alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 50903.

#### Protest 118592-K of Luckenbach Steamship Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

An examination of the record failing to disclose anything to overcome the presumption of correctness attaching to the collector’s action, the protest was overruled.
# C_2017195EN.01002501.xml

| 19.6.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 195/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.6.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 195/25

---

Judgment of the General Court of 5 May 2017 — Messe Friedrichshafen v EUIPO — El Corte Inglés (Out Door)

(Case T-224/16) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - EU figurative mark Out Door - Earlier EU word mark OUTDOOR PRO - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 76 of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2017/C 195/35)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Messe Friedrichshafen GmbH (Friedrichshafen, Germany) (represented by: W. Schulte Hemming, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Eberl and D. Hanf, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: El Corte Inglés, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: J.L. Rivas Zurdo, lawyer)

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

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 February 2016 (Case R 2302/2011-2), relating to opposition proceedings between El Corte Inglés and Messe Friedrichshafen.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Messe Friedrichshafen GmbH to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Messe Friedrichshafen GmbH to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 232, 27.6.2016.

1

---
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

   Schedule of Year-To-Date Principal and Interest Distributions
                           to
                  Certificateholders
                                                                              Ending
Class                   Interest             Principal      Losses           Balance
<S>                     <C>                  <C>            <C>              <C>
A1                     1,089,725.00         219,326.70         0.00        186,590,673.30
A2                        96,156.08               0.00         0.00         16,483,900.00
A3                       160,416.67               0.00         0.00         27,500,000.00
A4                       160,416.67               0.00         0.00         27,500,000.00
A5                        46,666.67           1,878.50         0.00          7,998,121.50
APO                            0.00             424.22         0.00            469,464.37
AR                             0.58             100.00         0.00                  0.00
B1                        28,075.83           3,509.52         0.00          4,809,490.48
B2                         7,215.83             901.99         0.00          1,236,098.01
B3                         4,013.33             501.67         0.00            687,498.33
B4                         4,013.33             501.67         0.00            687,498.33
B5                         2,403.33             300.42         0.00            411,699.58
B6                         2,409.52             254.95        46.24            412,759.06

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<CIK>                                          0001051904
<NAME>                                         FRISBY TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 APR-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         2,824,381
<SECURITIES>                                   1,555,441
<RECEIVABLES>                                  1,734,897
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (30,000)
<INVENTORY>                                      791,806
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               7,156,958
<PP&E>                                           735,647
<DEPRECIATION>                                  (131,797)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                10,003,162
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1,471,715
<BONDS>                                                0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                            0
<COMMON>                                           5,708
<OTHER-SE>                                     7,024,239
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   7,029,947
<SALES>                                        2,498,946
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               2,902,476
<CGS>                                          1,929,240
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  2,335,339
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               3,388,325
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              (132,566)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (2,688,622)
<INCOME-TAX>                                           0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (2,688,622)
<DISCONTINUED>                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                        0
<CHANGES>                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (2,688,622)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.50)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      (0.50)


</TABLE>
Case 2:05-cv-02711-JS Document 167 Filed 05/18/07 Page 1 of 10
Case 2:05-cv-02711-JS Document 167 Filed 05/18/07 Page 2 of 10
Case 2:05-cv-02711-JS Document 167 Filed 05/18/07 Page 3 of 10
Case 2:05-cv-02711-JS Document 167 Filed 05/18/07 Page 4 of 10
Case 2:05-cv-02711-JS Document 167 Filed 05/18/07 Page 5 of 10
Case 2:05-cv-02711-JS Document 167 Filed 05/18/07 Page 6 of 10
Case 2:05-cv-02711-JS Document 167 Filed 05/18/07 Page 7 of 10
Case 2:05-cv-02711-JS Document 167 Filed 05/18/07 Page 8 of 10
Case 2:05-cv-02711-JS Document 167 Filed 05/18/07 Page 9 of 10
Case 2:05-cv-02711-JS Document 167 Filed 05/18/07 Page 10 of 10
PH2\743186.1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR 

THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

THE CHESTER COUNTY HOSPITAL : CIVIL ACTION 

 : NO. 02-2746 

 v. : 

 : 

INDEPENDENCE BLUE CROSS, : 

QCC INSURANCE COMPANY, : 

KEYSTONE HEALTH PLAN EAST, and : 

KEYSTONE MERCY HEALTH PLAN : 

PRAECIPE TO SUBSTITUTE CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

TO THE CLERK OF COURT: 

 Please substitute the attached Amended Certificate of Service for the Certificate of 

Service that was attached to Plaintiff's Joint Response to Non-Party Aetna Inc.'s Appeal of the 

Court's July 7, 2003 and July 16, 2003 Orders Modifying the January 24, 2003 Protective Order 

and to Multiplan's Statement of Objections and/or Notice of Appeal from the Magistrate Judge's 

Order Denying Multiplan's Motion to Intervene and/or Motion for Protective Order (Doc. No. 

