alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2017078EN.01002902.xml

| 13.3.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 78/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.3.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78/29

---

Judgment of the General Court of 26 January 2017 — Opko Ireland Global Holdings v EUIPO — Teva Pharmaceutical Industries (ALPHAREN)

(Case T-88/16) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark ALPHAREN - Earlier national word marks ALPHA D3 - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Consideration of new evidence by the Board of Appeal following a judgment annulling a decision - Article 76(2) of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2017/C 078/40)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Opko Ireland Global Holdings Ltd (Dublin, Ireland) (represented by: S. Malynicz QC, A. Smith and D. Meale, Solicitors)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd (Jerusalem, Israel)

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

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 December 2015 (Case R 2387/2014-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Teva Pharmaceutical Industries and Opko Ireland Global Holdings.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Opko Ireland Global Holdings Ltd to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Opko Ireland Global Holdings Ltd to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 136, 18.4.2016.

1

---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

 

 

FELIX D. WHITTINGTON,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

DONALD VAUGHN, et al.,

 Defendants.

 CIVIL ACTION

 NO. 02-4346

O R D E R

 

AND NOW, this 27th day of November, 2002, it is hereby ORDERED that

the attached communication shall be filed by the clerk. The Clerks shall note on the docket

plaintiff’s change of address to:

Felix Dean Whittington

AY-4935

10745 Rt. 18

Albion, PA 16475-0002

BY THE COURT:

 

MARVIN KATZ, S.J.

Case 2:02-cv-04346-MK Document 56 Filed 11/27/2002 Page 1 of 1
No. 57962.

protests 124400-K, etc. (Detroit).

#### F. W. Myers & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise are similar in all material respects to the Western white spruce lumber the subject of *C. J. Tower & Sons*v. *United States*(31 Cust. Ct. 13, C. D. 1538), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained as to said items.
# C_2017269EN.01002002.xml

| 14.8.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 269/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.8.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 269/20

---

Order of the General Court of 21 June 2017 — Inox Mare v Commission

(Case T-289/16) (1)

1

((Action for annulment - Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 - External investigation conducted by OLAF - Report and recommendations - Measures not amenable to challenge - Inadmissible))

(2017/C 269/29)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Inox Mare Srl (Rimini, Italy) (represented by: R. Holzeisen, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially, J. Baquero Cruz, D. Nardi and L. Grønfeldt, and, subsequently, J. Baquero Cruz and D. Nardi, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU, seeking annulment of the Final Report of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) concerning external investigation OF/2013/0086/B1 (THOR(2015) 40189 of 26 November 2015), of the recommendation of the Director-General of OLAF with respect to that report (THOR(2015) 42057 of 9 December 2015) and of the prior and strictly related measures taken by OLAF

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as being inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as being inadmissible.

| 2. | Inox Mare Srl shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Inox Mare Srl shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 270, 25.7.2016.

1

---
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Annual report [electronicresource]: conservation activities in Maryland**
 
2008 | 2013| 2014 | 2015
 
SuDoc Number:A 57.81/20:
Item Number:0120-C-20 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000561557
 
February 18, 2020
*

 Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be

published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstancesset forth in 5THCIR.R. 47.5.4.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-60338

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

BRUCE G. CARVER, SR.,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 1:99-CR-70-1

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

January 31, 2002

Before DeMOSS, PARKER, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges:

PER CURIAM:*

Bruce Carver appeals his sentence following a jury conviction

for obtaining money by fraud under a federal program, making false

writings in a matter within the jurisdiction of the Department of

Education, and conspiracy to commit these offenses. He argues that

the district court erred as follows: (1) in awarding him a twolevel sentence enhancement based on his supervisory role in the
2

offense; (2) in awarding him a two-level sentence enhancement for

abuse of a position of trust; and (3) in refusing to depart

downward more than three levels from the applicable Sentencing

Guidelines.

"A sentence will be upheld unless it was imposed in violation

of law, was an incorrect application of the sentencing guidelines,

or is outside the range of the applicable sentencing guideline."

United States v. Ocana, 204 F.3d 585, 588 (5th Cir.), cert. denied,

531 U.S. 880 (2000). A district court's finding that a defendant

is an organizer or leader pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1 is a factual

finding reviewed for clear error, as is a finding pursuant to

U.S.S.G. § 3B1.3 that the defendant abused a position of trust.

United States v. Dadi, 235 F.3d 945, 951 (5th Cir. 2000) (U.S.S.G.

§ 3B1.1), cert. denied, 121 S. Ct. 2230 (2001); United States v.

Brown, 7 F.3d 1155, 1161 (5th Cir. 1993) (U.S.S.G. § 3B1.3). We

hold that the district court did not clearly err in enhancing

Carver’s sentence a total of four levels based on its findings that

he played a supervisory role in the offense and that, as both a

police officer and inmate instructor, he abused a position of

public trust when he engaged in the criminal activity at issue.

