alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

LUZONICA M. BAUTISTA,

Petitioner

v.

MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD,

Respondent

______________________

2022-1500

______________________

Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection 

Board in No. SF-0831-21-0221-I-1.

______________________

ON MOTION

______________________

Before LOURIE, TARANTO, and HUGHES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

O R D E R

Luzonica M. Bautista moves for leave to proceed in 

forma pauperis. The Merit Systems Protection Board 

moves to dismiss this matter as untimely. Ms. Bautista 

has not responded to the Board’s motion.

Ms. Bautista appealed to the Board from the agency’s 

decision denying her application for an annuity. On 

Case: 22-1500 Document: 11 Page: 1 Filed: 05/26/2022
2 BAUTISTA v. MSPB

November 10, 2021, an administrative judge issued a decision dismissing Ms. Bautista’s appeal as untimely and, alternatively, affirming the agency’s decision. That decision

became the final decision of the Board on December 15, 

2021, by operation of the fact that Ms. Bautista did not

timely seek further review at the Board. This court received Ms. Bautista’s petition for this court’s review 69

days later, on February 22, 2022.

Section 7703(b)(1)(A) of title 5 of the U.S. Code states 

that a petition for review from the Board “shall be filed 

within 60 days after the Board issues notice of the final order or decision of the Board.” 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(1)(A). This 

court has held that section 7703(b)(1)(A)’s statutory deadline is jurisdictional and not subject to equitable tolling. 

See Fedora v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 848 F.3d 1013, 1016 

(Fed. Cir. 2017). Thus, we may only consider whether the 

petition for review was timely filed. Ms. Bautista’s petition 

here was received outside of the 60-day filing deadline, and 

we therefore must dismiss.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The Board’s motion to dismiss is granted. The petition for review is dismissed. 

(2) Each side shall bear its own costs.

(3) Ms. Bautista’s motion is denied as moot.

May 26, 2022

 Date

 FOR THE COURT

 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner

 Peter R. Marksteiner

 Clerk of Court

ISSUED AS A MANDATE: May 26, 2022

Case: 22-1500 Document: 11 Page: 2 Filed: 05/26/2022
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Lawrence A. SAGE, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 04-30146.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 1, 2005.*

Decided Aug. 4, 2005.

Susan B. Dohrmann, Asst. U.S. Atty., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Seattle, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Timothy R. Lohraff, Esq., Federal Public Defender’s Office, Seattle, WA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before O’SCANNLAIN, CALLAHAN and BEA, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Lawrence A. Sage appeals the 27-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for possession of visual depictions of minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct, in violation of 18 U.S.C. *63§§ 2252(a)(4)(B) and (b)(2). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3742.

We remand the sentence for further proceedings consistent with *United States v. Ameline,*409 F.3d 1073, 1084-85 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc).

REMANDED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
| (logo) WELLS FARGO | **Commercial Mortgage  Servicing**D1050-084, 8th Floor  401 South Tryon St.  Charlotte, NC 28202  1-800-326-1334 |
|--------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

**ANNUAL STATEMENT OFCOMPLIANCE**

 

 

Reference is hereby made tothat certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as  of November 1,2015, by and among J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp., as Depositor,Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Master Servicer, Torchlight LoanServices, LLC, as Special Servicer, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, asCertificate Administrator, Wilmington Trust, National Association, as Trustee,and Pentalpha Surveillance LLC, as Senior Trust Advisor with respect toCommercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2015-C33 (the"Agreement"). Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise definedshall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.

 

Pursuant to Section 11.09 ofthis Agreement, I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice President of CommercialMortgage Services do hereby certify that:

 

1. A review of the activitiesof the Master Servicer during the period from January 1, 2016 through December31, 2016 (the “Reporting Period”), and of its performance per theAgreement during such period has been made under my supervision, and

 

2. To the best of myknowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer has fulfilled all of itsobligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout theReporting Period.

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, theundersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 28th day of February 2017.

 

 

/s/ Daniel Bober

Daniel Bober

Executive Vice President

 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together we’ll  go far |
|------------------------|-------------------------------------|
Exhibit 32.1

                                  Certification

            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)

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350), the
undersigned officer of SonomaWest Holdings, Inc., a California corporation (the
"Company"), does hereby certify that to his knowledge:

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004 (the
"Form 10-Q") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section
13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that
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: November 12, 2004

                                /s/ Roger S. Mertz
                                --------------------------------------------
                                Roger S. Mertz
                                Chairman of the Board

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to SonomaWest Holdings, Inc. and will be retained by SonomaWest
Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
No. 48116.

