

Mdins-walcbr Bum-m- 296 S.W.2d 93 (lkx.

sup. 1957). lbcarcllng1y it ieourxziziIegislatLue used tb? term %Qzpm@ated" in diffemrlt calte?cts in eections l(q)and 19, ~clearlyintepldedthat~eupplanente~fmngiftfundebe reprtedtothe se4uwaq of state.

p. 3201Ihemle BobBullock- page 3 (H-757)

SUMMARY 

### -w~~eJPeIedtopay~salar~ of State

enplayees

andofficers

until* -ofanyeabryfq@ms?n% including srplglenents

made with gift fur&, is reported tothe secremyof state.

Attorney

wel of !&arm

pa 3202
# Official Journal L 385/2021

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 385 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6429 October 2021 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 385

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6429 October 2021

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | DIRECTIVES |
| | * | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/1832 of 12 October 2021 amending Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff | 1 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

DIRECTIVES

*

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/1832 of 12 October 2021 amending Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
§ 1.663 Licensing of Government-owned inventions. ( a ) The licensing of Government-owned inventions under VA control and custody will be conducted pursuant to the regulations on the licensing of Government-owned inventions contained in 37 CFR part 404, and 15 U.S.C. 3710a, as appropriate.
( b ) Any person whose application for a license in an invention under VA control and custody has been denied; whose license in such an invention has been modified or terminated, in whole or in part; or who timely filed a written objection in response to a proposal to grant an exclusive or partially exclusive license in an invention under VA control or custody, may, if damaged, appeal any decision or determination concerning the grant, denial, interpretation, modification, or termination of a license to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. Such appeal shall be in writing; shall set forth with specificity the basis of the appeal; and shall be postmarked not later than 60 days after the action being appealed. Upon request of the appellant, such appeal may be considered by one to three persons appointed on a case-by-case basis by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. Such a request will be granted only if it accompanies the written appeal. Appellant may appear and be represented by counsel before such a panel, which will sit in Washington, DC. If the appeal challenges a decision to grant an exclusive or partially exclusive license in an invention under VA control or custody, the licensee shall be furnished a copy of the appeal, shall be given the opportunity to respond in writing, may appear and be represented by counsel at any hearing requested by appellant, and may request a hearing if appellant has not, under the same terms and conditions, at which the appellant may also appear and be represented by counsel.
[61 FR 29659, June 12, 1996]
# C_2018066EN.01006101.xml

| 21.2.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 66/61 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.2.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 66/61

---

P8_TA(2016)0140

Convention on mutual assistance and cooperation between customs administrations (accession of Croatia) *

European Parliament legislative resolution of 28 April 2016 on the recommendation for a Council decision concerning the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the Convention of 18 December 1997, drawn up on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, on mutual assistance and cooperation between customs administrations (COM(2015)0556 — C8-0376/2015 — 2015/0261(NLE))

(Consultation)

(2018/C 066/10)

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

| — | having regard to the Commission recommendation to the Council (COM(2015)0556), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the Commission recommendation to the Council (COM(2015)0556),

| — | having regard to Article 3(4) and (5) of the Act of Accession of the Republic of Croatia, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8-0376/2015), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Article 3(4) and (5) of the Act of Accession of the Republic of Croatia, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8-0376/2015),

| — | having regard to Rule 59 of its Rules of Procedure, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Rule 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

| — | having regard to the report of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (A8-0054/2016), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (A8-0054/2016),

| 1. | Approves the Commission recommendation; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Approves the Commission recommendation;

| 2. | Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;

| 3. | Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to substantially amend the text approved by Parliament; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to substantially amend the text approved by Parliament;

| 4. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.

---
###### Editorial Note on Part 1

#### Editorial Notes:

1. In Patent and Trademark Office publications and usage the part number is omitted from the numbers of §§ 1.1 to 1.352 and the numbers to the right of the decimal point correspond with the respective rule numbers.

