alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 59491.

protests 179504-K, etc. (Seattle).

#### Alfred H. Marzolf *v.*United States,

*318Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of beef or veal similar in all material respects to the beef the subject of *Swift & Company et al.*v. *United States*(33 Cust. Ct. 212, C. D. 1655), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
##### 



EXHIBIT 23 CONSENTS OF LAWRENCE B. COCHRANE, ROBERT A. HORN
AND ROBERT C. OSBORNE,
EACH AS A QUALIFIED PERSON UNDER
NATIONAL INSTRUMENT 43-101




---



##### 



CONSENT OF LAWRENCE B. COCHRANE The undersigned hereby consents to the reference to him as having
responsibility for the statements as to the ore reserves of Inco Limiteds
operations in Ontario and Manitoba and the Voiseys Bay deposit and the ore
reserves of PT International Nickel Indonesia Tbk in the Annual Report on Form
10-K of Inco Limited for the year ended December 31, 2003 under the headings
Ore Reserves and Mining Rights and PT International Nickel Indonesia Tbk. (Signed) LAWRENCE B. COCHRANELawrence B. Cochrane
  Dated the 15th day of March, 2004.




---



##### 



CONSENT OF ROBERT A. HORN The undersigned hereby consents to the reference to him as having
responsibility for the statements as to the ore reserves of Goro Nickel S.A. in
the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Inco Limited for the year ended December 31,
2003 under the headings Ore Reserves and Mining Rights and Goro Nickel S.A. (Signed) ROBERT A. HORNRobert A. Horn
  Dated the 15th day of March, 2004.




---



##### 



CONSENT OF ROBERT C. OSBORNE The undersigned hereby consents to the reference to him as having
responsibility for the statements as to the ore reserves of PT International
Nickel Indonesia Tbk in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Inco Limited for the
year ended December 31, 2003 under the headings Ore Reserves and Mining
Rights and PT International Nickel Indonesia Tbk. (Signed) ROBERT C. OSBORNERobert C. Osborne
  Dated the 15th day of March, 2004.
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.                  

###### Department of State

          - [Delegation of Authority No. 296] 

By virtue of the authority vested in the Secretary of State by the laws of the United States, including Section 1 of the State Department Basic Authorities Act and the Presidential Memorandum for the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security—Assignment of Functions Relating to Import Restrictions on Iraqi Antiquities, dated May 5, 2006 (71 FR 28,753), and delegated to the Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs pursuant to Delegation of Authority No. 294 (July 6, 2006), I hereby delegate to the Assistant Secretary of State for Educational and Cultural Affairs the functions of the President under section 3002 of the Emergency Protection for Iraqi Cultural Antiquities Act of 2004 (title III of Public Law 108-429). 

In performing such functions, the Assistant Secretary of State shall consult the Secretary of Homeland Security and the heads of other departments and agencies or their designees, as appropriate. 

Notwithstanding this delegation of authority, the Secretary of State, the Deputy Secretary of State, the Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs and the Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs may at any time exercise any function or authority delegated by this delegation of authority. 

Any act, executive order, regulation or procedure subject to, or affected by, this delegation shall be deemed to be such act, executive order, regulation or procedure as amended from time to time. 

                    This delegation of authority shall be published in the                     **Federal Register**                    .                 

Dated: December 22, 2007. 

R. Nicholas Burns, 

Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs,  Department of State.