The district court’s decision as to the extent of a downward

departure is within its near complete discretion. See United

States v. Cooper, __ F.3d__ (5th Cir. Nov. 26, 2001, No. 00-30208)

2001 WL 1504530, at *13. The extent of departure is unreviewable
3

unless it is otherwise in violation of federal statutory or

constitutional law, neither of which Carver argues is applicable.

United States v. Alvarez, 51 F.3d 36, 41 (5th Cir. 1995). We

therefore hold that the district court did not abuse its near

complete discretion in refusing any further downward departure.

AFFIRMED.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MARA FLAMM : CIVIL ACTION

:

v. :

:

SARNER & ASSOCIATES, P.C.; JOSHUA SARNER; : NO. 02-4302

LEONARD SARNER, ESQUIRE; :

JODI H. BROWN, M.D.; JOHN MATUSAVAGE; :

JOHN DOE PROCESS SERVER, INDIVIDUALLY AND :

AS AGENT FOR SARNER 7 ASSOCIATES, P.C.; :

JOSHUA SARNER, ESQUIRE; LEONARD SARNER, :

ESQUIRE; AND JODI H. BROWN, M.D. :

ORDER

AND NOW, this 1st day of October, 2003, it is hereby ORDERED that a Telephone Status

Conference for the above-captioned matter is scheduled for October 15, 2003, at 2:00 p.m. in order

to discuss the status of Plaintiff’s bankruptcy proceedings. Plaintiff’s counsel shall initiate this

conference call to (215) 597-6079.

BY THE COURT:

 

M. FAITH ANGELL

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:02-cv-04302-MFA Document 49 Filed 10/03/2003 Page 1 of 1
##### 



Exhibit 99.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of CSK Auto Corporation (the Company)
on Form 10-Q for the period ending August 4, 2002 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Maynard Jenkins,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,
as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|(1) |  | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 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 result of operations of the Company.

|                                                          
|----------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Maynard Jenkins                                       
|                                                          
|                                                          
|                                                          
|                                                          
|                                                          
|                                                          
|                                                          
|                                                          
|                                                          
|Maynard Jenkins
Chief Executive Officer
September 18, 2002
##### 



Exhibit 31.2 Section 302 Certification I, David W. Sharp, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report of Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
June 30, 2004 of Horizon Offshore, 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(s) 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 registrant 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 registrant, 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 registrant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 registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants
most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the
case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably
likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over
financial reporting; and 5. The registrants other certifying officer(s) 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 the registrant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 registrant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 registrants internal
control over financial reporting. Date: August 9, 2004 /s/ David W. Sharp  David W. Sharp
Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer
Horizon Offshore, Inc.
July 23, 1945

No. 50366.

Suit 4189.

#### United *States*v. *Shalom & Co.*

C. D. 854 reversed May 24, 1945. C. A. D. 311.
EXHIBIT 13.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS

ADOPTED PURSUANT
TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 20-F of Alto Palermo Sociedad
Anónima (the company) for the year ended June 30, 2006 as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Eduardo S. Elsztain, as Chief Executive Officer of the company,
hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that;



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities and 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------











|                                                |  | 
|----------------------------------------------- |  | 
|/s/ Eduardo S. Elsztain By: Eduardo S.
Elsztain |  | 
|Chief Executive Officer                         |  | 
|                                                | 
|December 28, 2006                               |  | 

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 and shall not, except as to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
UNITED STATES ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS 

Before 

KERN, ALDYKIEWICZ, and MARTIN 

Appellate Military Judges 

UNITED STATES, Appellee 

v. 

Private First Class RYAN A. REED 

United States Army, Appellant 

ARMY 20110485 

Headquarters, III Corps and Fort Hood 

James L. Varley, Military Judge 

Colonel Stuart W. Risch, Staff Judge Advocate 

For Appellant: Colonel Patricia A. Ham, JA; Lieutenant Colonel Imogene M. 

Jamison, JA; Major Jacob D. Bashore, JA; Major Mary E. Braisted, JA (on brief). 

For Appellee: Major Robert A. Rodrigues, JA; Major Daniel D. Maurer, JA; Captain 

Sean Fitzgibbon, JA (on brief). 

30 April 2013 

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

SUMMARY DISPOSITION 

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

Per Curiam: 

A military judge sitting as a general court-martial convicted appellant, 

pursuant to his pleas, of desertion and absence without leave, in violation of Articles 

85 and 86, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 885, 886 (2006) 

[hereinafter UCMJ]. The military judge sentenced appellant to a bad-conduct 

discharge, confinement for ten months, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and 

reduction to the grade of E-1. The convening authority approved the adjudged 

sentence, and credited appellant with fourteen days of confinement against the 

sentence to confinement. 

Appellant’s case is now before this court for review pursuant to Article 66, 

UCMJ. Appellant alleges, inter alia, that he was denied his right to request deferral 

of his adjudged forfeitures, adjudged reduction in grade, and automatic forfeitures. 

