alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

May 27, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

130529 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 130591 

Marilyn Kelly 130594 Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

DEBRA JACKSON, Successor

Personal Representative of the

Estate of Shirley Jackson, Deceased,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 130529 

 COA: 263766 
 Wayne CC: 04-421501-NH

HENRY FORD HEALTH SYSTEM,

a/k/a HENRY FORD HOSPITAL, 

MICHAEL S. EICHENHORN, M.D.,

and VENCOR HOSPITAL, a/k/a 

KINDRED HOSPITALS EAST,

L.L.C., d/b/a KINDRED HOSPITAL 

DETROIT,

 Defendants-Appellees, 

and 

MICHIGAN HOSPITALISTS, P.C., 

and MASOOD AHMAD, M.D.,

 Defendants-Appellants, 

and 

HARPEL S. JANDE, M.D.,

 Defendant.
 

_________________________________________/ 

DEBRA JACKSON, Successor

Personal Representative of the

Estate of Shirley Jackson, Deceased,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 130591 

 COA: 263766 

Wayne CC: 04-421501-NH

HENRY FORD HEALTH SYSTEM, 
 

2 

a/k/a HENRY FORD HOSPITAL, 

MICHAEL S. EICHENHORN, M.D.,

MICHIGAN HOSPITALISTS, P.C., 

MASOOD AHMAD, M.D., and

HARPEL S. JANDE, M.D.,

 Defendants-Appellees, 

and 

VENCOR HOSPITAL, a/k/a KINDRED 

HOSPITALS EAST, L.L.C., d/b/a 

KINDRED HOSPITAL DETROIT, 

 Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

DEBRA JACKSON, Successor

Personal Representative of the

Estate of Shirley Jackson, Deceased,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 130594 

 COA: 263766 

HENRY FORD HEALTH SYSTEM,

a/k/a HENRY FORD HOSPITAL, 

and MICHAEL S. EICHENHORN, M.D., 

 Defendants-Appellants, 

Wayne CC: 04-421501-NH 

and 

VENCOR HOSPITAL, a/k/a KINDRED 

HOSPITALS EAST, L.L.C., d/b/a 

KINDRED HOSPITAL DETROIT, 

MICHIGAN HOSPITALISTS, P.C., 

and MASOOD AHMAD, M.D.,

 Defendants-Appellees, 

and 

HARPEL S. JANDE, M.D.,

 Defendant. 

_________________________________________/ 

By order of October 17, 2007, the applications for leave to appeal the January 17, 

2006 judgment of the Court of Appeals were held in abeyance pending the decision in 

Braverman v Garden City Hospital (Docket Nos. 134445-6). On order of the Court, the 

case having been decided on April 9, 2008, 480 Mich 1159 (2008), the applications are 
 _________________________________________ 

 

3 

again considered, and they are DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions 

presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

l0519 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

May 27, 2008 

 Clerk
# C_2016078EN.01003001.xml

| 29.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 78/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78/30

---

Action brought on 29 December 2015 — SeNaPro v OHIM — Paltentaler Splitt & Marmorwerke (Dolokorn)

(Case T-769/15)

(2016/C 078/41)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: SeNaPro GmbH (Pommelsbrunn, Germany) (represented by: A. Schröder, 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: Paltentaler Splitt & Marmorwerke GmbH (Rottenmann, Austria)

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 ‘Dolokorn’ — Application No 11 877 181

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Procedure before OHIM

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 23 October 2015 in Case R 2643/2014-1

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 its own costs and those incurred by SeNaPro GmbH. |
| --- | --- |

—

order OHIM to pay its own costs and those incurred by SeNaPro GmbH.

Plea in law

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 75 and Article 76(1) and (2) of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 75 and Article 76(1) and (2) of Regulation No 207/2009.

---
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         November 15, 2023.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on November 9, 2023, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 105 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2024-51, CP2024-51.                

Sean Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2023-25259 Filed 11-14-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk October 26, 2009

1019 

# Order

October 26, 2009

139289

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 139289 COA: 282923 Oakland CC: 2007-213678-FH RAULE EMILIO BACON, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the applicati on for leave to appeal the May 21, 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
No. 58475.

protest 218562-K (Portland, Oreg.).