 [FR Doc. E7-3011 Filed 2-21-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710-24-P
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN RE: ASBESTOS PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION

This document relates to:

 : CIVIL ACTION

02-4363 RONEY : NO. MDL 875

02-4409 HAMMOND :

02-4410 GRESH :

02-4411 GEARINGER :

02-4413 BRASSILL :

02-4414 FYE :

02-4415 SEARFOSS :

02-4416 SMITH :

02-4479 SMALL :

02-4480 MEYER :

02-4608 BINDER :

02-4658 BINDER :

02-4659 BOULOUS :

02-4730 NEES :

02-4753 CUTHBERT :

02-4754 WILLIAMS :

02-4841 BROWN :

02-5164 WHELAN :

02-5165 MENTZER :

02-5317 MCELHINEY :

02-5318 DELGAUDIO :

02-5319 WAGNER :

02-5891 WALSH :

02-5892 BRAUN :

02-5893 WAGNER :

02-5894 DELGADIO :

O R D E R

The Court having been advised that the issues raised in

each of these actions are also presently pending before the

Honorable District Court Judge Alfred Wolin. Judge Wolin has

been specially designated to sit in the District of Delaware and

preside over these matters. Further, the Judge has set a

schedule and will proceed appropriately. In the interest of

judicial economy and for a prompt resolution of all outstanding

issues this Court will hold its action in abeyance and await the

ruling by the Bankruptcy Court.

Case 2:02-cv-04480-RB Document 2 Filed 08/09/2002 Page 1 of 2
IT IS THEREFORE THE ORDER OF THIS COURT that all

pending motions for abstention and remand are denied without

prejudice at this time with leave to renew at a later date. The

cases are administratively dismissed, subject to reinstatement

following the determination of the bankruptcy issues by Judge

Wolin and any subsequent appeals thereto.

Done this 9th day of August, 2002.

 BY THE COURT

 

Charles R. Weiner, SJ

Case 2:02-cv-04480-RB Document 2 Filed 08/09/2002 Page 2 of 2
Part 1

SUPPLEMENT

DRAFT 

ID

Simple or

 Special Name Type Description Rule

46 SPECIAL

Restriction for Non-Federal Exceptions Compound

Federal Non-Federal Code domain value E (Non-Federal exceptions) is restricted. Exceptions are pending 

OMB OGC legal review. Fail 

U.S. Standard General Ledger

Data Validations - Summary

Bulletin No. 2023-11 DRAFT VII VSR - 1
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

 

ROBBINS MOTOR TRANSPORTATION, INC. : 

P.O. Box 38 : 

Essington, PA 19029 : 

 Plaintiff : CIVIL ACTION 

 : 

 v. : 

 : NO.: 02-CV-4446 

TRI-STATE MOTOR TRANSIT CO. : 

T/A TRISM D/B/A TRISM SPECIAL : 

SERVICES, INC. : 

 Defendant : 

STATUS REPORT

 Defendant, Tri State Motor Transit Company filed a Voluntary Petition under Chapter 

11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the United States District Court for the Western District of 

Missouri on December 18, 2001. 

 The United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Missouri confirmed 

defendant, Tri State Motor Transit Company’s Chapter 11 plan for liquidation. Pursuant 

to Sections 105 and/or 362 of the Bankruptcy Code, all injunctions or stays remain in full 

force and effect until the Bankruptcy Court closes this case. 

 As the stay remains in effect, we cannot proceed any further in the matter before the 

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania at this time. 

 Plaintiff’s attorney confirmed via PACER Service Center and via telephone 

conversation with Mark Stingley, Esquire, attorney for Defendant, that the bankruptcy 

plan for payout may take another nine to twelve months. 

 A copy of our status report was served upon Defendant’s counsel, Mark G. Stingley, 

Esquire regarding the status of the bankruptcy proceeding and confirming the status. 