54) and Motion to Quash, Motion to Intervene and/or Motion for Protective Order (Doc. No. 83) 

filed on July 29, 2003 in the above-captioned matter. 

DUANE MORRIS LLP 

BY:______________________________ 

Lewis R. Olshin 

Wayne A. Mack 

Seth A. Goldberg 

One Liberty Place, 39th Floor 

Philadelphia, PA 19103-7396 

215-979-1129/1152/1175 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 105 Filed 07/30/2003 Page 1 of 1
No. 62995.

#### Cathay Crafts Corp. *v.*United States,

protests 58/6960 and 58/8444 (New York).

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of iron pictures the same in all material respects as those the subject of *Marshall Field & Co.*v. *United States*(45 C.C.P.A. 72, C.A.D. 676), the merchandise was held dutiable, as claimed, at the applicable rates in effect on the respective dates of importation under the pertinent trade agreements.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1499 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1499

   To increase from $10,000,000,000 to $50,000,000,000 the threshold 
figure at which regulated depository institutions are subject to direct 
   examination and reporting requirements of the Bureau of Consumer 
             Financial Protection, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 29, 2017

  Mr. Toomey (for himself and Mr. Donnelly) introduced the following 
 bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, 
                       Housing, and Urban Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To increase from $10,000,000,000 to $50,000,000,000 the threshold 
figure at which regulated depository institutions are subject to direct 
   examination and reporting requirements of the Bureau of Consumer 
             Financial Protection, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Consumer Financial Protection Bureau 
Examination and Reporting Threshold Act of 2017''.

SEC. 2. INCREASE IN THE EXAMINATION THRESHOLD.

    Section 1025(a) of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 
(12 U.S.C. 5515(a)) is amended by striking ``$10,000,000,000'' each 
place that term appears and inserting ``$50,000,000,000''.

SEC. 3. INCREASE IN THE REPORTING THRESHOLD.

    Section 1026(a) of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 
(12 U.S.C. 5516(a)) is amended by striking ``$10,000,000,000'' each 
place that term appears and inserting ``$50,000,000,000''.

SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    This Act and the amendments made by this Act shall take effect on 
the date that is 45 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
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


In connection with the Annual Report of FullCircle Registry, Inc. a Nevada
corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10-KSB for the annual period ending
December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
"Report"), I, Trent Oakley, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section
1350), that to my knowledge:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); 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/Trent Oakley
                                                         ---------------
                                                         Trent Oakley
                                                         Chief Financial Officer
Date: April 14, 2004
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
COMPANY'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS IN THIS REPORT ON FORM 10-QSB AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                     JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                    78,332
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                             18,725
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                               46,879
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                         219,047
<PP&E>                                 1,496,292
<DEPRECIATION>                           207,706
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                         1,528,133
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                  1,086,159
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                  20,821
<OTHER-SE>                               102,324
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>           1,528,133
<SALES>                                   54,286
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                          54,286
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                         550,693
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        38,408
<INCOME-PRETAX>                         (534,815)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                     (534,815)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                            (534,815)
<EPS-BASIC>                                (0.26)
<EPS-DILUTED>                              (0.26)



</TABLE>
Case 2:05-cv-01099-ER Document 118-3 Filed 07/28/15 Page 1 of 9
Case 2:05-cv-01099-ER Document 118-3 Filed 07/28/15 Page 2 of 9
Case 2:05-cv-01099-ER Document 118-3 Filed 07/28/15 Page 3 of 9
Case 2:05-cv-01099-ER Document 118-3 Filed 07/28/15 Page 4 of 9
Case 2:05-cv-01099-ER Document 118-3 Filed 07/28/15 Page 5 of 9
Case 2:05-cv-01099-ER Document 118-3 Filed 07/28/15 Page 6 of 9
Case 2:05-cv-01099-ER Document 118-3 Filed 07/28/15 Page 7 of 9
Case 2:05-cv-01099-ER Document 118-3 Filed 07/28/15 Page 8 of 9
Case 2:05-cv-01099-ER Document 118-3 Filed 07/28/15 Page 9 of 9
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS Appeal of

-- Advanced Medical Partners, Inc. Under Contract No. 000000-00-0-0000 APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT: ) ) ) ) )

APPEARANCES FORTHE GOVERNMENT: ASBCA No. 60830
Kimberly Gdula, Esq.

