alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2015171EN.01003501.xml

| 26.5.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 171/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.5.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 171/35

---

Action brought on 1 April 2015 — Puma v OHIM — Gemma Group (Device of a jumping animal)

(Case T-159/15)

(2015/C 171/42)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Puma SE (Herzogenaurach, Germany) (represented by: P. González-Bueno Catalán de Ocón, lawyer)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Gemma Group Srl (Cerasolo Ausa, Italy)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Applicant: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Applicant:

Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark (Device of a jumping animal) — Application for registration No 11 573 474

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Procedure before OHIM

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 19 December 2014 in Case R 1207/2014-5

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order OHIM and the other party to the proceedings to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order OHIM and the other party to the proceedings to pay the costs.

Plea in law

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Articles 8(5), 75 and 76 of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Articles 8(5), 75 and 76 of Regulation No 207/2009.

---
IN THE

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

US AIRWAYS, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION,

Plaintiff/Appellant/Cross-Appellee,

v.

QWEST CORPORATION, A COLORADO CORPORATION,

Defendant/Appellee/Cross-Appellant, 

SKYLINE STEEL, INC., AN ARIZONA CORPORATION; ONE CALL LOCATORS, LTD.,

DBA ELM LOCATING & UTILITY SERVICES, A MONTANA CORPORATION,

Defendants/Appellees.

No. CV-16-0027-PR

Filed November 23, 2016

Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

The Honorable Arthur T. Anderson, Judge

No. CV2011-001859

Opinion of the Court of Appeals, Division One

238 Ariz. 413, 361 P.3d 942 (App. 2015)

AFFIRMED IN PART, DEPUBLISHED IN PART

COUNSEL:

Kevin D. Neal, Jennifer A. Cranston (argued), Liana J. Garcia, Gallagher & 

Kennedy, P.A., Phoenix, Attorneys for US Airways, Inc.

Rodolfo Parga, Jr., Andrea G. Lovell (argued), Ryley Carlock & Applewhite, 

PC, Phoenix, Attorneys for Qwest Corporation

John J. Kastner, Jr. (argued), Gust Rosenfeld, P.L.C., Tucson, Attorneys for 

One Call Locators, Ltd., dba ELM Locating & Utility Services

Meghan H. Grabel, Andrea M. Taylor, Osborn Maledon, Phoenix,

Attorneys for Amicus Curiae Arizona Investment Council
Andrew M. Jacobs, Snell & Wilmer, LLP, Tucson, Timothy J. Sabo, W. 

Danny Green, Snell & Wilmer, LLP, Phoenix, Attorneys for Amici Curiae 

Tucson Electric Power Company, UNS Electric, Inc., UNS Gas, Inc.

John J. Egbert, Kerry A. Hodges, Jennings, Strouss & Salmon, P.L.C.,

Phoenix, Attorneys for Amicus Curiae Southwest Gas Corporation

David F. Gaona, Gaona Law Firm, Phoenix, Attorneys for Amicus Curiae 

Arizona Public Service Company

PER CURIAM:

¶ 1 We granted review in this case to consider whether the court 

of appeals erred in holding that (1) Qwest Corporation’s tariff(s) limited its 

liability for service interruption to non-customer US Airways, Inc., and (2) 

Qwest contractor ELM Locating and Utility Services owed no duty to US 

Airways. We have jurisdiction under article 6, section 5(3) of the Arizona 

Constitution and A.R.S. § 12-120.24.

¶ 2 After considering the briefs and oral arguments, the Court 

affirms the court of appeals’ resolution of these issues as set forth in

paragraphs 1-30 of its opinion. Although we did not grant review of the 

issue resolved in paragraphs 31-35 of the opinion, we depublish those 

paragraphs.
No. 62448.

#### International Expediters, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 325103-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

The protests were dismissed.
# Map            Albania.
Before the Third Division,

August 4, 1948

No. 52489.

protests 44875-K. etc. (Los Angelos).

#### Bullocks, Inc. *v.*United States,

*189Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel the court found that the facts herein agreed upon were such as to bring the case within the holding in *John Barr*v. *United States*(11 Cust. Ct. 88, C. D. 801), which record was incorporated herein. (See *John Barr*v. *United States,*324 U. S. 83.) In accordance therewith it was held that the currency of the invoices should be converted at the buying rate in the New York market at noon on the day of exportation (the “free” rate of exchange for pounds sterling), as certified by the Federal Reserve bank and set forth by the collector on each of the entries involved. The protests were sustained to this extent.
Before the First Division,

January 13, 1945

No. 49942.

