alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 124 (Tuesday, June 27, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 39603]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-16215]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Navy


Notice of Availability Inventions for Licensing; Government-Owned 
Inventions

AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DOD.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The invention listed below is assigned to the United States 
Government as represented by the Secretary of the Navy and is available 
for licensing by the Department of the Navy.
    U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 09/533,954 entitled, ``Chemical 
Warfare Agent Decontamination Foaming Composition and Method'', filing 
date: March 22, 2000, Navy Case No. 82169.

ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of the patent applications cited should 
be directed to the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren Laboratory, 
Code CD222, 17320 Dahlgren Road, Building 183, Room 015, Dahlgren, VA 
22448-5100, and must include the Navy Case number. Interested parties 
will be required to sign a Confidentiality, Non-Disclosure and Non-Use 
Agreement before receiving copies of requested patent applications.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James B. Bechtel, Patent Counsel, 
Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren Laboratory, Code CD222, 17320 
Dahlgren Road, Building 183, Room 015, Dahlgren, VA 22448-5100, 
telephone (540)-653-8016.

    Authority: 35 U.S.C. 207, 37 CFR Part 404.

    Dated: June 14, 2000.
J.L. Roth,
Lieutenant Commander, Judge Advocate General's Corps, U.S. Navy, 
Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 00-16215 Filed 6-26-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3810-FF-P
§ 60-300.40 Applicability of the affirmative action program requirement. ( a ) The requirements of this subpart apply to every Government contractor that has 50 or more employees and a contract of $100,000 or more.
( b ) Contractors described in paragraph (a) of this section shall, within 120 days of the commencement of a contract, prepare and maintain an affirmative action program at each establishment. The affirmative action program shall set forth the contractor's policies and procedures in accordance with this part. This program may be integrated into or kept separate from other affirmative action programs.
( c ) The affirmative action program shall be reviewed and updated annually by the official designated by the contractor pursuant to § 60-300.44(i).
( d ) The contractor shall submit the affirmative action program within 30 days of a request from OFCCP, unless the request provides for a different time. The contractor also shall make the affirmative action program promptly available on-site upon OFCCP's request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE FORM
10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED MARCH 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          31,632
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    573,656
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          21,680
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            21,722
<LOANS>                                      1,819,945
<ALLOWANCE>                                     27,721
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,535,767
<DEPOSITS>                                   1,711,049
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            559,192
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           198
<OTHER-SE>                                     265,328
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               2,535,767
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                133,116
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               35,399
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               168,515
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              79,246
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              99,306
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           69,209
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   13,661
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 59,956
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,819
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       2,732
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,732
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.15
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.42
<LOANS-NON>                                     23,350
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                14,559
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                19,741
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    5,782
<RECOVERIES>                                       101
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               27,721
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            27,721
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
#### IN THE MATTER OF WILLIE D. SIMPKINS III.

(Supreme Court Disciplinary No. 749)

(385 SE2d 291)

Per curiam.

Respondent Willie D. Simpkins III has petitioned for voluntary surrender of his license to practice law in the State of Georgia. His petition is based upon his admissions of fact and conduct in violation of Standard Nos. 4, 45, 61, 62, 63 and 65 of State Bar of Georgia Rule 4-102.

Respondent, in his petition, requests that this Court accept his *399voluntary surrender of his license to practice law.

Decided September 8, 1989.

*William P. Smith III, General Counsel State Bar, Paul B. Cohen, Assistant General Counsel State Bar,*for State Bar of Georgia.

In light of the above and in view of the recommendation of the Review Panel that Respondent be allowed to surrender his license to practice law, it is directed that he be allowed to surrender his license. Before any reinstatement petition is granted, he must comply with the reinstatement rules of the State Bar of Georgia in effect at such time.

Application for voluntary surrender of license is granted.

*All the Justices concur.*
§ 102-85.225 What are the funding responsibilities for relocations resulting from emergencies? ( a ) In emergencies, swift remedies, including the possible relocation of a customer agency to alternate space, are required. The remedies may include requests for funding authorizations from OMB and Congress. GSA may serve as the central coordinator of such remedies.
( b ) Funding responsibility will vary by situation. If a customer agency is only temporarily displaced from its space, GSA typically covers the cost of temporary set-up in a provisional location. If the agency is obliged to relocate permanently, an OA will be prepared which will address all terms of the occupancy. In such cases, new tenant improvements will be constructed which can be amortized over the life of a new occupancy term, and a new Rent rate will be developed.
026P16

