alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2015311EN.01004801.xml

| 21.9.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 311/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.9.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 311/48

---

Action brought on 12 June 2015 — IR v OHIM — Pirelli Tyre (popchrono)

(Case T-132/15)

(2015/C 311/53)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicants: IR (Caen, France) (represented by: C. de Marguerye, lawyer)

Applicants:

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

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Pirelli Tyre SpA (Milan, Italy)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘popchrono’ — Community trade mark No 4 177 267

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before OHIM: Revocation proceedings

Procedure before OHIM:

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 13 February 2015 in Case R 217/2014-5

Contested decision:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | receive its conclusions; |
| --- | --- |

—

receive its conclusions;

| — | rescind the decision of 13 February 2015 of the Board of Appeal; |
| --- | --- |

—

rescind the decision of 13 February 2015 of the Board of Appeal;

| — | confirm the property rights of the trademark POPCHRONO; |
| --- | --- |

—

confirm the property rights of the trademark POPCHRONO;

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

—

order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of the right to be heard; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of the right to be heard;

| — | Narrow interpretation of ‘genuine use’ by the Board of Appeal; |
| --- | --- |

—

Narrow interpretation of ‘genuine use’ by the Board of Appeal;

| — | Resumption of genuine use of a community trademark in question should have been examined by OHIM according to pieces submitted by the applicant, including a prior license agreement for more than three months before the introduction of the revocation request; |
| --- | --- |

—

Resumption of genuine use of a community trademark in question should have been examined by OHIM according to pieces submitted by the applicant, including a prior license agreement for more than three months before the introduction of the revocation request;

| — | OHIM’s failure to take account of the contempt of elementary rules of competition and not considered the will of obstruction of a party against the other party. |
| --- | --- |

—

OHIM’s failure to take account of the contempt of elementary rules of competition and not considered the will of obstruction of a party against the other party.

---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA :

: CRIMINAL ACTION

v. :

: NO. 04-192-02

ERIC HUMBERT :

O R D E R

AND NOW, this 31st day of March , 2015, upon consideration of Petitioner’s 

(1) Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (ECF No. 

141-1); (2) Motion for Reconsideration of the Court’s November 19, 2010 Order (ECF No. 143); 

and (3) Motion for Leave to Supplement the Section 2255 Motion (ECF No. 157), and all 

memoranda and exhibits submitted in support and opposition thereto, it is ORDERED that:

1. Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration of the Court’s November 19, 2010 Order 

(ECF No. 143) is DENIED;

2. Defendant’s Motion for Leave to Supplement (ECF No. 157) is GRANTED only 

to the extent it seeks leave to attach Exhibit “A” as an Exhibit to the habeas 

corpus Motion; 

3. Defendant’s Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence Pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 2255 (ECF No. 141-1) is DENIED;

4. Petitioner’s Application for Appointment of Counsel is DENIED;

Case 2:04-cr-00192-RBS Document 159 Filed 03/31/15 Page 1 of 2
5. No Certificate of Appealability shall issue. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

BY THE COURT:

___________________________

R. BARCLAY SURRICK, J.

2

Case 2:04-cr-00192-RBS Document 159 Filed 03/31/15 Page 2 of 2
No. 62983.

#### Henry Lutjen and Campbell Soup Co. *v.*United States,

protest 284117-K (New York).

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of cooked boneless cow beef, not packed in airtight containers and not pickled or cured, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
### NUMBER 13 - 2 1 - 0 0 001 - C V COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI

– EDINBURG

IN RE DERUITER RANCH, LLC

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.



## ORDER
Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Hinojosa and Silva Order Per Curiam
On January 4, 2021, relator DeRuiter Ranch, LLC (DeRuiter) filed a petition for writ of mandamus th r ough which it asserts that the trial court abused its discretion in preventing DeR uiter from obtaining discovery pertaining to “public use” in a statutory condemnation proceeding

. See T EX

. U TIL

. C ODE A NN . § 181.004 (“ A gas or electric corporation has the right and power to enter on, condemn, and appropriate the land, right

of

- way, easement, or other property of any person or corporation. ”) ; T EX

. C ONST . art. I, §17 (a) ( “ No person's property shall be taken, damaged, or destroyed for or applied to public use without adequate compensation being made . . . .”).2

T he Court r equests that the real part y in interest , Permian Highway Pipeline LLC , or any others whose interest would be directly affected by the relief sought, file a response to the petition for writ of mandamus on or before the expiration of ten days from the date of this order. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P

. 52.2, 52.4, 52.8. IT IS SO ORDERED. PER CURIAM
D elivered and filed the 6 th day of January , 202 1

.
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT  TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I,
Douglas M. Schirle, certify that:

1.     I
have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of GSI Technology, Inc.;

2.     Based
on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.     Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations, and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.     The
registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f))
for the registrant and have:



5.     The
registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's
auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



Date: June 4, 2010/s/ DOUGLAS M. SCHIRLE Douglas M. Schirle Chief Financial Officer


---



QuickLinks
# C_2015337EN.01004501.xml

| 12.10.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 337/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.10.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 337/45

---

Action brought on 31 August 2015 — LG Electronics v OHIM — Cyrus Wellness Consulting (Viewty)

(Case T-498/15)

(2015/C 337/51)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: LG Electronics, Inc. (Seoul, Republic of Korea) (represented by: M. Graf, 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: Cyrus Wellness Consulting GmbH (Berlin, Germany)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Applicant of the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘Viewty’ — Application for registration No 6 266 531

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Procedure before OHIM

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 15 June 2015 in Joined Cases R 1935/2014-2 and R 1563/2014-2

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. |
| --- | --- |

—

order OHIM to pay the costs.