#### Protests 905706-G, etc., of Johan Gotteberg Imptg. Co. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Cole, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
No. 58892.

protest 191463-K (New York).

#### Belle Neckware Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of bags, composed wholly of greaseproof paper, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. P68/187.

protest 61/23426(B) (New York).

#### E. M. Stevens Corp. *v.*United States,

Beckworth, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protest consists of knives similar in all material respects to those the subject of *National Carloading Corp.*v. *United States*(54 Cust. Ct. 178, C.D. 2529), except that said knives are with handles of wood, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
# 		Sorry, something went wrong

An unexpected error has occurred.Web Parts Maintenance Page: If you have permission, you can use this page to temporarily close Web Parts or remove personal settings. For more information, contact your site administrator.

Technical Details

Troubleshoot issues with Microsoft SharePoint Foundation.

Correlation ID: 36a523a1-6496-a055-81d4-62a1ed31c49a

Date and Time: 4/29/2024 12:39:27 AM

----

Go back to site
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18
- 7100

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. SHAWNTAY LAKEITH SWANN , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina , at Greensboro

. Thomas D. Schroeder, Chief District Judge. ( 1:06

- cr - 00443

- TDS

- 1; 1:18

- cv - 00527

- TDS

- JLW )

Submitted : March 28, 2019 Decided: April 11, 2019

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and KING and AGEE , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Shawntay Lakeith Swann, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Shawntay Lakeith Swann seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion as successive . The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of ap pealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a p risoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 3 22,
336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at
484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Swann has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argume nt would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
DSF 2_6_13 

# Development of Chemical Precipitation BAT Design Basis and Determining Treatment in Place: Clarifiers

The following documentation supports EPA’ s determination of the BAT design basis for FGD wastewater treatment clarifiers. It also describes EPA’s methodology for assessing and determining costs/loads credits assigned for existing clarifiers at steam electric plants

.DSF 2_6_13

Evaluation of Clarifiers used for 1

- Stage Chemical Precipitation
From the file “CBI_Chem Precip TIP.xlsx,” o f the 43 TIP systems:

- 28 are 1

- stage

- 2 are 1

- stage with both primary (primary solids removal with chems) and secondary clarifiers

- 12 are 2

- stage

- 1 is unknown
Note: Of the 43 TIP systems, 9 claimed their FGD wastewater treatment system diagrams to be CBI. Six claimed information provided in response to the Steam Electric Survey about their FGD wastewater treatment system components to be CBI (Part D, Question D5

- 2).

Of the 31 1

- stage systems:

- 12 have one clarifier

- 18 have two clarifiers

- 1 is unknown

Note: Of the 30 1

- stage TIP sys tems, 8 claimed their FGD wastewater treatment system diagrams to be CBI. Five claimed information provided in response to the Steam Electric Survey about their FGD wastewater treatment system components to be CBI (Part D, Question D5

- 2).
Attempted to inv estigate plants with two clarifiers to determine the total capacity provided by the clarifiers (e.g., 2 x100%, 2x75%, 2x50%), but was largely unsuccessful. Survey responses typically provide only volume (ft3) and residence time (hr), but not design capaci ty. Furthermore, p lants did not indicate how residence time was determined (typical flow, avg design flow, max design flow).
Looked at available information for the 3 BAT plants:

- [Redacted] uses 2x50% clarifiers (based on non
- CBI design engineer’s report)

- [Redacted] uses [Redacted] (based on CBI design engineer’s report)

- [Redacted] uses [Redacted] (based on CBI design engineer’s report)

. For BAT design basis, decided to cost 2x75% clarifiers as a conservative estimate based on operations at the BAT plants.
For determining TIP, although we can generally determine whether plants have one or two clarifiers, we cannot easily determine their capacity. At a minimum, plants are presumed to have 100% clarifier capacity, regardless of whether satisfied by one or two clarifiers. Many plants presumably have more than 100% clarifier capacity, regardless of whether they use one or two clarifiers. Decisions regarding the WWTP redundancy are based on many factors, including plant policy. EPA assumes that all TIP plants have determined and included appropriate redundancy regardless of whether they installed one or two clarifiers.
Before the Second Division,

August 21, 1951

No. 55829.

protest 151539-K (Los Angeles).