2. For nomenclature changes to part 1, see 68 FR 14335, Mar. 25, 2003; 87 FR 68904, Nov. 17, 2022.

#### § 1.73 Summary of the invention.

A brief summary of the invention indicating its nature and substance, which may include a statement of the object of the invention, should precede the detailed description. Such summary should, when set forth, be commensurate with the invention as claimed and any object recited should be that of the invention as claimed.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 2 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 6 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 7 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 1 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 3 pertaining to both patents and trademarks is placed in the grouping pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 4 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 5 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.
#### Brannon *v.*The State.

*Violating Prohibition Law.*

Decided June 13, 1912.

Rehearing denied July 11, 1912.

59 South. 230.)

*Intoxicating Liquors; Indictment; Sufficiency.*— An indictment charging that the defendant sold spirituous, vinous or malt liquors without license and contrary to law was sufficient to sustain a conviction under Acts 1909, p. 90: the words, “without license” will be regarded as mere surplusage, and hence, will not invalidate the indictment.

Appeal from Barbour Circuit Court.

Heard before Hon. M. Sollie.

Harry Brannon ivas convicted of violating the prohibition law, and he appeals.

Affirmed.

The indictment charges that the defendant sold spirituous, vinous, or malt liquors without license and contrary to law. The demurrers were that the indictment charges no offense, and ivas predicated upon a statute ivhich did not exist at the time the indictment Avas returned or at the time when the alleged offense was committed.

Peach & Thomas, for appellant.

The form of indictment Avas not appropriate as it charged the sale Avas Avithout license when no license was permissible under the Fuller and Carmichael Bills. The indictment should have been made to conform to the *statute.*— TJllmer *v. The*State, 61 Ala. 208; *McPherson v. The*State, 54 Ala. 221; *Mosely v. The State,*156 Ala. 139.

R. C. Brickell, Attorney General, and W. L. Martin, Assistant'Attorney General, for the State.

The indictment was sufficient. The words “without license and *196contrary to law” does not invalidate it, as they will be regarded as mere *surplusage.*— Powell *v. The State,*69 Ala. 10; *McGrary v. The State, 73 Ala.*480; *Armstead v. The Slate,*89 Ala. 161; *Mitchell v. The State,*141 Ala. 90.

PELHAM, J.

The defendant Avas indicted and convicted for selling prohibited liquors Avithout a license, and contrary to law. The indictment Avas returned at the fall term of the court, on November 30, 1910. The proof showed the offense to have been committed in the fall of 1910, and within a year before the indictment Avas returned. The state-Avide prohibition laAvs had been in force for more than a year before- the indictment was found. Clearly the indictment was intended to charge a violation of the prohibition laws. The indictment charges an offense against the prohibition laws.—Fuller Bill, Acts 1909, p. 90, § 29% The Avords “without a license” are mere surplusage and do not invalidate the *indictment.*—Scott *v. State,*3 Ala. App. 142, 57 South. 413; *Mitchell v. State,*141 Ala. 90, 37 South. 407; *Olmstead v. State,*89 Ala. 16, 7 South. 775.

The court’s rulings on the demurrers and refusing the general charge are without error.

Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2309 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2309

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 3916 Milgen Road in Columbus, Georgia, as the ``Frank G. Lumpkin, 
                      Jr. Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. FRANK G. LUMPKIN, JR. POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 3916 Milgen Road in Columbus, Georgia, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Frank G. Lumpkin, Jr. Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Frank G. 
Lumpkin, Jr. Post Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 30, 2007.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
110th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 2309

