alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2016441EN.01001801.xml

| 28.11.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 441/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.11.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 441/18

---

Judgment of the General Court of 18 October 2016 — Raimund Schmitt Verpachtungsgesellschaft v EUIPO (BRAUWELT)

(Case T-56/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for European Union word mark BRAUWELT - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Distinctive character acquired through use - Article 7(3) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Right to be heard - Obligation to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2016/C 441/22)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Raimund Schmitt Verpachtungsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG (Nuremberg, Germany) (represented by: M. Höfler, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 December 2014 (Case R 1121/2014-4), concerning an application for registration of the word sign BRAUWELT as a European Union trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Raimund Schmitt Verpachtungsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Raimund Schmitt Verpachtungsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 118, 13.4.2015.

---
No. 40393.

#### Protest 835082-G of New York Merchandise Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Sxjluvan, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of uninflated rubber balls or so-called beach balls the same as those the subject of *United States*v. *Woolworth*(24 C. C. P. A. 338, T. D. 48770). The claim at 30 percent under paragraph 1502 was therefore sustained.
No. 44204.

#### Protest 877267-G of A. Gluckman, Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Brown, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of bodies, hoods, forms, or shapes similar to that the subject of *Cohn*v. *United States*(4 Cust. Ct. 166, C. D. 314). The protest was sustained accordingly.
Reap. Dec. 8957.

#### F. *W. Woolworth Co.*v. *United States.*

Entered at San Francisco, Calif. [Not published.] Motion by plaintiff.
A97A0888.

#### GOSS BROTHERS TRUCKING et al. v. ASHLEY.

(512 SE2d 319)

Decided February 11, 1999.

*McNatt, Greene & Thompson, Hugh B. McNatt, Richard S. Thompson,*for appellants.

Ruffin, Judge.

In *Ashley v. Goss Bros. Trucking,*269 Ga. 449 (499 SE2d 638) (1998), the Supreme Court reversed our decision in *Goss Bros. Trucking v. Ashley,*228 Ga. App. 354, 355-357 (1) (492 SE2d 7) (1997), in which we reversed the judgment of the trial court and remanded for a new trial. Accordingly, Division 1 of our prior opinion is vacated, the judgment of the Supreme Court is made the judgment of this Court, and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Johnson, C. J., McMurray, P. J., Andrews, Blackburn, Barnes, JJ, and Senior Appellate Judge Harold R. Banke concur.*

*418*Salter, Shook & Craig, Mitchell M. Shook, Susan S. Shook,*for appellee.
No. 53198.

#### Bien Trading Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 146483-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
#### UNITED STATES, Appellant v ROBERT E. TAYLOR, Private (E-2), U. S. Army, Appellee

10 USCMA 621, 28 CMR 187

No. 13,131

Decided August 21, 1959

*Lieutenant Colonel James G. MeConaughy*and *First Lieutenant Stuart Goldstein*were on the brief for Appellant, United States.

*Captain Arnold 1. Melnick*and *First Lieutenant William L. Garwood*were on the brief for Appellee, Accused.

Opinion of the Court

GeoRGe W. Latimer, Judge:

This a companion case to our decision in United States v Smith, 10 USCMA 619, 28 CMR 185, decided this date, and the facts are substantially similar, both accused having been questioned by the same Federal Bureau of Investigation agent at the same place and at approximately the same time. The accused here pleaded guilty to one specification of absence without leave and not guilty to a specification of possession of a false pass with intent to deceive. After trial by general court-martial, he was found guilty of both offenses and sentenced to a dishonorable discharge, total forfeitures, and confinement at hard labor for one year. The convening authority approved the sentence, but the board of review, after affirming the findings of the absence without leave offense, set aside the conviction for possession of a false pass and approved only so much of the sentence as provided for a bad-conduct discharge, total forfeitures, and confinement at hard labor for six months.

The Judge Advocate General of the Army has certified for our determination the same issue with which we were confronted in the *Smith*case, supra, and for the reasons we there set forth, the certified question is answered in the negative. That part of the board of review’s decision setting aside the findings of guilty of possession of a false pass is reversed, and the record is returned to The Judge Advocate General of the Army for reference to a board of review for action not inconsistent with this opinion.

*622Chief Judge Quinn concurs.

„ T , Ferguson, Judge

. v (concurring) :

The law governing the disposition of this case, over my dissent, has been fixed by the decision of this Court in United States v Holder, 10 USCMA 448, 28 CMR 14. Accordingly, I concur in the disposition ordered by my brothers,
No. 56622.

protests 168025-K, etc. (New York).

#### Atlas Fibers Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Cole, J.

The protests were dismissed.
Specimen Common Stock Certificate

                                   [SPECIMEN]

                NOT VALID UNLESS COUNTERSIGNED BY TRANSFER AGENT
               INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

     CUSIP  NO.

     NUMBER     SHARES
     ------     ------


                         National Rehab Properties, Inc.

