alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2016038EN.01001902.xml

| 1.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 38/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 38/19

---

Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 23 October 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal da Relação de Lisboa — Portugal) — Cruz & Companhia Lda v Instituto de Financiamento da Agricultura e Pescas IP (IFAP), Caixa Central — Caixa Central de Crédito Agrícola Mútuo CRL

(Case C-152/15) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Agriculture - Common organisation of the markets - Regulation (EEC) No 3665/87 - Articles 4(1) and 13 - Regulation (EEC) No 2220/85 - Article 19(1)(a) - Conditions for the release of the guarantee provided to ensure the repayment of the advance - Conditions for the grant of the refund - Sound and fair marketable quality of the products exported - Taking into account, for the grant of the refund, the facts established by the competent authority following an inspection which took place after the actual export and customs clearance of the products - Interpretation of the judgment in Cruz & Companhia (C-128/13, EU:C:2014:2432)))

(2016/C 038/28)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Referring court

Tribunal da Relação de Lisboa

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Cruz & Companhia Lda

Applicant:

Defendants: Instituto de Financiamento da Agricultura e Pescas IP (IFAP), Caixa Central — Caixa Central de Crédito Agrícola Mútuo CRL

Defendants:

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

Article 19(1)(a) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2220/85 of 22 July 1985 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of securities for agricultural products, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 3403/93 of 10 December 1993, must be interpreted as meaning that the guarantee furnished by an exporter to ensure the repayment of the advance received by way of export refund may be implemented where, following an inspection carried out after the actual export and customs clearance of the products in question, it is established that one of the other conditions for the grant of that refund, in particular the condition of sound and fair marketable quality of the products exported, provided for in Article 13 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3665/87 of 27 November 1987 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of export refunds on agricultural products, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1829/94 of 26 July 1994, is not satisfied.

---

(1)  OJ C 205, 22.6.2015.

1

---
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 176 

Expressing the sense of the Congress that a commemorative postage stamp 

should be issued to honor our Nation’s disabled veterans. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 27, 2007 

Mr. BUCHANAN (for himself, Mr. AKIN, Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland, Mrs. 

BACHMANN, Mr. BILIRAKIS, Mrs. BLACKBURN, Mr. BOOZMAN, Ms. 

GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. CAMPBELL of California, Ms. CARSON, Mr. CHABOT, Mr. CRENSHAW, Mr. 

CULBERSON, Mr. DAVIS of Illinois, Mr. DAVID DAVIS of Tennessee, Mrs. 

DAVIS of California, Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida, Mr. MARIO

DIAZ-BALART of Florida, Mr. DOOLITTLE, Mr. FEENEY, Mr. GARRETT

of New Jersey, Mr. HENSARLING, Mr. JONES of North Carolina, Ms. 

KAPTUR, Mr. KLINE of Minnesota, Mr. KUHL of New York, Mrs. 

MCMORRIS RODGERS, Mr. MCNERNEY, Mr. MCKEON, Mr. MACK, Mr. 

MANZULLO, Mr. MARSHALL, Mr. MICA, Mr. MILLER of Florida, Mr. 

NEAL of Massachusetts, Mr. NEUGEBAUER, Mr. PAYNE, Mr. PITTS, Mr. 

PUTNAM, Mr. REICHERT, Mr. ROGERS of Alabama, Mr. ROSKAM, Ms. 

SHEA-PORTER, Mr. SHADEGG, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. SOUDER, 

Mr. TANCREDO, Mr. UDALL of Colorado, Mr. WAMP, Mr. WELDON of 

Florida, Mr. YOUNG of Alaska, Mr. COHEN, Mr. FORTUN ̃O, Mr. DONNELLY, Mr. MITCHELL, Mrs. CHRISTENSEN, Mr. BROWN of South Carolina, Ms. BERKLEY, Mrs. BOYDA of Kansas, Mr. STEARNS, Mr. ROGERS

of Michigan, Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN, Mr. FOSSELLA, Mr. CASTLE, Mr. 

UPTON, Mr. MAHONEY of Florida, Mr. WALDEN of Oregon, Mr. MEEK

of Florida, Mr. KING of New York, Mr. KELLER of Florida, Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota, and Mr. SPACE) submitted the following concurrent 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the Congress that a commemorative 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
2 

•HCON 176 IH 

postage stamp should be issued to honor our Nation’s 

disabled veterans. 