#### Massabni Bros. & Saba *v.*United States,

*303Opinion by

Form, J.

At the trial counsel for the plaintiff limited its claim to the merchandise described on the invoices as follows:

> 94500E — 72 x 126/22” — linen banquet sets

> 9110 — 22” linen napkins

> 9810 — -72 x 144/22” — linen banquet sets

> 9480 — 68 x 84/16” — linen banquet sets

> 9600 — 68/104/16”—linen banquet sets

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the items in question consist of table sets, such as banquet sets, etc., made in part of hand-made lace, containing no machine-made material or article provided for in paragraph 1529 (a), valued at not more than $50 per pound, and being more than 2 inches in width, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED NATIONAL INSURANCE

CO., et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

AON LTD., et al.,

Defendants.

Civ. No. 04-539

ORDER

AND NOW, this 24th day of July, 2009, for the reasons stated in the

accompanying opinion, defendants’ Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law or for a

New Trial (docket no. 217) is hereby DENIED.

BY THE COURT:

/ s / Louis H. Pollak, J. 

Pollak, J.

Case 2:04-cv-00539-LP Document 249 Filed 07/24/09 Page 1 of 1
No. 60744.

#### Lane Antiques *v.*United States,

protest 280891-K (New York).

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with rule 5 (b) of the rules of this court, as amended, the protest was dismissed for lack of prosecution.
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D18-2423

_____________________________

GERARD L. BROOKINS,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Linda F. McCallum, Judge.

October 16, 2018

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROWE, OSTERHAUS, and KELSEY, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Gerard L. Brookins, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
II 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1049 

To allow the Secretary of Health and Human Services to require that risk 

evaluation and mitigation strategies for certain drugs include communication plans that provide information about drug formulations or properties 

described in the drug labeling. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 4, 2017 

Ms. HASSAN (for herself and Mr. YOUNG) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, 

Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To allow the Secretary of Health and Human Services to 

require that risk evaluation and mitigation strategies for 

certain drugs include communication plans that provide 

information about drug formulations or properties described in the drug labeling. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Opioid Addiction Risk 

5 Transparency Act’’. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1049 IS

1 SEC. 2. REMS COMMUNICATION PLANS. 

2 Section 505–1(e)(3) of the Federal Food, Drug, and 

3 Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355–1(e)(3)) is amended— 

4 (1) in subparagraph (B), by striking ‘‘; or’’; 

5 (2) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period 

6 and inserting ‘‘; or’’; and 

7 (3) by adding at the end the following: 

8 ‘‘(D) disseminating information to health 

9 care providers about the meaning of terms re10 lated to drug formulations or properties that 

11 are described in the drug labeling, including in12 formation about the limitations or patient care 

13 implications of such formulations or properties, 

14 and how such formulations or properties may 

15 be related to serious adverse drug events associ16 ated with use of the drug.’’. 

Æ 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
No. 65353.

#### Hercules Antiques and American Shipping Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 159308-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the items marked “A” consist of candlesticks and candelabras similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 62036, except that they are not plated with platinum, gold, or silver, nor colored with gold lacquer, the claim at 22% percent under the provision in paragraph 397, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T.D. 51802), for other metal articles, not specially provided for, was sustained. The items marked “C,” stipulated to be the same as those involved in said Abstract 62036, were held dutiable at 25 percent under the provision in said paragraph 397, as modified, *supra,*for articles, not specially provided for, plated with silver on nickel silver or copper, but not in chief value of silver, as claimed. The items marked “E,” stipulated to be the same as those the subject of said Abstract 62036, except that they are plated with gold, were held dutiable at 32% percent under the provision in said paragraph 397, as modified, *supra,*supplemented by Presidential proclamation (T.D. 51909), for articles, not specially provided for, plated with gold, or colored with gold lacquer, as claimed.
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19
- 6987

VICTOR LIVERMON , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v. HAROLD W. CLARKE , Respondent

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Richmond

. M. Hannah Lauck , District Judge. ( 3:19

- cv - 00324

- MHL

- RCY )