Case 2:02-cv-04446-JD Document 15 Filed 04/03/2006 Page 1 of 3
 

 JFP2247 

 __________________________ 

 JOHN F. PEOPLES, ESQUIRE 

 Identification #19361 

 2701 West Chester Pike, Suite 104 

 Broomall, PA 19008 

 (610) 356-2711 

Date: March 31, 2006 

Case 2:02-cv-04446-JD Document 15 Filed 04/03/2006 Page 2 of 3
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

ROBBINS MOTOR TRANSPORTATION, INC. : 

P.O. Box 38 : 

Essington, PA 19029 : 

 : 

 Plaintiff : CIVIL ACTION 

 v. : 

 : NO.: 02-CV-4446 

TRI-STATE MOTOR TRANSIT CO. : 

T/A TRISM D/B/A TRISM SPECIAL : 

SERVICES, INC. : 

 Defendant : 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 I, JOHN F. PEOPLES, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of Status Report 

has been served upon counsel for Defendant, Tri-State Motor Transit Co. t/a Trism d/b/a 

Trism Special Services, Inc. and The Honorable Jan E. DuBois whose address appears 

below, on March 31, 2006 by first class mail, postage prepaid. 

 Mark G. Stingley, Esquire 

 Bryan Cave, L.L.P. 

 3500 One Kansas City Place 

 1200 Main Street 

 Kansas City, MO 64105-2100 

 Attorney for Defendant 

 The Honorable Jan E. Dubois 

 United States District Court 

 Eastern District of Pennsylvania 

 United States Courthouse 

 Independence Mall West 

 601 Market Street 

 Chambers, Room 12613 

 Philadelphia, PA 19106 

 JFP 2247 

 __________________________ 

 JOHN F. PEOPLES, ESQUIRE 

Date: Attorney for Plaintiff 

Case 2:02-cv-04446-JD Document 15 Filed 04/03/2006 Page 3 of 3
Case 2:05-cv-04160-JHS Document 108 Filed 06/25/08 Page 1 of 1
# C_2017161EN.01000601.xml

| 22.5.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 161/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.5.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 161/6

---

Appeal brought on 28 December 2016 by Meissen Keramik GmbH against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 18 October 2016 in Case T-776/15 Meissen Keramik GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Meissen Keramik GmbH

European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

(Case C-686/16 P)

(2017/C 161/07)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Meissen Keramik GmbH (represented by: M. Vohwinkel and Dr M. Bagh, Rechtsanwälte)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

| — | set aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 18 October 2016 (T-776/15); |
| --- | --- |

—

set aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 18 October 2016 (T-776/15);

| — | annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 28 October 2015 (Case R 0531/2015-1); |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 28 October 2015 (Case R 0531/2015-1);

| — | annul the decision of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 13 January 2015; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 13 January 2015;

| — | order the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) to pay the costs of all the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) to pay the costs of all the proceedings.

Grounds of appeal and main arguments

Grounds of appeal and main arguments

The appeal is based on a misinterpretation of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009 (1) in conjunction with an infringement of Article 135(4) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court.

1

The basis for the claim that the Rules of Procedure were infringed is that the General Court did not base its judgment on the understanding of the word element of the trade mark which had been established in the Board of Appeal’s decision, but applied its own understanding of that word element and thus changed the subject-matter of the proceedings.

The basis for the claim that Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009 was misinterpreted is that the General Court regards an indication of the geographical origin of a specific type of product that is designated by means of its main constituent material (Meissen Keramik) as descriptive even in relation to goods which contain components — no matter how insignificant — consisting of that material or goods which can be associated with goods of the type designated.

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).

1

---
No. 63001.

#### Commodore Mfg. Corp. and Excel Shipping Corp. *v.*United States,

protest 327638-K (New York).

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

The protest was dismissed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          15,756
<SECURITIES>                                    86,558
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,540
<ALLOWANCES>                                       182
<INVENTORY>                                        189
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               111,272
<PP&E>                                           7,570
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,483
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 125,971
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           21,992
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           155
<OTHER-SE>                                     103,371
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   125,971
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                32,822
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   21,180
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  23
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 14,259
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,154
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              9,105
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     9,105
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .60
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .58


