alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
COALITION PROVISIONAL AUTHORITY ORDER NUMBER 8
TRAVELING ABROAD FOR ACADEMIC PURPOSES

Pursuant to my authority as head of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), relevant
U.N. Security Council resolutions, including Resolution 1483 (2003), and the laws and
usages of war,

Reconfirming the provisions of General Franks’ Freedom Message to the Iraqi People of
April 16, 2003,

Recognizing that the free exchange of ideas and the pursuit of academic excellence is
necessary to the establishment of representative self-government in Iraq,

Acting on behalf, and for the benefit, of the Iraqi people,

I hereby promulgate the following:

Any statute, regulation, instruction or policy of the former Iraqi government that imposes
restrictions or procedures on faculty, employees or students of public universities,
colleges or other institutions of higher education who desire to travel abroad for
educational purposes, is hereby rescinded. Effective immediately, the acting presidents
of public universities, colleges or other institutions of higher education shall have
exclusive authority to approve requests from faculty, employees and students of their
institutions to travel abroad for any academic purpose, including teaching; pursuing
programs of study; or attending or participating in sabbaticals, seminars, conferences,
meetings, or similar events.

A cond_etrtes

L. Paul Bremer, Administrator
Coalition Provisional Authority

CPA/ORD/7 June 2003/08
No. 51920.

#### Levy Bros. & Adler Rochester, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 69258-K, etc. (Rochester).

Opinion 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. The protests were sustained to this extent.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE J.CREW
GROUP,INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FROM THE THREE MONTHS ENDED APRIL 29, 2000 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-03-2001
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-29-2000
<CASH>                                          18,370
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    135,455
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               181,006
<PP&E>                                         225,793
<DEPRECIATION>                                (83,837)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 350,123
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          114,170
<BONDS>                                        283,890
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          179,809
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   (275,903)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   350,123
<SALES>                                        158,032
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               158,809
<CGS>                                           85,479
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  158,641
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,838
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (8,670)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,470
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (5,200)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (5,200)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
# C_2017070EN.01002001.xml

| 6.3.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 70/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.3.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 70/20

---

Judgment of the General Court of 25 January 2017 — Anton Riemerschmid Weinbrennerei und Likörfabrik v EUIPO — Viña y Bodega Botalcura (LITU)

(Case T-187/16) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark LITU - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - No similarity between the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2017/C 070/28)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Anton Riemerschmid Weinbrennerei und Likörfabrik GmbH & Co. KG (Erding, Germany) (represented by: P. Koch Moreno, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Ivanauskas, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Viña y Bodega Botalcura SA (Las Condes, Chile)

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

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 February 2016 (Case R 719/2015-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Anton Riemerschmid Weinbrennerei und Likörfabrik and Viña y Bodega Botalcura.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Anton Riemerschmid Weinbrennerei und Likörfabrik GmbH & Co. KG to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Anton Riemerschmid Weinbrennerei und Likörfabrik GmbH & Co. KG to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

---

(1)  OJ C 243, 4.7.2016.

1

---
June 9, 2015 

Mr. Carlos A. Franklin 

3900 S Ware Rd. 

McAllen, TX 78503 

Dear Mr. Franklin: 

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption of 

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can not process your 

request and what you should do in the next 30 days. 

Why We Can Not Process Your Request 

We entered your March 16, 2015, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2015-

0657), but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does 

not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request 

any further, you must send us all of the following: 

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the 

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief. 

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole. 

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption 

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you 

seek an exemption. 

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request. 

What You Should Do 

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your 

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption. 
2 

If We Do Not Hear From You 

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

Brenda Robeson 

Program Analyst, Airmen and 

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
# C_2015171EN.01003001.xml

| 26.5.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 171/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.5.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 171/30

---

Action brought on 18 March 2015 — Unicorn v OHIM — Mercilink Equipment Leasing (UNICORN)

(Case T-124/15)

(2015/C 171/35)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Unicorn a.s. (Prague, Czech Republic) (represented by: L. Lorenc, 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: Mercilink Equipment Leasing Ltd (Limassol, Cyprus)

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 (Representation of a unicorn) – Community trade mark No 11 014 743

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Procedure before OHIM:

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 13 January 2015 in Case R 149/2014-5

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 to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

Pleas in law

| — | OHIM did not properly take into consideration evidence submitted by the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

OHIM did not properly take into consideration evidence submitted by the applicant;

| — | OHIM incorrectly considered good reputation of the earlier trademarks. |
| --- | --- |

—

OHIM incorrectly considered good reputation of the earlier trademarks.