                          40,000,000 SHARES AUTHORIZED
                                PAR VALUE: $.001

THIS  CERTIFIES  THAT

IS  THE  RECORD  HOLDER  OF

                         NATIONAL REHAB PROPERTIES, INC

TRANSFERABLE  ON  THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  CORPORATION  IN PERSON BY DULY AUTHORIZED
ATTORNEY  UPON SURRENDER OF THIS CERTIFICATE PROPERLY ENDORSED. THIS CERTIFICATE
IS  NOT  VALID  UNTIL  COUNTERSIGNED  BY  THE  TRANSFER  AGENT AND REGISTRAR AND

REGISTERED  BY  THE  REGISTRAR.

WITNESS  THE  FACSIMILE  SEAL OF THE CORPORATION AND THE FACSIMILE SIGNATURES OF
ITS  DULY  AUTHORIZED  OFFICERS.

Dated:

------------------     [CORPORATE     ---------------
     Secretary     SEAL]     President

 Countersigned  &  Registered:     CJB  TRANSFER  SERVICES,
     460  Inverness  Dr.  So.
     Ste  200
     Englewood,  CO  80112
     303-486-5873

     By  ___________________________
     Authorized  Signature


<PAGE>

 NOTICE:     Signature  must  be  guaranteed  by  a  firm which is a member of a
     registered  national  stock  exchange,  or  by  a  bank  (other  than  a
     saving  bank)  or  a  trust  company.  The  following  abbreviations,
     when  used  in  the  inscription  on  the  face  of  this  certificate,
     shall  be  construed  as  though  they  were  written  out  in  full
     according  to  the  applicable  laws  or  regulations:



TEN  COM  -  as  tenants  in  common                      UNIF  GIFT  MIN  ACT -
Custodian

(Cust)        (Minor)
TEN  ENT  -  as  tenants by the entireties                                 under
Uniform  Gifts  to  Minors

JT  TEN  -  as  joint tenants with right of                                Act
           survivorship  and  not  as  tenants
(State)
           in  common

         Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list.


     For  Value  Received,  __________,  hereby  sell,  assign and transfer unto

PLEASE  INSERT  SOCIAL  SECURITY  OR  OTHER
  IDENTIFYING  NUMBER  OF  ASSIGNEE






   (Please  print  or typewrite name and address including zip code of assignee)

_________________________________________________________________________ Shares
of  the  capital  stock  represented  by  the  within certificate, and do hereby
irrevocably  constitute  and  appoint

_______________________________________________________________________ Attorney
to  transfer  the  said stock on the books of the within named  Corporation with
full  power  of  substitution  in  the  premises.

Dated  ________________________


     NOTICE:  THE  SIGNATURE  TO  THIS  ASSIGNMENT  MUST  CORRESPOND  WITH
     THE  NAME  AS  WRITTEN  UPON  THE  FACE  OF  THE  CERTIFICATE  IN
     EVERY  PARTICULAR  WITHOUT  ALTERATION  OR  ENLARGEMENT  OR
     ANY  CHANGE  WHATEVER
<PAGE>


                                                                     EXHIBIT 4.1



                             CHINA VENTURES LIMITED
                      (INCORPORATED IN THE CAYMAN ISLANDS)
                                SHARE CERTIFICATE



CERTIFICATE NUMBER: XXX                                NUMBER OF SHARES: XXXX



         THIS CERTIFIES THAT           IS THE REGISTERED HOLDER OF
ORDINARY SHARES OF US $0.001 EACH, SUBJECT TO THE MEMORANDUM AND ARTICLES OF
ASSOCIATION OF THE COMPANY AND TRANSFERABLE ONLY ON THE BOOKS OF THE COMPANY BY
THE HOLDER HEREOF IN PERSON OR BY ATTORNEY ONLY UPON SURRENDER OF THIS
CERTIFICATE PROPERLY ENDORSED.



         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, THE SAID COMPANY HAS CAUSED THIS CERTIFICATE TO BE
SIGNED BY ITS DULY AUTHORIZED OFFICERS AND ITS CORPORATE SEAL TO BE HEREUNTO
AFFIXED.



THIS          DAY OF          ,          .



[SEAL]

                                  FOR TRIDENT DIRECTORS (CAYMAN) LTD.
                                  DIRECTOR



                                  TRANSFER FORM



FOR VALUE RECEIVED I/WE           DO HEREBY TRANSFER UNTO           SHARES
STANDING IN MY/OUR NAME IN THE BOOKS OF THE COMPANY WHOSE CERTIFICATE APPEARS
ABOVE.



TRANSFEROR:                                            DATE:
Before the Second Division,

July 22, 1938

No. 39074.

#### Protests 328840-G, etc., of Gimbel Bros., Inc., et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

On the record presented certain items consisting of nets and other articles in chief value of cellulose filaments similar to those involved in *Amberg*v. *United States*(T. D. 46204) and Abstract 37230 were held dutiable at 60 percent under paragraph 31 as claimed.
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 Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

Effective April 24, 2007, Alan Haymes, of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission), was designated as non-decisional staff in the above-captioned docket. As non-decisional staff, Mr. Haymes will not participate in an advisory capacity in deliberations on the issues pending therein. Separated non-decisional and advisory staffs are prohibited from communicating with one another concerning the deliberations set forth above. 

