alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 103 (Wednesday, May 30, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30020-30021]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-2673]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; Notice 
of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meetings.
    The meeting will be open to the public, with attendance limited to 
space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special 
assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable 
accommodations, should inform the Contact Person listed below in 
advance of the meeting.

    Name of Committee: Muscular Dystrophy Coordinating Committee.
    Date: June 25, 2007.
    Time: 8 a.m. to 3 p.m.
    Agenda: Policy Discussion.
    Place: Crowne Plaza Hotel, 8777 Georgia Avenue, Silver Spring, 
Maryland 20910, Phone: 301-587-4791.
    Contact Person: John D. Porter, PhD, Executive Secretary, 
Muscular Dystrophy Coordinating Committee, National Institute of 
Neurological Disorders and Stroke, NIH, 6001 Executive Boulevard, 
NSC 2172, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 496-1917, 
[email protected].

    Any interested person may file written comments with the 
committee by forwarding

[[Page 30021]]

the statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The 
statement should include the name, address, telephone number and 
when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the 
interested person.
    Information is also available on the MDCC Web site: http://www.ninds.nih.gov/resaerch/muscular_dystrophy/coordinating_committee, where an agenda and any additional information for the 
meeting will be posted when available.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.853, 
Clinical Research Related to Neurological Disorders; 93.854, 
Biological Basis Research in the Neurosciences, National Institutes 
of Health, HHS)