Whereas more than 3,000,000 of the Nation’s veterans are 

currently classified as disabled; 

Whereas disabled veterans risked their lives and sacrificed 

their health in dedicated service to our country; 

Whereas disabled veterans are returning home each day from 

honorably defending our country; and 

Whereas it is only fitting that our disabled veterans be honored for their selfless service and sacrifices: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), That it is the sense of the Congress that— 

3 (1) a commemorative postage stamp should be 

4 issued by the United States Postal Service to honor 

5 our Nation’s disabled veterans; and 

6 (2) the Citizens’ Stamp Advisory Committee 

7 should recommend to the Postmaster General that 

8 such a stamp be issued. 

Æ 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
(V.D. 109)

#### Herman H. Sticht Co., Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 846088.

(Decided March 4, 1960)

*Strauss £ Hedges*for the plaintiff.

*George Goehr an Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Lawrence, Judge:

This is a valuation proceeding which arose by reason of a judgment rendered by the second division of this court in the case of *Herman H. Sticht & Co., Inc., et al.*v. *United States,*38 Cust. Ct. 480, Abstract 60687.

The cause of action, having been formally abandoned, is dismissed. Judgment will issue accordingly.
# C_2016454EN.01000902.xml

| 5.12.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 454/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.12.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 454/9

---

Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 20 July 2016 — Claire Staelen v European Ombudsman

(Case C-338/15 P) (1)

((Appeal - Non-contractual liability - Handling by the European Ombudsman of a complaint concerning the management of a list of suitable candidates following an open competition - Rules of Procedure of the Court - Article 181))

(2016/C 454/19)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Claire Staelen (represented by: V. Olona, avocate)

Other party to the proceedings: European Ombudsman (represented: initially by G. Grill, and subsequently by L. Papadias, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | The appeal is rejected. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The appeal is rejected.

| 2. | Claire Staelen is ordered to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Claire Staelen is ordered to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 294, 7.9.2015.

---
EXHIBIT 11.1
<TABLE>

                           SIERRA MONITOR CORPORATION
                    NET INCOME (LOSS) PER SHARE COMPUTATIONS
                     QUARTERS ENDED MARCH 31, 1997 AND 1996
                                   (unaudited)

<CAPTION>
                                                  (All amounts in thousands except per share amounts)

                                                      For the three month period ended March 31,
                                                      ------------------------------------------
                                                           1997                          1996
                                                           ----                          ----
<S>                                                      <C>                           <C>   
Weighted average shares outstanding

      Common Stock                                       10,333                        10,277
                                                         ======                        ======

      Total weighted average shares
           outstanding                                   10,333                        10,277
                                                         ======                        ======

Net loss                                                    $50                           $68
                                                         ======                        ======

Net loss per share                                        $0.00                         $0.01
                                                         ======                        ======
<FN>

Note:    Common  stock  equivalents  were  excluded  from the net loss per share
         computations due to the antidilutive effect.
</FN>
</TABLE>
# C_2015190EN.01003601.xml

| 8.6.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 190/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.6.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 190/36

---

Action brought on 27 March 2015 — ZZ v OHIM

(Case F-48/15)

(2015/C 190/42)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: T. Bontinck and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM)

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the applicant’s staff report for 2013 and the recovery plan adopted on the basis of that report, together with a claim for damages in respect of the non-pecuniary loss allegedly suffered.

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the staff report drawn up concerning the applicant for 2013; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the staff report drawn up concerning the applicant for 2013;

| — | Annul the recovery plan adopted on the basis of the staff report; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the recovery plan adopted on the basis of the staff report;

| — | Order OHIM to pay compensation in respect of the non-pecuniary loss suffered by the applicant, assessed at EUR 10  000, reserving the right to increase or reduce that sum during the proceedings; |
| --- | --- |

—

Order OHIM to pay compensation in respect of the non-pecuniary loss suffered by the applicant, assessed at EUR 10  000, reserving the right to increase or reduce that sum during the proceedings;

| — | Order OHIM to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order OHIM to pay the costs.

---
# C_2016232EN.01003701.xml

| 27.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 232/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 232/37

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 12 May 2016 — FR v EASA

(Case F-51/15) (1)

1

(2016/C 232/47)

Language of the case: English

The Judge ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 190, 8/6/2015, p. 37.

1

---
Exhibit 32

Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of Chiquita Brands International, Inc. (the company), does hereby certify,
to such officers knowledge, that:

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 of the company fully complies with the
requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the company.



|                      |  |                      |  |                        
|--------------------- |  | -------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Dated: August 6, 2008 |  |                      |  |                        
|                      | 
|                      |  | /s/ Fernando Aguirre
|                      |  | Name:                |  | Fernando Aguirre       
|                      |  | Title:               |  | Chief Executive Officer
|                      |  |                     
|Dated: August 6, 2008 |  |                      |  |                        
|                      | 
|                      |  | /s/ Jeffrey M. Zalla
|                      |  | Name:                |  | Jeffrey M. Zalla       
|                      |  | Title:               |  | Chief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 543 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 543

Temporarily suspending the Rules for the Regulation of the Senate Wing 
   of the United States Capitol and Senate Office Buildings for the 
  purpose of permitting the taking of photographs in the area of the 
                          Daily Press Gallery.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                July 27 (legislative day, July 26), 2006

 Mr. Lott submitted the following resolution; which was considered and 
                               agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Temporarily suspending the Rules for the Regulation of the Senate Wing 
   of the United States Capitol and Senate Office Buildings for the 
  purpose of permitting the taking of photographs in the area of the 
                          Daily Press Gallery.