</TABLE>
Case 2:05-cv-02989-CDJ Document 32 Filed 05/05/08 Page 1 of 14
Case 2:05-cv-02989-CDJ Document 32 Filed 05/05/08 Page 2 of 14
Case 2:05-cv-02989-CDJ Document 32 Filed 05/05/08 Page 3 of 14
Case 2:05-cv-02989-CDJ Document 32 Filed 05/05/08 Page 4 of 14
Case 2:05-cv-02989-CDJ Document 32 Filed 05/05/08 Page 5 of 14
Case 2:05-cv-02989-CDJ Document 32 Filed 05/05/08 Page 6 of 14
Case 2:05-cv-02989-CDJ Document 32 Filed 05/05/08 Page 7 of 14
Case 2:05-cv-02989-CDJ Document 32 Filed 05/05/08 Page 8 of 14
Case 2:05-cv-02989-CDJ Document 32 Filed 05/05/08 Page 9 of 14
Case 2:05-cv-02989-CDJ Document 32 Filed 05/05/08 Page 10 of 14
Case 2:05-cv-02989-CDJ Document 32 Filed 05/05/08 Page 11 of 14
Case 2:05-cv-02989-CDJ Document 32 Filed 05/05/08 Page 12 of 14
Case 2:05-cv-02989-CDJ Document 32 Filed 05/05/08 Page 13 of 14
Case 2:05-cv-02989-CDJ Document 32 Filed 05/05/08 Page 14 of 14
EXHIBIT 32



CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT



We, Charles K. Gifford, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, and Robert C. Lamb, Jr., Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, of
FleetBoston Financial Corporation (the Company), certify, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350), that:



| | 1. |  | the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2003 (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 results of operations of the Company.
| | -- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------









Dated: March 1, 2004



/s/  CHARLES K. GIFFORDCharles K. Gifford Chairman and Chief Executive Officer




/s/  ROBERT C. LAMB, JR.Robert C. Lamb, Jr. Executive Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



The undersigned, Brian J. Martin,
President (chief executive officer) of the managing owner, Prudential Securities Futures Management Inc. (the Managing Owner), of World Monitor TrustSeries C (Series C), hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | Series Cs Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 25, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Series C.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                                         |  |  |  | 
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  |  |  | 
|/s/ Brian J. Martin                                                                      |  |  |  | 
|Brian J. Martin President (chief executive officer) of the Managing Owner August 9, 2004 |  |
Exhibit 23
                                                                               
                                                                               
                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
                                       
                                       
      As   independent  public  accountants,  we  hereby  consent  to  the
   incorporation  by  reference  of our report  dated  January  21,  1999,
   included  in this Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1998,  into
   Indiana   Bell  Telephone  Company,  Incorporated's  previously   filed
   Registration Statement File No. 33-51027.
   
   
   
   
   ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP
   
   
   Chicago, Illinois
   March 29, 1999
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-8100

O’MARK SHANELL BEST,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District

Judge. (CA-01-836-5-HO)

Submitted: February 14, 2002 Decided: February 27, 2002

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

O’Mark Shanell Best, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

O’Mark Shanell Best appeals the district court’s order and

judgment denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition.

We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and find

no reversible error. Because Best was sentenced to less than

twenty years’ imprisonment, there was no violation under Apprendi

v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000). See United States v. General,

F.3d , 2002 WL 90833 (4th Cir. 2002). Accordingly, we

affirm. We deny Best’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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.

AFFIRMED
# C_2017374EN.01003501.xml

| 6.11.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 374/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.11.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 374/35

---

Judgment of the General Court of 21 September 2017 — InvoiceAuction B2B v EUIPO (INVOICE AUCTION)

(Case T-789/16) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Application for the figurative EU trade mark INVOICE AUCTION - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2017/C 374/52)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: InvoiceAuction B2B GmbH (Frankfurt am Main, Germany) (represented by: C. Jonas, lawyer)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 August 2016 (Case R 2201/2015-1), relating to the application for registration of the figurative sign INVOICE AUCTION as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders InvoiceAuction B2B GmbH to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders InvoiceAuction B2B GmbH to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 14, 16.1.2017.

1

---