    Dated: May 23, 2007.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 07-2673 Filed 5-29-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
```
# C_2013129EN.01001901.xml

| 4.5.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 129/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.5.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 129/19

---

Judgment of the General Court of 19 March 2013 — Yueqing Onesto Electric v OHIM — Ensto (ONESTO)

(Case T-624/11) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Community - Figurative mark ONESTO - Earlier Community figurative mark ENSTO - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2013/C 129/37

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Yueqing Onesto Electric Co. Ltd (Zhejiang, China) (represented by: B. Piepenbrink, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: V. Melgar, Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Ensto Oy (Porvoo, Finland) (represented by: F. Teixeira Baptista, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 September 2011 (Case R 2535/2010-2), concerning opposition proceedings between Ensto Oy and Yueqing Onesto Electric Co. Ltd.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Yueqing Onesto Electric Co. Ltd to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Yueqing Onesto Electric Co. Ltd to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 32, 4.2.2012.

1

---
1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

DOUGLAS JACKSON, 

 Petitioner, Civil No. 2:15-CV-11622 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

v. GERSHWIN A. DRAIN 

LES PARISH, 

 Respondent, 

____________________________________/ 

 

OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING THE MOTION TO AMEND THE 

PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS (Doc. 34) AND DIRECTING 

PETITIONER TO PROVIDE TWO COPIES OF THE AMENDED 

PETITION FOR SERVICE UPON RESPONDENT AND THE MICHIGAN 

ATTORNEY GENERAL 

 On June 15, 2018, this Court reopened the case to the Court’s active docket 

and granted petitioner a 120-day extension of time to file an amended habeas 

petition, if he chose to do so. The Court also set a deadline for the respondent to file 

an answer. Respondent was given 180 days from the later of (1) the date on which 

the amended petition is filed or (2) the date on which the period for filing an amended 

petition expired, to file an answer. (Doc. 31). 

 Before the Court is petitioner’s amended habeas petition (Doc. 34) which is 

construed also as a motion to amend the petition. 

The Court will permit the petitioner to amend his habeas petition subject to the 

one condition mentioned below. Petitioner’s proposed amended habeas petition 
2 

should be granted because it advances new claims that may have arguable merit. See 

e.g. Braden v. United States, 817 F.3d 926, 930 (6th Cir. 2016). 

The Court notes that petitioner’s amended habeas petition is deficient because he 

failed to provide sufficient copies of the petition for service upon the Michigan 

Attorney General and the Warden. Petitioner’s failure to submit these copies of the 

petition to the Clerk of the Court rendered his amended habeas petition deficiently. 

See e.g. Moore v. Hawley, 7 F. Supp. 2d 901, 903 (E.D. Mich. 1998). The Court 

directs petitioner to provide two (2) additional copies of the amended petition for 

service upon respondent and the Michigan Attorney General within thirty (30) days

of this order. If the petitioner fails to provide sufficient service copies of the 

amended petition within the thirty day period, the respondent will be required to file 

an answer to only to the claims and the allegations contained in the original habeas 

petition. Respondent shall have 180 (one hundred and eighty) days from the 

expiration of this thirty day period to file the answer. 

Dated: November 19, 2018 

 s/Gershwin A. Drain 

 HON. GERSHWIN A. DRAIN 

 United States District Court Judge 

 
3 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to the attorneys 

of record on this date, November 19, 2018, by electronic and/or ordinary mail. 

s/Teresa McGovern 

Case Manager
###### Editorial Note on Part 356

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 356 appear at 68 FR 5576, Feb. 4, 2003.

#### § 356.37 Operation of a Fishing Industry Vessel by a Mortgage Trustee.

An approved Mortgage Trustee cannot operate a Fishing Industry Vessel without the approval of the Citizenship Approval Officer, except where non-commercial operation is necessary for the immediate safety of the vessel, or for repairs, drydocking or berthing changes; provided, that the vessel is operated under the command of a Citizen of the United States for a period of no more than 15 calendar days.

[68 FR 5582, Feb. 4, 2003]
**Certification      Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

| 1. | The                  Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or                  15(d) of                  the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | The                  information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                  respects, the financial condition and results of operations of                  Registrant. |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |                /s/ Jack Rhian       |
|--------|------------------------------------------|
|   | Jack              Rhian                  |
|   | Chief              Executive Officer and |
|   | President                                |

**A      signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been      provided to American Medical Alert Corp. and will be retained by American      Medical Alert Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission      or      its staff upon request.**
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-7780

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

BERNARD MIDDLETON,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief

District Judge. (CR-92-348-A, CA-96-1097-AM)

Submitted: June 11, 2002 Decided: July 18, 2002

Before WILKINS and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Bernard Middleton, Appellant Pro Se. James L. Trump, OFFICE OF THE

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Bernard Middleton seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.

2001). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion

and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate

of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the

district court. See United States v. Middleton, Nos. CR-92-348-A;

CA-96-1097-AM (E.D. Va. Sept. 27, 2001). We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### HANNAH O’SHEA, PLAINTIFF, v. PUBLIC SERVICE TRANSPORTATION COMPANY ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

Decided January 16, 1929.

Before G-ummeke, Chief Justice, and Justices Pabicer and Katzenbach.

*124Eor the rule, *Frank G. Turner.*

Contra, *Maley & Matey.*

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff brought the present suit to recover compensation for personal injuries received by her while a passenger-in one of the buses of the Public Service Transportation Company, resulting from a collision between the bus in which she-was riding and a truck belonging to the Keystone Dairy Company. The suit was instituted against the respective owners of the two vehicles, and at the conclusion of the trial the jury returned a verdict of no cause of action as to the Public Service Transportation Company, and awarded the plaintiff $3,000 as-against the Keystone Dairy Company. The latter then applied for and obtained the present rule, and the only ground upon which we are asked to make the rule absolute is that the-verdict is excessive.

Our examination of the testimony sent up with the rule-leads us to the conclusion ’that, if the jury accepted as true-the testimony of the plaintiff and of her attending physician as to the character of the injuries which she received and their effect upon her physical condition, the amount awarded to the-plaintiff cannot be clearly excessive. The jury was .justified in accepting this testimony as accurately showing the character and extent of the injuries received by the plaintiff, and we conclude therefore, that the rule to show cause should be discharged.
SUPREME COURT.

#### In the Matter of Opening Lexington Avenue.

*New York Special Term,*

*June,*1874.

*haches, in moving to set aside regort of commissioners.*

The report-of commissioners of estimate and assessment in street opening cases in the city of New York will not be set aside for fraud, mistake or irregularity, where the moving party has been guilty of laches in making the application, and the public have been allowed, for considerable time, to act upon it as confirmed.