#### Shaka Greene v. Trustee Services of Carolina, LLC and U.S. Bank, N.A. In the Matter of the Foreclosure of Real Property Under Deed of Trust from Jeffrey S. Kenley and Laura L. Kenley, in the Original Amount of $296,700, and Dated September 29, 2005 and Recorded on September 30, 2005, in Book 3935 at Page 425, of Union County Registry

1. Pit’s Motion for Temporary Stay (COA15-90 & COA15-97)

1. Allowed 01/22/2016

Dissolved 06/09/2016

2. Pit’s Petition for *Writ of Supersedeas*

2. Denied

3. Pit’s PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31

3. Denied
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-41189 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ANTONIO ARROYO-JUAREZ, also known as Rogelio Ortega-Lopez, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. B-00-CR-132-1

-------------------- June 7, 2001 Before REAVLEY, DeMOSS and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Antonio Arroyo-Juarez (“Arroyo”) appeals his conviction for illegal reentry after deportation, pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He contends that the Government failed to allege his prior aggravated felony conviction in his indictment. He also contends that the district court erred by “double counting” his aggravated felony conviction to increase both his offense level and criminal history score. Arroyo concedes that his first contention in this appeal is foreclosed by the Supreme Court’s decision in Almendarez-TorresNo. 00-41189 -2- v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), and that he raises the issue solely to preserve it for review by the Supreme Court. Arroyo’s second contention is without merit. See United States v. Hawkins , 69 F.3d 11, 14 (5th Cir. 1995). This court affirms the judgment of the district court.
AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                             1043222
<SECURITIES>                                        284651
<RECEIVABLES>                                        21950
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   1279188
<PP&E>                                                   0
<DEPRECIATION>                                           0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     1959698
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                33207
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             13810
<OTHER-SE>                                          966369
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       1959698
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    128860
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        91756
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      65050
<INCOME-TAX>                                         16940
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  48110
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                         48110
<EPS-BASIC>                                            .03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          .03



</TABLE>
Exhibit








Exhibit  10.16
FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE
SCI 401(K) RETIREMENT SAVINGS PLAN


WHEREAS, Service Corporation International (the “Employer”) adopted a restatement of the SCI 401(k) Retirement Savings Plan (the “Plan”), effective as of January 1, 2016; and


WHEREAS, the Employer has the ability to amend the Plan pursuant to Article 11.1; and


WHEREAS, the Employer now desires to amend the Plan to increase the Default Percentage from 3% to 4%;


NOW, THEREFORE, the Employer hereby amends the Plan in the following respects, effective as of January 1, 2017:


		
	1.
	Section 3.2(e)(2) of the Plan is amended to read as follows:




		
	(2)
	Default Elective Deferral.  The Default Percentage applied to a Covered Employee’s Compensation for each pay period will be equal to 4%.




		
	2.
	In all other respects, the terms of this Plan are hereby ratified and confirmed.




IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Employer has caused this First Amendment to be executed in duplicate counterparts, each of which shall be considered as an original, as of the date indicated below.




SERVICE CORPORATION INTERNATIONAL






/s/ Susan L. Garrett            By: /s/ Gregory T. Sangalis                    
Witness                    Gregory T. Sangalis
Title:   Senior Vice President General Counsel and Secretary


Date:   October 31, 2016
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"19-2246: M2M SOLUTIONS LLC v. AMAZON.COM, INC. [RULE 36 JUDGMENT], Nonprecedential - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"j3b4AGzoO8\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/9-11-2020-19-2246-m2m-solutions-llc-v-amazoncom-inc-rule-36-judgment-19-2246-rule_36_judgment-9-11-2020_1651022\/\">19-2246: M2M SOLUTIONS LLC v. AMAZON.COM, INC. [RULE 36 JUDGMENT], Nonprecedential<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/9-11-2020-19-2246-m2m-solutions-llc-v-amazoncom-inc-rule-36-judgment-19-2246-rule_36_judgment-9-11-2020_1651022\/embed\/#?secret=j3b4AGzoO8\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“19-2246: M2M SOLUTIONS LLC v. AMAZON.COM, INC. [RULE 36 JUDGMENT], Nonprecedential” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"j3b4AGzoO8\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"Opinions\/Orders posted: M2M SOLUTIONS LLC v. AMAZON.COM, INC. [RULE 36 JUDGMENT](pdf) Appeal Number: 19-2246 Origin: PTO Nonprecedential To see more opinions and orders, follow this link: Opinions and Orders."}
**EXHIBIT
32.1**
  **CERTIFICATIONS
PURSUANT TO**
 **SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
 