Plea in law

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.

---
No. 58893.

protest 224586-K (New York).

#### J. D. Smith Inter-Ocean, Inc., for Alexandria Mercantile Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of table damask, wholly or in chief value of table damask, wholly or in chief value of cotton, and articles made or cut from such table damask, and that the packing list, attached to the protest, establishes the net weights of the items in question, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained. The collector was directed to reliquidate the entry accordingly, basing weights upon the packing list, attached to the protest.
IV 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 96 

Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on the Budget in 

the One Hundred Fifteenth Congress. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 7, 2017 

Mrs. BLACK submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on House Administration 

RESOLUTION 

Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on 

the Budget in the One Hundred Fifteenth Congress. 

1 Resolved, 

2 SECTION 1. AMOUNTS FOR COMMITTEE EXPENSES. 

3 For the expenses of the Committee on the Budget 

4 (hereafter in this resolution referred to as the ‘‘Com5 mittee’’), including the expenses of all staff salaries, there 

6 shall be paid, out of the applicable accounts of the House 

7 of Representatives for committee salaries and expenses, 

8 not more than $10,380,424 for the One Hundred Fif9 teenth Congress. 


rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 96 IH 

1 SEC. 2. SESSION LIMITATIONS. 

2 Of the amount specified in section 1— 

3 (1) not more than $5,190,212 shall be available 

4 for expenses incurred during the period beginning at 

5 noon on January 3, 2017, and ending immediately 

6 before noon on January 3, 2018; and 

7 (2) not more than $5,190,212 shall be available 

8 for expenses incurred during the period beginning at 

9 noon on January 3, 2018, and ending immediately 

10 before noon on January 3, 2019. 

11 SEC. 3. VOUCHERS. 

12 Payments under this resolution shall be made on 

13 vouchers authorized by the Committee, signed by the 

14 Chairman of the Committee, and approved in the manner 

15 directed by the Committee on House Administration. 

16 SEC. 4. REGULATIONS. 

17 Amounts made available under this resolution shall 

18 be expended in accordance with regulations prescribed by 

19 the Committee on House Administration. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with BILLS
**Exhibit 31.2**
CERTIFICATION
I, Charles P. Huffman, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of EnergySouth, Inc. (the “Registrant”);
2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this quarterly report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterlyreport;
4. The Registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) and have:
(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the Registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this quarterly report is being prepared;
(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the periodcovered by this quarterly report based on such evaluation; and
(c) Disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the Registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the Registrant’s most recentfiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;
5. The Registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the Registrant’s board of directors:
(a) All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the Registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.     Date: February 2, 2005 /s/  Charles P. Huffman   Charles P. Huffman
Before the Third Division,

September 25, 1946

No. 51316.

#### Petition 6558-R of Lynbrook Textiles Co., Inc. (Providence).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

From the testimony of the customs broker who made - the entry and that of the secretary of the importing corporation, it appeared that the order for the merchandise was placed in June 1945, but the goods did not arrive in the United States until the latter part of August. The customs broker testified that he arrived at the value through information he had obtained from similar entries of merchandise from the manufacturer, and that he considered the value at which he entered to be the prevailing market price in Mexico at the time of this exportation. He stated'that he was in constant touch with the selling agent of the manufacturer and obtained information from said selling agent that there was no change in the prices, so far as he knew. From the evidence submitted it was held that the entry of the merchandise at a value lower than that arrived at on final appraisement was without intent to defraud the Government or to deceive its officials and that the importer apd its agent acted in good faith in making entry at the lower price. The petition was therefore granted.
The OTC Self-Service Kiosk

Fiscal Service has added the functionality of integrating OTCnet with Self-Service Kiosks for 

agencies who process transactions with OTCnet. The new Self-Service Kiosk web service affords

Point-of-Sale (POS) kiosks the ability to connect with OTCnet to reconcile debit/credit card

transactions independently of a cashier.

With the addition of the OTC Self-Service Kiosk, OTCnet will be the only 

one-stop-shop payment option for agencies’ over-the-counter 

collections needs by seamlessly offering cash, check, and card 

processing without needing to access multiple applications. Agencies 

that have in-person customers at locations submitting checks, U.S.

cash, and debit/credit card payments and have medium to high

volume transaction volumes are ideal candidates for a kiosk service. 