Jackson Walker LLP Austin, TX Jeffrey P. Hildebrant, Esq.

Deputy ChiefTrial Attorney Christopher S. Cole, Esq.

Senior Trial Attorney ORDER OF DISMISSAL The dispute has been settled. The appeal is dismissed with prejudice. Dated: 25 October 2016

dministrative Judge Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals I certify that the foregoing is a true copy ofthe Order ofDismissal ofthe Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals in ASBCA No. 60830, Appeal ofAdvanced Medical Partners, Inc., rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. Dated:

JEFFREY D. GARDIN Recorder, Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals 

### f 

### f
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

DOLORES (DEE) BARRETT : 

 : 

 V. : CIVIL ACTION - LAW 

 : 

THE GREATER HATBORO CHAMBER NO. 02 -cv-4421 

OF COMMERCE, INC.; JOHN J.(BUD) : 

AIKEN, AND MICKEY GLANTZ : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

AND NOW, this ________day of April 2004 comes Plaintiff Dee Barrett by and through counsel 

and requests this Honorable Court to enter an order compelling defendant Greater Hatboro 

Chamber of Commerce to produce documents requested pursuant to FRCP 34 for the following 

reasons: 

 1. On February 9, 2004 Plaintiff served Request for Production of Documents (RPD) to 

defendants' counsel. A true and correct copy is attached as Ex. "A." These are crucial 

documents required by Plaintiff for trial preparation, as corporate defendant has represented to 

this Honorable Court that it has no financial resources or insurance applicable to this case. 

 2. On or about March 26 undersigned counsel for Plaintiff received some documents said 

to be responsive to the RPD. No Answer or Objection to the RPD was served, and the papers 

received did not include any documents, answer or objection regarding Requests #4, #5, #6, #7, 

#8, #9, #10, #11, #13, #14, #15, #16, and #17, seeking tax returns, assets and financial reports of 

corporate defendant, which is allegedly a nonprofit corporation. 

 3. On March 30, 2004 undersigned counsel wrote defense counsel in an attempt to 

resolve this discovery dispute for purposes of Local Federal Rule 26(f) without seeking 

assistance of the Court. A true and correct copy of said letter is attached hereto as Ex. "B". 

Case 2:02-cv-04421-PBT Document 15 Filed 04/15/2004 Page 1 of 2
 4. No response was received. This Motion is filed pursuant to Local Federal Rule 26(g), 

without a supporting memorandum of law. This Motion may be granted or denied without 

waiting for response from Defendant. An Order is requested promptly due to impending 

discovery cutoff and attempts to take depositions. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests an Order be entered requiring production of the requested 

documents forthwith, pursuant to FRCP 34 and FRCP 37. 

 Respectfully submitted 

 __________________________ 

 Anita F. Alberts Esquire 

 Counsel for Plaintiff Dee Barrett 

 

Case 2:02-cv-04421-PBT Document 15 Filed 04/15/2004 Page 2 of 2
rtsp://multimedia.mcpa.virginia.edu/911/hearing10/2004041301_high.rm
STATE STREET





Mr. Michael Umana
Chief Financial Officer
Saucony, Inc.
13 Centennial Drive
Peabody, MA 01960

November 23, 2001

Re:      Amendment to Revolving Credit Agreement dated August 31, 1998 by and
         between State Street Bank and Trust Company, a Massachusetts trust
         company, as lender and Saucony, Inc. ("Saucony"), as borrower (the
         "Credit Agreement").

Dear Michael:

         This letter is to confirm that the Termination Date (as defined in
Section 1.1 of the Credit Agreement) shall be extended through December 31,
2001.

         Saucony agree that the Credit Agreement and all documents executed in
connection therewith or pursuant thereto remain in full force and effect after
giving effect to this letter amendment to Credit Agreement.

         Please confirm that the foregoing correctly sets forth our agreement by
signing and returning the duplicate copy of this letter agreement enclosed
herewith.