---
# March 2015

# April 2015

# May 2015

# June 2015

# July 2015

# August 2015

# September 2015

# October 2015

# November 2015

# December 2015

# January 2016

# February 2016

# March 2016

# April 2016

# May 2016

# June 2016

# July 2016

# August 2016

# September 2016

# FY 2017 October 2016

# November 2016

# December 2016

# January 2017

# February 2017

# March 2017
# C_2018072EN.01002002.xml

| 26.2.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 72/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.2.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 72/20

---

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 20 December 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal — Ireland) — Florea Gusa v Minister for Social Protection, Ireland, Attorney General

(Case C-442/16) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2004/38/EC - Person no longer working in a self-employed capacity - Retention of the status of self-employed person - Right of residence - Legislation of a Member State restricting eligibility for a jobseeker’s allowance to persons who have a right of residence on the territory of that Member State))

(2018/C 072/26)

Language of the case: English

Referring court

Referring court

Court of Appeal

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Florea Gusa

Appellant:

Respondents: Minister for Social Protection, Ireland, Attorney General

Respondents:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 7(3)(b) of Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC must be interpreted as meaning that a national of a Member State retains the status of self-employed person for the purposes of Article 7(1)(a) of that directive where, after having lawfully resided in and worked as a self-employed person in another Member State for approximately four years, that national has ceased that activity, because of a duly recorded absence of work owing to reasons beyond his control, and has registered as a jobseeker with the relevant employment office of the latter Member State.

---

(1)  OJ C 383, 17.10.2016.

1

---
No. 54561.

#### S. Nathan & Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 126560-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of synthetic stones the same in all material respects as those the subject of *S. Nathan*& *Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(37 C. C. P. A. 99, C. A. D. 426), the claim at 10 percent under paragraph 1528 was sustained.
| Fauna Series No. 7

**Cover**

Contents

Foreword

Summary

Introduction

Study Area

Isle Royale Mammal History

Methods and Extent of Present Research

Results

Wolf-Moose Coaction

Acknowledgements

Appendix

Bibliography | **UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR** |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------|
# OAR Box 1384 Prepped by Charmelle Mathews p. i



### Document

Number: 

# 145 ) ll-E-10 5
Docket Number: 

# A-94-5 2

Printed 7/2/2008 8:42:08 AM Sheet 145 of 264P. 2 OCT-23-9 7 12:4 0 P M LIVINGSTON.MOLDE.PRODUC T 253852672 9 ni.ii.-H / 1415 7 Bldi»<m023 4 PE S RT P N C

Contac tRepor t From : Rober tJemison , Pacifi c Environmenta l Services , Inc . (PES ) Date : October 22,199 7 Co n I act : Mr . Bo b Morganster

n Company : Livingston , Inc . Telephon e Number : (253 ) 28 8 050 2 Fa x Number : (253 ) 288-043 6 P..0 1 21002.-o n 2


### •A-9 4 

# I I -S7

Contac tSummary : Mr . Bo b Morganster

n wa s contacte d t

o updat e information provide d i n th e 199 3 EP A screenin g surve

y submitted b

y Livingston , Inc . fo

r thei r Auburn . Washingto n facility . T n response t o m y question s Mr . Morganster n indicate d th e following : Th e facilit y stil l use s the mechanica l resin application (ope n molding ) and resi n transfer moldin g (close d molding ) reinforced plastic s fabrication processes . Th e facility ha s completel y switche d fro

m atomize d mechanica

l lesi u application t

o non-atomized mechanica l resi n applicatio n b y purchasin g an

d installin g Venu s flo w chopper equipment. Th e facilit y ha s adde

d th e us e o f

a lo w pressur

e sheetmoldin g compoun d (approximatel y 550 0 lbs/month ) whic h requires a lowe r temperatur e an d pressur e fo r curin g tha

n th e typica l Shee

t moldin g compound s currentl y use d by th e reinforce

d plastic s industry . Th e facilit y i s als o currently experimentin g wil h a proprietar y vacuum baggin g process . Th e styren e conten to f

die primar

y resi n applied b

y mechanical resi n applicatio n i s 38. 0 percen tb y weighr . Th e styrene conten toftli c ge l coa

tused by th e facilit

y i s 35. 9 percentb

y weight . Ther e i s n o additional stymi e added t o th e resin ri r nV . ge l coat . Th e resi n use d i

n th e resin transfe

r moldin g (RTM ) proces s contain s approximatel y 5 0 percentmethy l methacrylat e an d approximatel

y 4 0 percen

tfille r i s added t

n th e resin . Th e RTM proces s use d b y Livingston , Inc . i s 10 0 percen tclose d molding .

INFORMATIO N T

S ACCURAT E 

# ' VfrMfi-

' W
No.50362.

#### Protest 27708-K of Geo. E. Mallinson Importing Co., Inc. (Seattle).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise is the same as that passed upon in *Nippon Import & Trading Co.*v. *United States*(14 Cust. Ct. 35, C. D. 908), the claim at 35 percent under paragraph 921 was sustained.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

FRANK RISLEY and

BARBARA RISLEY

:

:

: CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-CV-4246

Plaintiffs, :

:

v. :

:

BAYER CORPORATION;

BAYER AG;

GLAXOSMITHKLINE, PLC;

GLAXOSMITHKLINE;

SMITHKLINE BEECHAM

:

:

:

:

:

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

:

Defendants. :

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

To the Clerk of the Court:

Kindly enter the appearances of Hope S. Freiwald, Aline Fairweather, Erin

Brennan and Kirstin J. Miller as attorneys for defendant GlaxoSmithKline PLC.