 In
connection with the Annual Report of VendingData Corporation (the “Company”) on
Form 10-KSB/A for the year ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), we, Mark R. Newburg,
Executive Director of the Company (Principal Executive Officer), and Douglas H.
Caszatt, Acting Chief Financial Officer and Controller 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) 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 result of operations of the
      Company.
   By:
    /s/
      Mark R. Newburg
    Dated:
    April 29, 2005Mark
      R. NewburgTitle:
    Executive
      Director of VendingData Corporation (Principal Executive
      Officer)
  By:
    /s/
      Douglas H. Caszatt
    Dated:
    April 29, 2005Douglas
      H. CaszattTitle:
    Acting
      Chief Financial Officer and Controller of VendingData Corporation
 
 This
certification is made solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, subject
to the knowledge standard contained therein, and not for any other
purpose.
071P16

#### State v. Ronald Anthony Miller

Def’s PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31 (COA15-162)

Denied
Exhibit 32.1

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 Wyeth (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended
September 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 5, 2008 (the Report), I, Bernard Poussot, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as
adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(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 operations of the Company.

Dated: November 5, 2008



By:

/s/ Bernard PoussotBernard PoussotChairman, President andChief Executive Officer
No. 11-59.

#### Isaiah *v.*Western Maryland Hospital System et al.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### § 50-202.2 Minimum wage in all industries.

In all industries, the minimum wage applicable to employees described in § 50-201.102 of this chapter shall be not less than $3.35 per hour commencing January 1, 1981, $3.80 per hour commencing April 1, 1990, and $4.25 per hour commencing April 1, 1991.

[56 FR 32258, July 15, 1991]
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Bernard J. Morello and White Lion Holdings, L.L.C. v. Seaway Crude 

Pipeline Company, LLC

Appellate case number: 01-16-00765-CV

Trial court case number: 13-CCV-050231

Trial court: County Court at Law No. 3 of Fort Bend County

Appellants Bernard J. Morello and While Lion Holdings, L.L.C. filed a motion seeking 

an order that either compels the trial court clerk to transmit to this Court, in camera, the 

documents that were submitted in camera to the trial court or permits Appellants to submit 

authenticated copies of the documents directly to this Court in camera. 

This Court has responsibilities to the public as an appellate court to resolve disputes 

through public opinions that explain our decisions based on the record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.3

(“All opinions of the courts of appeals are open to the public and must be made available . . . . ”); 

see also R.V.K. v. L.L.K., 103 S.W.3d 612, 614–15 (Tex. App.–San Antonio 2003, no pet.) 

(attempting to “strike a fair balance” between parties’ interest in keeping sealed portion of record 

confidential and court’s and public’s interest in court fulfilling its responsibilities); Mi Gwang 

Contact Lens Co., Ltd. v. Chapa, No. 13–13–00306–CV, 2015 WL 3637846, at *6–7 (Tex. 

App.–Corpus Christi June 11, 2015, no pet.) (mem. op.) (same). Appellants’ motion is DENIED.

Within 15 days, Appellants shall either request that the clerk include the documents in the 

appellate record without limitation or, to the extent they seek to maintain any confidentiality to 

the documents, file with the trial court a Rule 76a motion to seal court records. Appellants shall 

notify this Court whether it is pursuing a Rule 76a motion by December 8, 2016.

If Appellants pursue a Rule 76a motion and the trial court grants their motion, the trial 

court clerk shall submit to this Court those documents that are part of the summary-judgment 

record below that are sealed separate from those documents that are part of the summaryjudgment record below that are not sealed, clearly designating each group. 

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: Harvey Brown

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: November 23, 2016
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"18-1793: IGNITE USA, LLC v. PACIFIC MARKET INTERNATIONAL [RULE 36 JUDGMENT], Nonprecedential - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"52oeYQg0uT\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/3-07-2019-18-1793-ignite-usa-llc-v-pacific-market-international-rule-36-judgment-18-1793-rule_36_judgment-3-7-2019-1\/\">18-1793: IGNITE USA, LLC v. PACIFIC MARKET INTERNATIONAL [RULE 36 JUDGMENT], Nonprecedential<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/3-07-2019-18-1793-ignite-usa-llc-v-pacific-market-international-rule-36-judgment-18-1793-rule_36_judgment-3-7-2019-1\/embed\/#?secret=52oeYQg0uT\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“18-1793: IGNITE USA, LLC v. PACIFIC MARKET INTERNATIONAL [RULE 36 JUDGMENT], Nonprecedential” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"52oeYQg0uT\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"Opinions\/Orders posted: IGNITE USA, LLC v. PACIFIC MARKET INTERNATIONAL [RULE 36 JUDGMENT](pdf) Appeal Number: 18-1793 Origin: PTO Nonprecedential To see more opinions and orders, follow this link: Opinions and Orders."}