    Resolved, That--
            (1) paragraph 1 of rule IV of the Rules for the Regulation 
        of the Senate Wing of the United States Capitol and Senate 
        Office Buildings (prohibiting the taking of pictures in the 
        Senate Chamber) shall be temporarily suspended for the purpose 
        of permitting the taking of photographs in the area of the 
        Daily Press Gallery;
            (2) photographs permitted under paragraph (1) may only be 
        taken at a time when the Senate is in recess;
            (3) photographs permitted to be taken under paragraph (1) 
        may only be used in relation to United States District Court 
        Civil Action No. 04-0026; and
            (4) the Sergeant at Arms of the Senate is authorized and 
        directed to make the necessary arrangements for implementation 
        of paragraph (1), which arrangements shall provide that there 
        will be no disruption to the business of the Senate.
                                 <all>
```
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsThe effect of texture on the crack growth resistance of aluminaThe crack growth resistance of a textured, extruded alumina body was compared with that of an isotropic, isopressed body of similar grain size, density, and chemistry. R-curve levels reflected the preferred orientation; however, R-curve slopes (dK sub IR/d Delta a) were the same in all instances, implying a similar crack growth resistive mechanism. Three orthogonal orientations of crack growth in the two structures exhibited similar forms of K sub IR versus Delta-a curves, for which a schematic diagram for polycrystalline ceramics is proposed.Document ID19880004824Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeConference PaperAuthorsSalem, Jonathan A.*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH., United States)*Shannon, John L., Jr.*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH., United States)*Bradt, Richard C.*(Washington Univ. Seattle., United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 5, 2013Publication DateJanuary 1, 1987Subject CategoryNonmetallic MaterialsReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.15:100250REPT-167-B-87E-3873NASA-TM-100250Accession Number88N14206Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 505-63-1BDistribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19880004824.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

) 

BRETT ANDREW NELSON, ) 

) 

Petitioner, ) 

) 

v. ) Civil Action No. 21-1168 (UNA) 

) 

KERI ANN YODER, et al., ) 

) 

Respondents. ) 

_________________________________________ ) 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

This matter is before the Court on review of this pro se petitioner’s application to proceed in 

forma pauperis and his Motion to Confirm the Unchallenged Arbitration Award (ECF No. 1, “Pet.”). 

Petitioner asserts that he and the respondents entered into a contract on May 23, 2018, which provided 

that the parties would submit to an arbitration process if a dispute arose. See Pet. ¶¶ 1-2. According to 

petitioner, he initiated arbitration proceedings in October 2019, and an arbitrator issued a decision on 

November 27, 2019 in his favor. See id. ¶¶ 3-4; see also Pet., Ex. (ECF No. 1-1). This is not 

petitioner’s first effort to enforce the same arbitration agreement. 

Petitioner filed a petition in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia demanding 

enforcement of the same arbitration agreement against the same respondents. See Nelson v. Jackson, 

No. 3:20-cv-0028 (M.D. Ga. Feb. 24, 2020). That court granted respondents’ motion to dismiss the 

petition, as amended, for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. See Nelson v. 

Jackson, No. 3:20-cv-0028 (M.D. Ga. Jan. 26, 2021), appeal docketed, No. 21-10440 (11th Cir. Feb. 8, 

2021). 

MAY 17 2021
2 

It appears, then, that this civil action is duplicative, and the matter has been resolved on the 

merits in the Middle District of Georgia. Therefore, the Court concludes that petitioner’s claims are 

barred. See Stark v. Holder, No. 1:15-CV-0202, 2015 WL 1137724, at *2 (D.D.C. Mar. 13, 2015) 

(dismissing petition “seeking enforcement of the same agreement as against the same defendants and for 

confirmation of the same arbitration award” that another district court dismissed with prejudice). 

Nelson’s path forward is to appeal that ruling, which he has done, not to seek a do-over in another 

district. Cf. MacKenzie v. Fudge, No. 1:20-CV-00411 (TNM), 2021 WL 1061220, at *1 (D.D.C. Mar. 

18, 2021) (“Because he brought and lost the same claims in another federal court several years ago, 

MacKenzie cannot relitigate them here.”).

The Court will grant petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the 

petition. An Order is issued separately. 

 ________________________ 

 TREVOR N. McFADDEN 

 United States District Judge 

DATE: May 17, 2021
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION, EQUITY INJECTION AND SOURCES AND USE OF FUNDS



CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION, EQUITY INJECTION