Respectfully Submitted,

_____________________________ _____________________________

Hope S. Freiwald Aline Fairweather

_____________________________ _____________________________

Erin Brennan Kirstin J. Miller

DECHERT PRICE & RHOADS

4000 Bell Atlantic Tower

1717 Arch Street

Philadelphia, PA 19103-2793

(215) 994-4000

Case 2:02-cv-04246-AB Document 6 Filed 09/11/2002 Page 1 of 1
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

HAROLD C. WILSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, et al.,

Defendants.

CIVIL ACTION

NO. 04-05396

ORDER

AND NOW, this 8th day of April, 2016, upon consideration of Defendants’ Motions for 

Summary Judgment (ECF Nos. 211, 213), Harold C. Wilson’s (“Wilson”) Responses (ECF Nos. 

218, 224) and Defendants’ Replies (ECF Nos. 230, 234), it is hereby ORDERED that:

1. The City of Philadelphia’s (“the City”) motion is GRANTED. Judgment is entered 

in favor the City and against Wilson on: (1) Wilson’s Brady claims against all former 

police officers; (2) Wilson’s Monell claim against the City; (3) Wilson’s federal and 

state law malicious prosecution claims against all former police officers; and (4) 

Wilson’s intentional infliction of emotional distress claims against all former police 

officers.

2. The Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office’s (“DAO”) motion is DENIED to the 

extent it seeks judgment on the part of Wilson’s Monell claim alleging a “custom” of 

discrimination in jury selection. 

BY THE COURT: 

/s/ Gerald J. Pappert 

GERALD J. PAPPERT, J.

Case 2:04-cv-05396-GJP Document 246 Filed 04/08/16 Page 1 of 1
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-7714

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

DEON MAURICE MOSELY, a/k/a D,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior

District Judge. (CR-91-429-A, CA-98-517-AM)

Submitted: January 7, 1999 Decided: January 21, 1999

Before WIDENER, MURNAGHAN, and ERVIN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Deon Maurice Mosely, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Chestnut, 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:

Deon Maurice Mosely seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 &

Supp. 1998) and his motion for reconsideration. 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. Mosely, Nos. CR-91-429-A; CA-98-517-AM (E.D. Va.

Sept. 10 & Oct. 9, 1998). 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
Exhibit 31.2 [for the post-Regulation AB period from and including February 1, 2006 (the first day of the distribution period in which the BA Credit Card Trust first issued securities subject to Regulation AB) to and including June 30, 2006]        Exhibit 31.2 [for the period from and including February 1, 2006 to and including June 30, 2006] Certification I, Marcie E. Copson-Hall, certify that: 1.
        I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of BA Credit Card Trust (the Exchange Act periodic reports);
 2.
        Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do 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, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;
 4.
        I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicers and based on my knowledge and the compliance reviews conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statements required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreements; and
 5.
        All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.
 In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: The Bank of New York and JPMorgan Chase Bank.  Date:  May 9, 2007By:
        /s/ Marcie E. Copson-HallName:
        Marcie E. Copson-HallTitle:
        Senior Vice President(senior officer in charge of the servicing function)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

: CIVIL ACTION NOS.

:

TODD : 02-3885

WINDING : 02-3894

HEDSTROM, et al. : 02-3908

GONZALEZ, et al. : 02-3915

GOMEZ, et al. : 02-3941

MATUSZAK, et al. : 02-3944

BICK : 02-4109

ROGERS : 02-4122

ALLEN : 02-4124

BREWER : 02-4132

SHAPIRO : 02-4198

FINCH, et al. : 02-4219

WHITESIDE, et al. : 02-4245

TKACH : 02-4248

RITTHALER, et al. : 02-4263

SCHULEIN, et al. : 02-4264

WONG, et al. : 02-4278

DENTS, et al. : 02-4303

DURAN, et al. : 02-4314

:

VS. :

:

BAYER CORPORATION, et al. :

O R D E R

AND NOW, this day of July, 2002, the Court having been previously

advised that the above action cannot proceed to trial and disposition because of the following

reason:

[ ] - Order staying these proceedings pending disposition of a related

action.

[ ] - Order staying these proceedings pending determination of

arbitration proceedings.

[ ] - Interlocutory appeal filed.

Case 2:02-cv-04109-WY Document 2 Filed 07/10/2002 Page 1 of 2
[ X ] - Other: Case is placed into suspense pending receipt of the Case

Transfer Order from the Judicial Panel on Multi District Litigation

transferring case to District of Minnesota..

It is

ORDERED that the Clerk of Court mark this action closed for statistical purposes and

place the matter in the Civil Suspense File, and it is

FURTHER ORDERED that the Court shall retain jurisdiction; and that the case be

restored to the trial docket when the action is in a status so that it may proceed to final

disposition; this order shall not prejudice the rights of the parties to this litigation.

BY THE COURT:

________________________________________

William H. Yohn, Jr., Judge

Case 2:02-cv-04109-WY Document 2 Filed 07/10/2002 Page 2 of 2