#### Protests 65772-K, etc., of F. W. Woolworth Co. (Boston).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

On the agreed facts, the merchandise in question was held dutiable at 3 cents per pound, but not less than 22nor more than 45 percent ad valorem, under the provision in paragraph 397, as modified by the said trade-agreement (T. D. 49753), for such articles, whether wholly or partly manufactured.. That claim was therefore sustained, following Abstract 47501.
# C_2016016EN.01001601.xml

| 18.1.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 16/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.1.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 16/16

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Berlin (Germany) lodged on 24 September 2015 — Recep Kilic v Land Berlin

(Case C-509/15)

(2016/C 016/19)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Berlin

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Recep Kilic

Applicant:

Defendant: Land Berlin

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Can the extension of the residence permit of a family member — who was permitted to join the principal person entitled at a time when the latter was not duly registered as belonging to the labour force — at a date on which the principal person entitled, with whom the family member is lawfully resident, has become an employed person be regarded as constituting an ‘authorisation to join’ for the purposes of Article 7 of EEC-Turkey Association Council Decision No 1/80 of 19 September 1980?

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

                                            
<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-02-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          62,911
<SECURITIES>                                    13,817
<RECEIVABLES>                                   22,371
<ALLOWANCES>                                       507
<INVENTORY>                                     20,744
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               132,332
<PP&E>                                         150,632
<DEPRECIATION>                                  68,894
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 224,679
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           27,989
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           251
<OTHER-SE>                                     192,556
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   224,679
<SALES>                                         36,928
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                36,928
<CGS>                                           22,274
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   22,274
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 (132)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  36
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,194)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (695)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,499)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,499)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.08)
        

</TABLE>
(logo) **Deutsche Bank**

 

1761 East St. Andrew Place

Santa Ana, CA92705-4934

 

Tel 714 247 6000

Fax 714 247 6009 

 

 

ANNUAL STATEMENT AS TOCOMPLIANCE

 

COMM 2016-787S Mortgage Trust

 

The undersigned, David Co, a Directorof Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as the Certificate Administrator (a"Certifying Servicer") under the Trust and Servicing Agreement, datedas of March 1, 2016 (the "Agreement"), by and among, DeutscheMortgage & Asset Receiving Corporation, as Depositor, Wells Fargo Bank,National Association, as Master Servicer and Special Servicer, WilmingtonTrust, National Association, as Trustee, and Deutsche Bank Trust CompanyAmericas, as Certificate Administrator, Paying Agent, and Custodian, here bycertifies in accordance with Section 11.07 of the Agreement :

 

A)           A review of such Certifying Servicer's activities from March 1, 2016 toDecember 31, 2016 (the "reporting period") and of such CertifyingServicer's performance under the Agreement has been made under such officer'ssupervision and

B)           That, as to the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, suchCertifying Servicer has fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement, inall material respects throughout the reporting period.

 

DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANYAMERICAS

as Certificate Administrator

 

/s/ David Co

BY: David Co

Title: Director

Date: March 1, 2017
# C_2017038EN.01003101.xml

| 6.2.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 38/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.2.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 38/31

---

Judgment of the General Court of 15 December 2016 — Aldi v EUIPO — Cantina Tollo (ALDIANO)

(Case T-391/15) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark ALDIANO - Earlier EU word mark ALDI - Genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 42(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Rule 22(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95))

(2017/C 038/42)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Aldi GmbH & Co. KG (Mülheim an der Ruhr, Germany) (represented by: N. Lützenrath, U. Rademacher, C. Fürsen and N. Bertram, lawyers)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervening before the General Court: Cantina Tollo SCA (Tollo, Italy) (represented by: F. Celluprica and F. Fischetti, lawyers)

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

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 13 May 2015 (Case R 1612/2014-4), concerning opposition proceedings between Aldi and Cantina Tollo.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | orders Aldi GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

orders Aldi GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 302, 14.9.2015.

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
The  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information   extracted  from  the
registrant's  financial  statements  as of and for the nine month  period  ended
December  26,  1998,  and is  qualified  in its  entirety by  reference  to such
financial statements:
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       APR-3-1999
<PERIOD-END>                           DEC-26-1998
<CASH>                                   1,870,908
<SECURITIES>                               590,664
<RECEIVABLES>                                    0
<ALLOWANCES>                                     0
<INVENTORY>                              2,821,832
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                         5,664,774
<PP&E>                                   3,508,305
<DEPRECIATION>                           2,149,901
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           7,237,033
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                    4,621,957
<BONDS>                                    488,625
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<COMMON>                                   153,175
<OTHER-SE>                               1,820,929
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             7,237,033
<SALES>                                 13,126,196
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        13,126,196
<CGS>                                    7,796,882
<TOTAL-COSTS>                            7,796,882
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                         5,809,748
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          81,764
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (506,681)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (506,681)
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                              (506,681)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                (0.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                (0.04)
                                


</TABLE>
No. 49411.