The report of the commissioners of estimate and assessment for opening Lexington avenue, from One Hundred and • Second street to Harlem river, was confirmed February 14, 1874. On the 12th of June, 1874, an order to show cause was granted, returnable June fifteenth, why the report should not he set aside, for fraud, mistake and irregularity. The motion was made on behalf of Peter A. H. Jackson and S. S. Stevens, owners of land taken, and various affidavits' were submitted in support of the grounds taken in the order to show cause, all of which were traversed in answering affidavits.

*Ira D. Warren & W. B. Larned,*for motion.

*James A. Deering, Wheeler H. Peckham & E. Delafield Smith,*counsel to the corporation, opposed.

Davis, *P. J.*

In my opinion, the application comes too late. The moving party should not have permitted the pro*115ceedings to have gone on to their present state before taking steps to correct the alleged error. Public policy requires that the confirmation should not be disturbed when assessments have been collected, and both the city and citizens put in relations where their rights must be seriously affected and prejudiced by disturbing the confirmation.

Motion denied.
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential.



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

______________________

IN RE: AAMP OF FLOR IDA, INC., Appellant

______________________

2019

- 1074

______________________

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. 90/013,891.

______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

M ARK H. B LOOMBERG

, Zuber Lawler & Del Duca LLP, New York, NY, argued for appellant. Also represented by

J OEL W EISS

, J ACOB B ALDINGER , Weiss & Arons LLP, Spring Valley, NY.

M ONICA B ARNES L ATEEF

, Office of the Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Al exandria, VA, argued for appellee Andrei Iancu. Also represented by

M ICHAEL S. F ORMAN

, T HOMAS W. K RAUSE

, J OSEPH M ATAL

, C OKE M ORGAN S TEWART

.

______________________

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

O RDERED and A DJUDGED :P ER C URIAM (R EYNA

, T ARANTO

, and S TOLL

, Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED. See Fed . Cir. R. 36.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURT

October 7, 2019 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner

Date Peter R. Marksteiner

Clerk of Court
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

# District: 11
Federal Reserve Bank of: Dallas

## Filings received during the week ending April 21, 2007

|Filer                           | Filing Type    | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                                                                       | End of Comment Period                                 
|------------------------------- | -------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------
|COMMUNITY BANCSHARES, INC.      | * 3A1          | Community Bancshares, Inc., Bridgeport, Texas, to become a bank holding company by acquiring 100 percent of The Community Bank, Bridgeport, Texas (de novo).                                                                          | Newspaper:05/05/2007Federal Register:05/11/2007       
|Newspaper:                      | 05/05/2007    
|Federal Register:               | 05/11/2007    
|SNOOK BANCSHARES, INC.          | CIC            | Notice by Harry Lynn Williams and Oksana Williams, Plano, Texas, to increase their ownership to 13.20 percent of the voting common stock of Snook Bancshares, Inc., Snook, Texas, and indirectly First Bank of Snook, Snook, Texas.   | Newspaper:05/04/2007Federal Register:05/08/2007       
|Newspaper:                      | 05/04/2007    
|Federal Register:               | 05/08/2007    
|TIB THE INDEPENDENT BANKERSBANK | * 18C* Branch  | TIB The Independent BankersBank, Irving, Texas, to merge with South Bay Bank, National Association, Torrance, California, and to establish a branch to be located at 17011 Beach Boulevard, Suite 1260, Huntington Beach, California. | Newspaper:Not availableFederal Register:Not applicable
|Newspaper:                      | Not available 
|Federal Register:               | Not applicable

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location | RSSDID | Exam Date | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|---------------------- | ------ | --------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|NONE                  

## CRA Examinations scheduled for     Quarter of

|Institution | Location
|----------- | --------
|NONE       

Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

---

Home Banking information and regulation  Accessibility Contact 
  us
§ 42.01-10 Purpose of regulations. ( a ) The load line marks when placed on a vessel shall indicate the maximum amidships draft to which such vessel can be lawfully submerged, in the various circumstances and seasons applicable to such vessel.
( b ) This subchapter sets forth the uniform minimum requirements for load line marks on various categories of vessels. It also sets forth requirements for surveys relating to the assignment of load lines, the issuing of load line certificates by authorized issuing authorities, and the carriage of load line certificates aboard vessels.
( c ) The rules and regulations in this subchapter also provide for the enforcement of load line requirements and control over vessels when it is believed such vessels may be in violation of applicable load line requirements.
[CGFR 68-60, 33 FR 10049, July 12, 1968, as amended by CGD 80-120, 47 FR 5721, Feb. 8, 1982]
Schedule of participating executive officers



 Exhibit 10.2 
  
 SCHEDULE OF PARTICIPATING EXECUTIVE OFFICERS 
  
 Armstrong World Industries, Inc. has given substantially similar grant letters to the following executives. The executives are eligible for
a cash retention payment equal to the stated percentage of their current annualized base salary. 
  

				
	 Matthew J. Angello
	  	100	%
	 F. Nicholas Grasberger
	  	100	%
	 John N. Rigas
	  	100	%
	 Stephen J. Senkowski
	  	100	%
	 William C. Rodruan
	  	60	%
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

# District: 3
Federal Reserve Bank of: Philadelphia

## Filings received during the week ending August 26, 2006

|Filer             | Filing Type    | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                                                    | End of Comment Period                                 
|----------------- | -------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------
|ORRSTOWN BANK     | Premises* 18C  | Orrstown Bank, Shippensburg, PA, to establish a branch by purchasing the assets and assuming the liabilities of a branch of Omega Bank, State College, PA, located at 1110 East Simpson Street, Mechanicsburg, PA. | Newspaper:Not availableFederal Register:Not applicable
|Newspaper:        | Not available 
|Federal Register: | Not applicable

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location | RSSDID | Exam Date | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|---------------------- | ------ | --------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|NONE                  

## CRA Examinations scheduled for Forth Quarter of 2006 (October 1, 2006 - December 31, 2006)

|Institution | Location
|----------- | --------

Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

---

Home Banking information and regulation  Accessibility Contact 
  us
§ 44.01-13 Heavy weather plan. ( a ) Each heavy weather plan under § 44.01-12(b) must be prepared by the vessel owner or operator and approved by the cognizant Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection. Approval of a heavy weather plan is limited to the current hurricane season.
( b ) The cognizant Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection, is— ( 1 ) The Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection, within whose area the work site is located for a vessel that will be operating in a limited geographical area; or
( 2 ) The Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection, within whose area the point of departure is located for a transiting vessel.
( c ) The required content of the heavy weather plan is determined on a case-by-case basis by the cognizant Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection, based on knowledge of the local conditions. The heavy weather plan may contain weather radio frequencies and time schedules for seeking a harbor of safe refuge. A single heavy weather plan may be accepted for more than one vessel operating at a single work site or on a single route.
( d ) The vessel owner or operator must place a copy of the heavy weather plan on each vessel to which it applies and ensure that it remains there throughout the hurricane season.
[CGD 79-142, 45 FR 57402, Aug. 28, 1980]