 

What is the Self-Service Kiosk?

The Self-Service Kiosk is a vendor Point-of-Sale (POS) system that allows customers 

to make self-service payments. Kiosk vendors and agencies can utilize the OTC web

service suite to allow a current kiosk interface to upload cash, check and debit/credit

card data to OTCnet as payment processing options. 

How does my Agency benefit?

The Self-Service Kiosk provides agencies with the ability to streamline over-thecounter services by expanding payment type offerings, minimizing long lines at the 

counter, reducing staffing resources, and increasing payment accessibility, including 

remote locations. All collected payments and deposits will be synced into the existing 

OTCnet reporting functionality for ease of reference and agency accounting.

How does my Agency get started?

Contact the OTCnet Team today to get started! Fiscal Service and the OTCnet Team 

will work with agencies to review business requirements, identify kiosk functionalities, 

and discuss OTCnet integration.

For questions about the OTC Self-Service Kiosk, contact:

Reginald McKinney | Reginald.McKinney@fiscal.treasury.gov

Ava Singleton | Ava.Singleton@fiscal.treasury.gov

OTCnet Deployment Team | fiscalservice.otcdeployment@citi.com
1 NO. 2012-75468
ASCENTIUM CAPITAL LLC Plaintiff

v s . GEU DIAZ CRUZ, INDIVIDUALLY, FRANK MILLER D/B/A NARS EQUIPMENT, AND JASON MILLER D/B/A NARS EQUIPMENT Defendants § § § § § § § § § § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF

HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS

270th JUDICIAL COURT

NOTICE OF APPEAL
TO THE HONORABLE COURT: Frank Miller, defendant, files this Notice of Appeal, and pursuant to Texas Rules of Appellate
Procedure Rule 25.1(d), would show as follows: 1. The proper trial court, trial court number and style of this case are set forth in the caption above. 2. Defendant is appealing the interoluctory Judgment in favor of Ascentium Capital, LLC, plaintiff, that was executed, dated and entered on August 28, 2014. (Exhibit A) Defendant desires to appeal that Judgment. 3. The appeal is taken to the either the First or Fourteenth Court of Appeals in Houston,
Texas. 4. The name of the party filing this notice is Frank Miller. 4/27/2015 3:26:16 PM Chris Daniel - District Clerk Harris County

Envelope No. 5048709 By: Phyllis Washington Filed: 4/27/2015 3:26:16 PM

ACCEPTED 01-15-00405-CV FIRST COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS 5/20/2015 8:21:53 AM CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERK2 Respectfully submitted, THE TRIMBLE FIRM, P.L.L.C.

/s/ Dale L. Trimble By

_______________________________________ Dale L. Trimble State Bar No. 20222650 209 Simonton Street Conroe, Texas 77301 Telephone: (936) 539-3457 Telecopier: (936) 539-3464 Email: dlt@trimblefirm.com Counsel for Defendant, Frank Miller

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This pleading was served in compliance with Rules 21 and 21a of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure on the 27th day of April, 2015, upon all counsel of record. Matthew T. Wright Wright Law Group, PLLC 12620 FM 1960 Road W. Suite 4A, Box 304 Houston, Texas 77065 /s/ Dale L. Trimble

__________________________________ Dale L. Trimble
Certification of Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer
                             18 U.S.C. Section 1350
                             as Adopted Pursuant to
                  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

The undersigned, the Principal Executive Officer (President) and the Principal
Financial Officer (President) of Sword Comp-Soft Corp. (the "Company"), hereby
certifies that to his knowledge on the date hereof:

      (a)   The Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the Company for the year ended
            November 30, 2002, filed on the date hereof with the Securities and
            Exchange Commission (the "Report") fully complies with the
            requirements of Section 13(a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange
            Act of 1934; and

      (b)   Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
            respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
            Company.

Date: January 13, 2006


                                                 /s/ Louis Greco
                                             ----------------------
                                                   Louis Greco
                                                    President
                                   (Principal Executive and Financial Officer)

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed
by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended.
Exhibit 32(i)

CERTIFICATIONS OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

The
undersigned hereby certifies that, to his knowledge, (i) the Form 10-KSB filed by Carolina Bank Holdings, Inc. (the Issuer) for the year ended December 31, 2005, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) the information contained in that report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer on the dates and for the
periods presented therein.



|                     |  |                              |  |                                      
|-------------------- |  | ---------------------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|                     |  | Carolina Bank Holdings, Inc.
|                     |  |                             
|Date: March 28, 2006 |  | By:                          |  | /s/ Robert T. Braswell               
|                     |  |                              |  | Robert T. Braswell                   
|                     |  |                              |  | President and Chief Executive Officer



|                     |  |     |  |                             
|-------------------- |  | --- |  | ----------------------------
|Date: March 28, 2006 |  | By: |  | /s/ T. Allen Liles          
|                     |  |     |  | T. Allen Liles              
|                     |  |     |  | Chief Financial Officer and 
|                     |  |     |  | Principal Accounting Officer