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 3916 Milgen Road in Columbus, Georgia, as the ``Frank G. Lumpkin, 
                      Jr. Post Office Building''.
```
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 2 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Part 3

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 3 appear at 68 FR 14337, Mar. 25, 2003.

#### § 3.61 Domestic representative.

If the assignee of a patent, patent application, trademark application or trademark registration is not domiciled in the United States, the assignee may designate a domestic representative in a document filed in the United States Patent and Trademark Office. The designation should state the name and address of a person residing within the United States on whom may be served process or notice of proceedings affecting the application, patent or registration or rights thereunder.

[67 FR 79522, Dec. 30, 2002]

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 6 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 7 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 1 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 3 pertaining to both patents and trademarks is placed in the grouping pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 4 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 5 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.
#### George Schuchman, Respondent, *v.*The Club Stables, Appellant.

Appeal from a, judgment in favor of plaintiff, entered upon a verdict, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial.

Scott & Treadwell (L. B. Treadwell, of counsel), for appellant.

Leventritt & Brennan, for respondent.

*Per Guriam.*

The evidence clearly shows that defendant’s manager, who had sole charge of its business, ordered plaintiff to render the services and furnish the materials sued for herein, and that the sum claimed was just and reasonable.

The judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Present: Eitzsimons, Oh. J., and Oonlan, J.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
§ 21.350 Unauthorized absences. A veteran who is unable to obtain an authorized leave of absence in advance may seek to have the unauthorized absence excused. ( a ) *Excusing unauthorized absences.* VA may excuse an unauthorized absence and make proper charges against the veteran's leave when: ( 1 ) The veteran has absented himself or herself when advance approval from VA is impracticable; and
( 2 ) Conditions for approval of leave are otherwise met.
( b ) *Unexcused, unauthorized absences.* When an unauthorized absence is not satisfactorily explained, VA will take necessary action, including recoupment of subsistence allowance for that period of absence.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3110)
Exhibit
      32.2


**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
      connection with the quarterly report of Bel Fuse Inc (the "Company") on Form
      10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2005 filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Colin Dunn, Vice President of Finance
      of
      the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)
      The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934; and





(2)
      The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the consolidated financial condition of the Company as of the dates presented
      and consolidated result of operations of the Company for the periods presented.





Dated:
              November 7, 2005By:
            /s/ Colin
              DunnColin
              Dunn, Vice President of Finance
# Official Journal C 24/2007

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 24 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 502 February 2007 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 24

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 502 February 2007

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES |
| | Commission |
| 2007/C 024/01 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.4434 — RICOH/DANKA) (1) | 1 |
| 2007/C 024/02 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.4323 — ARLA/Ingman Foods) (1) | 1 |
| 2007/C 024/03 | Communication on the price information system in the sugar sector | 2 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES

Commission

2007/C 024/01

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.4434 — RICOH/DANKA) (1)

1

2007/C 024/02

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.4323 — ARLA/Ingman Foods) (1)

1

2007/C 024/03

Communication on the price information system in the sugar sector

2

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES |
| | Commission |
| 2007/C 024/04 | Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations: 3,50 % on 1 February 2007 — Euro exchange rates | 3 |
| | NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES |
| | Commission |
| 2007/C 024/05 | Commission notice pursuant to Article 4(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 — Amendment of a public service obligation imposed on certain scheduled air services within Portugal (1) | 4 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES

Commission

2007/C 024/04

Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations: 3,50 % on 1 February 2007 — Euro exchange rates

3

NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES

Commission

2007/C 024/05

Commission notice pursuant to Article 4(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 — Amendment of a public service obligation imposed on certain scheduled air services within Portugal (1)

4

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMPETITION POLICY |
| | Commission |
| 2007/C 024/06 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.4539 — TPG/Silver Lake/Sabre) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (1) | 6 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMPETITION POLICY

Commission

2007/C 024/06

Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.4539 — TPG/Silver Lake/Sabre) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (1)

6

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
§ 64.18 Recovery of funds. ( a ) *Recovery of funds.* VA may terminate a grant agreement with any RVCP grantee that does not comply with the terms of the RVCP agreement. VA may recover from the grantee any funds that are not used in accordance with a RVCP grant agreement. If VA decides to recover funds, VA will issue to the grantee a notice of intent to recover RVCP grant funds, and the grantee will then have 30 days beginning from the date of the notice to submit documentation demonstrating why the RVCP grant funds should not be recovered. If the RVCP grantee does not respond or if the grantee responds but VA determines the documentation is insufficient to establish compliance, VA will make a final determination as to whether action to recover the RVCP grant funds will be taken.
( b ) *Prohibition of further grants.* When VA determines action will be taken to recover grant funds from a grantee, the grantee will be prohibited from receiving any further RVCP grant funds for the duration of the pilot program.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, 523 *note*)