Submitted : November 19, 2019 Decided: November 22, 2019

Before WILKINSON and RICHARDSON , Circuit Judges , and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Victor Livermon, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Victor Livermon seeks to ap peal the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition for failure to pay the filing fee. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)( 1)(A) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000);

see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the distr ict court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Livermon has not made the requisite showing. Moreover, Livermon has since paid the filing fee and the district court docketed Livermon’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as a new civil action. See
Livermo n v. Clarke , No. 3:19

- cv - 00487

- MHL

- RCY

. Accordingly, Livermon has received the relief he seeks on appeal. W e therefore deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal as moot. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
# C_2016016EN.01004701.xml

| 18.1.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 16/47 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.1.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 16/47

---

Action brought on 12 November 2015 — Hako v OHIM (SCRUBMASTER)

(Case T-629/15)

(2016/C 016/56)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Hako GmbH (Bad Oldesloe, Germany) (represented by: A. Marx, lawyer)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘SCRUBMASTER’ — Application No 12 492 617

Trade mark at issue:

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 1 September 2015 in Case R 2197/2014-4

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order OHIM to pay the costs, including the costs in respect of the appeal proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order OHIM to pay the costs, including the costs in respect of the appeal proceedings.

Pleas in law

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) in conjunction with Article 7(2) of Regulation No 207/2009; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) in conjunction with Article 7(2) of Regulation No 207/2009;

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) in conjunction with Article 7(2) of Regulation No 207/2009; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) in conjunction with Article 7(2) of Regulation No 207/2009;

| — | Infringement of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009.

---
NESBITT, 

VASSAR & 

MCCOWN, L.L.P. 

attorneys I counselors 

15851 DALLAS PARKWAY, Sum 800, ADDISON, TEXAS 75001 

PHONE: 972.371.2411 fAx: 972.371.2410 WEB: WWW.NVMLAW.COM 

September 18, 2015 

Via E-Filing 

Clerk of the Court 

Fourth Court of Appeals 

Cadena-Reeves Justice Center 

300 Dolorosa, Suite 3200 

San Antonio, Texas 78205-3037 

Re: Case No. 04-15-00584-CV; In re Transamerica Life Insurance 

Company, in the Fourth Court of Appeals 

Dear Clerk: 

Cause No. 15-01-0043-CVA, In The Matter of J. Le Roy, 8l5t Judicial 

District Court, Atascosa County, Texas 

This firm and the undersigned attorneys represent JG Wentworth 

Originations, LLC ("JGW") in the above-referenced matters. Please be advised that 

on behalf of JGW, we have contacted the 81 st District Court of Atascosa County, 

Texas and cancelled the September 21, 2015 hearing scheduled on JGW's Motion 

to Compel Transamerica Life Insurance Company in Regards to the Transfer of 

Structured Settlement Payment Rights in the above-referenced trial court case. We 

have advised counsel for Transamerica Life Insurance Company ("Transamerica") 

of our representation and the cancellation of the September 21 hearing, and that 

counsel is copied on this letter. 

Further, JGW intends to take no action to enforce the trial court's Final Order 

Approving Transfer of Structured Settlement Payment Rights without conferring 

with counsel for Transamerica and providing at least ten (10) days' notice to that 

counsel. Transamerica was provided notice of the filing of the original petition and 

ACCEPTED

04-15-00584-CV

FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS

SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS

9/18/2015 3:07:25 PM

KEITH HOTTLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 4th COURT OF APPEALS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 9/18/2015 3:07:25 PM KEITH E. HOTTLE Clerk
Clerk of the Court 

September 18, 2015 

Page2 

of the final hearing in the trial court case. 

JGW is committed to resolution of this matter with Transamerica, and 

hopefully this case will involve no further use of the Court's time as it is resolved to 

the satisfaction of the parties. Thank you. 

Sincerely, 

Isl Earl S. Nesbitt 

Earl S. Nesbitt 

David S. Vassar 

Patrick P. Sicotte 

cc: Via Email (kordubarogers@gmail.com) 

Laryssa Korduba 

Korduba & Rodgers, LLP 

211 Florence Street 

Tomball, Texas 77357 

Via Email 

B. Lee Wertz, Jr. 

Stephen Gibson 

Dennis L. Roossien, Jr. 

Munsch Hardt Kopf & Harr, PC 

500 N. Akard Street, Suite 3800 

Dallas, Texas 75201-6659 

Via U.S. Mail 

J.LeRoy 

Via E-Filing 

81 st Judicial District Court 

Atascosa County, Texas