On a standard post-trial and appellate rights advisement form, appellant indicated 

that he wanted to request deferral of the foregoing, but contrary to appellant’s 

expressed desires, the record fails to reveal that any such deferment requests were 

ever presented to the convening authority. Furthermore, the appellate filings 

indicate that appellant never changed his post-trial and appellate rights selections, 
REED—ARMY 20110485 

2 

and while trial defense counsel requested the convening authority disapprove the 

forfeitures in the case, there was no request to defer the automatic or adjudged 

forfeitures or the reduction in rank. Accordingly, after reviewing the record and the 

appellate filings, we will grant appellant the relief he requests.*

 See United States v. 

Fordyce, 69 M.J. 501 (Army Ct. Crim. App. 2010) (en banc). 

The convening authority’s initial action, dated 23 March 2012, is set aside. 

The record of trial is returned to The Judge Advocate General for a new staff judge 

advocate recommendation and a new action by the same or different convening 

authority in accordance with Article 60(c)–(e), UCMJ. In addition, appellant will 

receive assistance from a new defense counsel. 

 FOR THE COURT: 

MALCOLM H. SQUIRES, JR. 

 Clerk of Court 

 

*

 Appellant raises a second assignment of error which we do not reach in issuing this 

decision. 

MALCOLM H. SQUIRES, JR. 

Clerk of Court 

FOR THE COURT:
No. 49109.

#### Protests 954940-G, etc., of H. C. Donaldson Co. (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Walker, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the coke in question is the same in all material respects as that passed upon in *Dona Id-son*v. *United States*(30 C. C. P. A. 223, C. A. D. 236), which record was incorporated herein, it was held that the said tax is not applicable.
# C_2018328EN.01004301.xml

| 17.9.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 328/43 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.9.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 328/43

---

Judgment of the General Court of 13 July 2018 — BPCE v ECB

(Case T-745/16) (1)

((Economic and monetary policy - Prudential supervision of credit institutions - Article 4(1)(d) and (3) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 - Calculation of the leverage ratio - The ECB’s refusal to authorise the applicant to exclude from the calculation of the leverage ratio the exposures fulfilling certain conditions - Article 429(14) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 - Discretion of the ECB - Errors of law - Manifest error of assessment))

(2018/C 328/58)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: BPCE (Paris, France) (represented by: initially A. Gosset Grainville, C. Renner and P. Kupka, then A. Gosset-Grainville, P. Kupka and M. Trabucchi and finally A. Gosset-Grainville and M. Trabucchi, lawyers)

Defendant: European Central Bank (ECB) (represented by: K. Lackhoff, R. Bax and G. Bassani, acting as Agents, and by H.-G. Kamann and F. Louis, lawyers)

Interveners in support of the defendants: Republic of Finland (represented by: S. Hartikainen, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking annulment of Decision ECB/SSM/2016 9695005MSX1OYEMGDF46/195 of the ECB, of 24 August 2016, pursuant to Article 4(1)(d), of Article 10 of Council Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 of 15 October 2013 conferring specific tasks on the European Central Bank concerning policies relating to the prudential supervision of credit institutions (OJ 2013 L 287, p. 63), and of Article 429(14) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on prudential requirements for credit institutions and investment firms and amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 (OJ 2013 L 176, p. 1, and corrigenda OJ 2013 L 208, p. 68 and OJ 2013 L 321, p. 6).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls Decision ECB/SSM/2016 9695005MSX1OYEMGDF46/195 of the European Central Bank of 24 August 2016; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls Decision ECB/SSM/2016 9695005MSX1OYEMGDF46/195 of the European Central Bank of 24 August 2016;

| 2. | Orders the ECB to pay the costs; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the ECB to pay the costs;

| 3. | Orders the Republic of Finland to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Republic of Finland to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 6, 9.1.2017.

---
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.                  

###### National Science Foundation

In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, as amended), the National Science Foundation (NSF) announces the following meeting:

*Name and Committee Code:*                     Advisory Committee for Computer and Information Science and Engineering (#1115) (Hybrid).                

*Date and Time:*                     December 6, 2023; 9:30 a.m.-5:00 p.m. (Eastern); December 7, 2023; 9:30 a.m.-12:30 p.m. (Eastern).                

*Place:*                     NSF, 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Room E3450, Alexandria, VA 22314 (Hybrid).                

                    To register for in-person attendance or for virtual meeting attendees to receive the Zoom link, please send your request to the following email:                     *cmessam@nsf.gov.*

*Type of Meeting:*                     Open.                

*Contact Persons:*                     Chantoye Messam, National Science Foundation, 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22314; Telephone:703-292-8900; email:                     *cmessam@nsf.gov.*

*Purpose of Meeting:*                     To provide advice, recommendations, and counsel on major goals and policies pertaining to Computer and Information Science and Engineering programs and activities.                

## Agenda

    - NSF and CISE update
    Report out from the Committee of Visitors for Computing and Communication Foundations, Computer and Network Systems, and Information and Intelligent Systems Divisions      ( print page 77372)    
    - Computing and Sustainability
    - Broadening Participation in Computing

Dated: November 6, 2023.

Crystal Robinson,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 2023-24778 Filed 11-8-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-P