#### Frank P. Dow Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of floor coverings, composed wholly or in chief value of rush and not of grass or of rice straw, which do not have a felt base, the same in all material respects as those the subject of Abstracts 57889 and 57890, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : CIVIL ACTION

:

v. :

:

$105,915 in U.S. Currency : NO. 02-4092

SCHEDULING ORDER

AND NOW, this 30th day of October, 2002, based upon the case status reports

filed by the parties hereto, it is ORDERED:

1. All discovery in this case is to be completed by JANUARY 15, 2003 .

2. All dispositive motions are due five (5) days after the discovery period.

3. The case will be placed in the trial pool (published in The Legal

Intelligencer) on FEBRUARY 10, 2003.

4. At least seven (7) days prior to the case being listed in the pool as set

forth in paragraph 3, all parties will file their respective pretrial memorandums, which shall

include all items set forth in paragraph 8 of the Pretrial and Trial Procedures Before Judge

Ronald L. Buckwalter. A copy of the pretrial memorandums shall be sent to opposing counsel

and unrepresented parties. Unless otherwise ordered, counsel need not submit a pretrial

memorandum, if a dispositive motion is filed, until after the Court’s ruling on the motion. If

necessary, pretrial memos are due 7 days after the Court’s ruling on the motion.

5. If requested by counsel, the court will hold a pretrial conference, but no

such conference will ordinarily be scheduled in the absence of a request.

RONALD L. BUCKWALTER, J.

 BY: 

 Matthew J. Higgins

 Deputy Clerk

Case 2:02-cv-04092-RB Document 6 Filed 10/30/2002 Page 1 of 1
Before the First Division,

June 28, 1944

No. 49568.

#### Protests 834491-G, etc., of Friedlaender Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned officer of Global Resource Corporation (the "Company") hereby
certifies to my knowledge that the Company's annual report on Form 10-KSB for
the year ended December 31, 2007 (the "Report"), as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission the on date hereof, fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company. This certification is provided solely pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, and shall not be deemed to be part of the Report or "filed" for any
purpose whatsoever.


Date: March 26, 2008                       Name:   /s/ Jeffrey J. Andrews
                                                   -------------------------
                                                   Jeffrey J. Andrews
                                           Title:  Chief Financial Officer
Appeal Reinstated, Motion Granted, Appeal Dismissed, and Memorandum 

Opinion filed April 30, 2019.

In The 

Fourteenth Court of Appeals 

NO. 14-18-00956-CV

LOWELL VERMILLION, Appellant 

V.

EPIC LIFT SYSTEMS, LLC, Appellee 

On Appeal from the 113th District Court 

Harris County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. 2018-63586 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

This is an interlocutory appeal from a temporary injunction order signed 

October 8, 2018. We abated the appeal on January 29, 2019, for the parties to pursue 

settlement. On April 17, 2019, appellant filed an unopposed motion to dismiss the 

appeal pursuant to the terms of the parties’ settlement agreement. See Tex. R. App. 

P. 42.1. We reinstate the appeal, grant the motion, and dismiss the appeal. 

PER CURIAM 

Panel Consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Jewell and Bourliot.
SOI Tax Stats - Individual Income Tax Returns Publication 1304 (Complete Report) website makes use of java scripting that was not replicated when harvested, all materials related to the website such as pdf's, spreadsheets, and zip file can be found in ~\lps4787\www.irs.gov\pub\irs-soi.
##### 



WESTERN RESERVE BANCORP, INC.
FORM 10-QSB
Quarter ended March 31, 2006
 CERTIFICATIONS
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Western Reserve Bancorp, Inc.;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a 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 small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented
in this report;4.
    