AND SOURCES AND USE OF FUNDS

 

I, Joseph L. Florence, the duly authorized officer of KRONOS ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES, INC., a Nevada corporation, and KRONOS ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES WV, INC., a West Virginia corporation (collectively, the “Borrowers”), hereby certifies on this 7th day of April, 2022, to the West Virginia Economic Development Authority, a West Virginia public corporation (“WVEDA”), in connection with WVEDA’s loans to the Borrowers in the aggregate principal amount of $2,610,000 (the “WVEDA Loans”), the proceeds of which are to be used to permanently finance a portion of the costs of (i) acquiring the former facility at 2501 Garfield Avenue, Parkersburg, West Virginia, consisting of approximately 9 acres of land and three existing buildings situated thereon (the “Facility”) and making certain upgrades and renovations thereto, and (ii) acquiring certain machinery, equipment, furniture and fixtures at the facility (the “Project Equipment” and together with the Facility, the “Project”) : 

1.The total cost of the Project was at least $5,800,000, which has been permanently financed by: 

a.The WVEDA Loans in the aggregate principal amount of $2,610,000, and 

b.An equity contribution from the Borrowers of at least $3,190,000. 

2.Based upon the report of Anthony L. Baumgard, P.E., of Balsa Limited LLC, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, the Project Equipment is in place and the Facility is structurally sound and fully operational. 




WITNESS my signature effective as of the day and year first above written.

 

KRONOS ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES, INC., 

a West Virginia corporation 

 

 

By:____________________________________ 

Name:Joseph L. Florence 

Its: Chief Operating Officer 

 

 

KRONOS ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES WV,  

INC., 

a West Virginia corporation 

 

 

By:____________________________________ 

Name:Joseph L. Florence 

Its: Chief Operating Officer 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Signature Page to Certificate of Completion

14773950 (1916.0939)


2





EXHIBIT A
### MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04

- 12

- 00305

- CR
Fernando FLORES
- MIRANDA , Appellant

v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee
From the 186th Judicial District Court , Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2011CR1872 Honorable Maria Teresa Herr , Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM Sitting: Rebecca S immons , Justice Steven C. Hilbig, Justice Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Delivered and Filed: July 25 , 2012
DISMISSED On June 7, 2012, we notified th e appellant that the trial court’s certification in this appeal states that “this criminal case is a plea

- bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” Additionally, the clerk’s record contained a written waiver signed by the appellant pursuant to which he entered a plea of no contest. The trial court’s judgment also reflected that there was a plea bargain agreement, and the punishment assessed did not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant . T herefore, the trial court’s04

- 12

- 00305

- CR

- 2

- c ertification accurately reflected that the criminal case is a plea

- bargain case. See T EX R. A PP

. P

. 25.2(a)(2).
In our June 7 , 2012 order, we warned the appellant that “ [this] appeal must be dismissed
if a certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part o f the
record under these rules

. ” S ee id. R. 25.2(d) . We ordered that this appeal would be dismissed pursuant to R ule 25.2(d) unless the appellant caused an amended trial court certificat ion to be filed by June 29, 2012, that showed the appellant has the right of appeal. See id. R. 25.2(d) , 37.1;
see also Chavez v. State , 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 200 6 ); Daniels v. State , 110
S.W.3d 174 , 176 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 2003, no pet. ). On July 6, 2012, appellant filed a response indicating that the trial court certification in the record is accurate and moved this court to dismiss the appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal.
PER CURIAM
DO NOT PUBLISH
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Central Pennsylvania Radiation :

Oncology, P.C., a Pennsylvania :

corporation, :

Appellant :

:

v. : No. 1004 C.D. 2020

:

The Good Samaritan Hospital :

of Lebanon, Pennsylvania, a :

Pennsylvania Corporation, :

WellSpan Health, a Pennsylvania :

Corporation, and Robert Longo, :

an adult Individual :

PER CURIAM O R D E R

NOW, January 24, 2022, having considered Appellant’s application for 

reargument, the application is denied.
No. 48073.

#### Protests 945436-G, etc., of Albert Eckstein & Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of *United States*v. *Armand Schwab*(30 C. C. P. A. 72, C. A. D. 218) certain of the hemp hats in question were held dutiable under paragraph 1504 (b) (1) as claimed.