#### Protests 886961-G, etc., of Absorbo Beer Pad Co., Inc., et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the pulpboard in question is the same in all material respects as that passed upon in *Absorbo Beer Pad Co.*v. *United States*(10 Cust. Ct. 176, C. D. 748), it was held dutiable at 10 percent under paragraph 1402 as claimed.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 306 Received in Senate (RDS)]

  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 306

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 11, 2008

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Permitting the use of the Rotunda of the Capitol for a ceremony as part 
   of the commemoration of the days of remembrance of victims of the 
                               Holocaust.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring),

SECTION 1. USE OF ROTUNDA FOR HOLOCAUST DAYS OF REMEMBRANCE CEREMONY.

    The Rotunda of the Capitol is authorized to be used on May 1, 2008, 
for a ceremony as part of the commemoration of the days of remembrance 
of victims of the

              

 Holocaust. Physical preparations for the ceremony shall be carried out 
in accordance with such conditions as the Architect of the Capitol may 
prescribe.

            Passed the House of Representatives March 10, 2008.

            Attest:

                                            LORRAINE C. MILLER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
September 12, 1969

No. 69-43

#### Allan J. Kallmann, CAPT, U. S. Army v MG Conn L. Milburn, Jr., M.C., Commanding General, Tripler General Hospital, Tripler Army Medical Center, Oahu, Hawaii; COL Spencer B. Reid, Acting Commander, Tripler Army Medical Center; and Stanley Resor, Secretary of the Army.

On consideration of the Petition filed in the above-entitled action, it appearing that no court-martial proceedings are pending or threatened against petitioner and, since the extraordinary jurisdiction conferred by the All Writs Act, 28 USC § 1651, may be invoked only in aid of the exercise of our jurisdiction over court-martial cases properly before us or which may come here eventually (United States v Snyder, 18 USCMA 480, 40 CMR 192; Mueller v Brown, 18 USCMA 534, 40 CMR 246), it is, by the Court, this 12th day of September, 1969,

*650ORDERED that said Petition be, and the same is, hereby dismissed.
# C_2016090EN.01000501.xml

| 7.3.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 90/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.3.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 90/5

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Handelsgericht Wien (Austria) lodged on 2 December 2015 — Verwertungsgesellschaft Rundfunk GmbH v Hettegger Hotel Edelweiss GmbH

(Case C-641/15)

(2016/C 090/07)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Handelsgericht Wien

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Verwertungsgesellschaft Rundfunk GmbH

Applicant:

Defendant: Hettegger Hotel Edelweiss GmbH

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Is the condition of ‘against [payment] of an entrance fee’ laid down in Article 8(3) of Directive 2006/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on rental right and lending right and on certain rights related to copyright in the field of intellectual property (1) satisfied where;

1

| — | through the TV set made available in each room of a hotel, the hotel operator provides access to the signal for various television and radio channels (‘hotel room TV’), and |
| --- | --- |

—

through the TV set made available in each room of a hotel, the hotel operator provides access to the signal for various television and radio channels (‘hotel room TV’), and

| — | for use of the room (including hotel room TV), the hotel operator charges a fee per room per night (room rate) which also includes use of the TV set and the television and radio channels to which access is thereby provided? |
| --- | --- |

—

for use of the room (including hotel room TV), the hotel operator charges a fee per room per night (room rate) which also includes use of the TV set and the television and radio channels to which access is thereby provided?

---

(1)  OJ 2006 L 376, p. 28.

1

---
H. Con. Res. 316 Agreed to March 14, 2008 

One Hundred Tenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and eight 

Concurrent Resolution 

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That when the House adjourns on the legislative day of 

Thursday, March 13, 2008, or Friday, March 14, 2008, on a motion 

offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its Majority Leader 

or his designee, it stand adjourned until 2 p.m. on Monday, March 

31, 2008, or until the time of any reassembly pursuant to section 

2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first; and that 

when the Senate recesses or adjourns on any day from Thursday, 

March 13, 2008, through Friday, March 28, 2008, on a motion 

offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its Majority Leader 

or his designee, it stand recessed or adjourned until noon on Monday, March 31, 2008, or such other time on that day as may 

be specified in the motion to recess or adjourn, or until the time 

of any reassembly pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first. 

SEC. 2. The Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader 

of the Senate, or their respective designees, acting jointly after 

consultation with the Minority Leader of the House and the 

Minority Leader of the Senate, shall notify the Members of the 

House and the Senate, respectively, to reassemble at such place 

and time as they may designate if, in their opinion, the public 

interest shall warrant it. 

Attest: 

Clerk of the House of Representatives. 

Attest: 

Secretary of the Senate.