    The small business issuers other certifying officers 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) for the small business issuer and have:
 (a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during
the period in which this report is being prepared;(b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuers disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; and(c)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuers internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuers most
recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuers fourth fiscal quarter in the case of
an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    The small business issuers other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuers
auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuers board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):
 (a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely
affect the small business issuers ability to record, process, summarize and report
financial information; and(b)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the small business issuers internal control over
financial reporting.
 Date: May 11, 2006
    
    /s/ Cynthia A. MahlCynthia A. Mahl, Senior Vice President and CFO
 Page 38
# C_2017269EN.01001902.xml

| 14.8.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 269/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.8.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 269/19

---

Order of the General Court of 26 June 2017 — L'Oréal v EUIPO — Guinot (MASTER DUO)

(Case T-182/16) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark MASTER DUO - Prior national figurative mark MASTERS COLORS PARIS - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Action manifestly unfounded in law - Article 126 of the Rules of Procedure))

(2017/C 269/27)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: L'Oréal (Paris, France) (represented by: T. de Haan and P. Péters, lawyers)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO intervening before the General Court: Guinot (Paris) (represented by: A. Sion, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO intervening before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 February 2016 (Case R 2916/2014-5) concerning opposition proceedings between Guinot and L’Oréal.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed.

| 2. | L’Oréal shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

L’Oréal shall pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 222, 20.6.2016.

1

---
# C_2018381EN.01002001.xml

| 22.10.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 381/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.10.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 381/20

---

Judgment of the General Court of 11 September 2018 — Foshan Lihua Ceramic v Commission

(Case T-654/16) (1)

((Dumping - Imports of ceramic tiles originating in China - Article 11(3) and (5) and Article 17 of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 (now Article 11(3) and (5) and Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036) - Rejection of a request for a partial interim review, limited to dumping aspects, of the definitive anti-dumping duty established by Implementing Regulation (EU) No 917/2011 - Lasting change in circumstances - Sampling - Individual examination - No cooperation in the investigation that led to the adoption of the definitive measures))

(2018/C 381/22)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Foshan Lihua Ceramic Co. Ltd. (Foshan City, China) (represented by: B. Spinoit and D. Philippe, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. França, T. Maxian Rusche, N. Kuplewatzky and A. Demeneix, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Implementing Decision C(2016) 4259 final of 11 July 2016 rejecting a request for a partial interim review limited to dumping aspects with regard to the definitive anti-dumping measures imposed on imports of ceramic tiles originating in the People’s Republic of China by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 917/2011 of 12 September 2011.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Foshan Lihua Ceramic Co. Ltd to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Foshan Lihua Ceramic Co. Ltd to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 428, 21.11.2016.

---
# C_2016371EN.01002902.xml

| 10.10.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 371/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.10.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 371/29

---

Action brought on 11 August 2016 — ZZ v EEAS

(Case F-41/16)

(2016/C 371/32)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: M. Meyer, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European External Action Service

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Action for annulment or setting aside of the appointing authority’s decisions to reclaim the education allowances allegedly unjustifiably received by the applicant and to refuse the applicant further additional education allowances and an order that the defendant shall repay the deductions.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the defendant’s decision of 12 May 2016 on the applicant’s complaints R/18/16 and R/19/16 and the thereby contested orders for the academic year 2014/15; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the defendant’s decision of 12 May 2016 on the applicant’s complaints R/18/16 and R/19/16 and the thereby contested orders for the academic year 2014/15;

| — | in the alternative, set aside the defendant’s decision of 12 May 2016 on the applicant’s complaints R/18/16 and R/19/16 and the thereby contested orders for the academic year 2014/15; |
| --- | --- |

—

in the alternative, set aside the defendant’s decision of 12 May 2016 on the applicant’s complaints R/18/16 and R/19/16 and the thereby contested orders for the academic year 2014/15;

| — | order the defendant to repay the unjust deductions on the basis of that decision to the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to repay the unjust deductions on the basis of that decision to the applicant;

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

—

order the EEAS to pay the costs.

---
**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO 18 USC, SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906**


**OF
      THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**








In
      connection with the Annual Report of Bio Solutions Manufacturing, Inc. (the
      "Company") on Form 10-Corporation for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2005,
      as
      filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
      "Report"), I, David S. Bennett, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
      pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)
      The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





(2)
      The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








Dated:
                March 2, 2006
            /s/David
                S. BennettBy:
                David S. BennettIts:
                Chief Executive Officer





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      Bio Solutions Manufacturing, Inc. and will be retained by Bio Solutions
      Manufacturing, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
      or
      its staff upon request.