Very truly yours,

STATE STREET BANK AND TRUST COMPANY


BY: /s/ Jacqueline Kuss
Title: Vice President


BORROWER:

SAUCONY, INC.


By:  /s/ Michael Umana
Title:  Chief Financial Officer
# C_2018104EN.01003301.xml

| 19.3.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 104/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.3.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 104/33

---

Judgment of the General Court of 5 December 2017 — El Corte Inglés v EUIPO — Elho Business & Sport (FRee STyLe)

(Case T-212/16) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark FRee STyLe - Absolute ground for refusal - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Article 76 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 95 of Regulation 2017/1001) - Equal treatment))

(2018/C 104/42)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: El Corte Inglés, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: J.L. Rivas Zurdo, lawyer)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Elho Business & Sport Vertriebs GmbH (Obergriesbach, Germany) (represented by E. Warnke, lawyer)

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

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 February 2016 (Case R 377/2015-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between Elho Business & Sport and El Corte Inglés.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders El Corte Inglés, SA, to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders El Corte Inglés, SA, to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 243, 4.7.2016.

1

---
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03

- 0 2

- 00 298

- CV

Car Traders, Inc. and Carmelo Luis Velez , Appellants

v.

Roy James , Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF FAYETTE COUNTY, 155TH

JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. 2000V

- 139 , HONORABLE DANIEL R. BECK , JUDGE PRESIDING

Appellants Car Traders, Inc. and Carmelo Luis Velez have informed this Court that they no longer

wish to pursue their appeal and understand that it will be dismissed for want of prosecution. Accordingly,

we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution on o ur own motion.

Marilyn Aboussie, Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Aboussie, Justices B. A. Smith and Yeakel

Dismissed for Want of Prosecution

Filed: May 31, 2002

Do N ot Publish
1

NEDA/CAP – EPA Meetings Proposed Topics

April 20, 2016 

9:30 – 10:45 Ozone & PM2.5 Implementation (Scott Mathias, Megan Brachtl, 

Rich Damberg, Michael Ling, and Others) – room C-500A

 Ozone and Rulemaking Timelines

o Timing on 2015 Implementation “Rule” or “Guidance”  

o Any surprises with respect to Ozone Monitoring and Designations?

o Status of Ohio SIP Case and Application of RACT when area is in

attainment without RACT?

o MERPS and Modeling (May be covered in Wayland/Fox meeting)

o Offsets – Modelled Project Offsets and Applicability Offsets

o Review the Clean Data Policy for ozone nonattainment designation

revocations and effect on planning and demonstrations (e.g., clean data,

no demonstration?)

o Any expectation of CTG or ACT updates?

 ROP in Interstate Areas – How will NOx Substitution for VOCs Work and

how will states take credit (if they need it) under transport rules?

 That status of VOC reactivity trading – places where this would be valuable

in EPA’s view?

 Ozone Nonattainment in the West – What were responses on the “ozone

season” for the west?

o Haze and RACT?

o RFP demonstrations?

o Rural Transport Areas – are there any new options like using the “old”

commerce department MSA/CSMA criteria for these areas?

 Exceptional Events:   

 How did the Arizona Meeting Go and Action Items?  Comments EPA

received on the proposed policy paper?

 Timeline for final rule and guidance documents?

 Other steps planned for background ozone levels, especially

monitoring it and accommodating for it in permitting?

 Other steps planned for international transport issues?
2

Meeting Participants

 Al Collins Occidental Petroleum

 Rob Kaufmann, Koch Public Sectors

 Keith Long, Koch Ag & Energy Solutions

 Anu Kunapuli, Merck & Co. (via telephone)

 Leslie Ritts, Counsel, NEDA/CAP

 Dave Pavlich, Phillips 66

 Jennifer Cogswell, Koch Ag & Energy

 Matt Iwicki, Boeing

 Scott Mathias, EPA/OAQPS/AQPD  

 Beth Palma, EPA/OAQPS/AQPD  

 Lev Gabrilovich, EPA/OAQPS/AQPD  

 Raj Rao, EPA/OAQPS/AQPD
Case 2:04-cv-03822-JF Document 6 Filed 01/11/05 Page 1 of 1
Case 2:05-cv-01661-MMB Document 46 Filed 04/14/06 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:05-cv-01661-MMB Document 46 Filed 04/14/06 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:05-cv-01661-MMB Document 46 Filed 04/14/06 Page 3 of 3