Kimberly D. Bose, 

Secretary.

 [FR Doc. E7-8335 Filed 5-1-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
March 25, 1999

Mr. Hank Byun
Samsung Electronics
105 Challenger Road
Ridgefield Park, NJ  07660



Dear Hank:

The purpose of this letter is to confirm  that  Summus,  Ltd. and High Speed Net
Solutions,  Inc. (HSNS) have entered into a marketing  license  agreement.  This
agreement authorizes HSNS to act solely, on behalf of Summus, Ltd., as the point
of contact for all commercial discussions and negotiations with Samsung relating
to Summus' video  streaming  product.  For purposes of these  negotiations  with
Samsung,  HSNS will also  represent  Summus Ltd.  with  regard to Summus'  other
products and  technology.  We are confident that this  arrangement  will help to
ensure a prosperous relationship between all our companies.

Thank you for the opportunity to clarify this point with you.

                                    Best regards,

Summus, Ltd.                                     High Speed Net Solutions, Inc.

/S/ Daniel E. Stansky                             /S/ Peter R. Rogina
-------------------------------                   -------------------
Daniel E. Stansky                                 Peter R. Rogina
Chief Operating Officer                           President
IIA 

Calendar No. 435 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. J. RES. 1 

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating 

to marriage. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 24, 2005 

Mr. ALLARD (for himself, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. LOTT, Mr. ENZI, Mr. DEMINT, 

Mr. SANTORUM, Mr. CRAPO, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. VITTER, Mr. THUNE, 

Mr. ALEXANDER, Mr. FRIST, Mr. TALENT, Mr. BURR, Mrs. HUTCHISON, 

Mr. KYL, Mrs. DOLE, Mr. MARTINEZ, Mr. ISAKSON, Mr. MCCONNELL, 

Mr. HATCH, Mr. ROBERTS, Mr. CORNYN, Mr. STEVENS, Mr. COBURN, 

Mr. COCHRAN, Mr. SHELBY, Mr. ALLEN, Mr. BROWNBACK, and Mr. 

DEWINE) introduced the following joint resolution; which was read twice 

and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

MAY 18, 2006 

Reported by Mr. SPECTER, without amendment 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United 

States relating to marriage. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives 

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two3 thirds of each House concurring therein), That the fol4 lowing article is proposed as an amendment to the ConVerDate Aug 31 2005 03:57 May 19, 2006 Jkt 049200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\SJ1.RS SJ1

bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

SJ 1 IS 

1 stitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all 

2 intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 

3 ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several 

4 States: 

5 ‘‘ARTICLE— 

6 ‘‘SECTION 1. This article may be cited as the ‘Mar7 riage Protection Amendment’. 

8 ‘‘SECTION 2. Marriage in the United States shall con9 sist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither 

10 this Constitution, nor the constitution of any State, shall 

11 be construed to require that marriage or the legal inci12 dents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the 

13 union of a man and a woman.’’. 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS

bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
Calendar No. 435 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. J. RES. 1 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the 

United States relating to marriage. 

MAY 18, 2006 

Reported without amendment 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
#### Chan Y. PARK, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. WEBCOR CONSTRUCTION INC., Defendant—Appellee.

No. 04-16964.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Sept. 12, 2005.*

Decided Sept. 26, 2005.

Chan Y. Park, San Francisco, CA, pro se.

Thomas M. Mclnerney, Esq., Deborah R. Schwartz, Esq., Thelen Reid & Priest, LLP, Michael C. Hughes, Esq., Davis, Co-well & Bowe LLP, San Francisco, CA, for Defendant—Appellee.

Before: REINHARDT, RYMER, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Chan Y. Park appeals pro se the district court’s summary judgment in favor of Webcor Construction in his employment discrimination action claiming wrongful termination based on his race, national origin, disability and age, under the federal Fair Employment and Housing Act, Cal. Gov’t.Code § § 12940 et. seq., and other state laws. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm for the reasons stated in the district court’s August 27, 2004 summary judgment order.

To the extent Park makes arguments in his opening brief regarding his former attorney’s motion to withdraw and his need for additional time for discovery, we decline to consider these issues raised for the first time on appeal. *See Barcamerica Int’l., USA Trust v. Tyfield Imps., Inc.,*289 F.3d 589, 595 n. 6 (9th Cir.2002).

Appellee’s Motion to Strike Portions of Appellant Park’s Excerpts of Record is granted.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 12.1


                       UGI UTILITIES INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
        COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES - EXHIBIT 12.1
                             (THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                   Six
                                                  Months
                                                  Ended                          Year Ended September 30,
                                                 March 31,       --------------------------------------------------------
                                                   2001            2000            1999            1998            1997
                                                 --------        --------        --------        --------        --------
<S>                                              <C>             <C>             <C>             <C>             <C>
EARNINGS:
Earnings before income taxes                     $ 69,928        $ 82,882        $ 63,139        $ 57,007        $ 63,275
Interest expense                                    9,912          18,135          17,317          17,383          16,696
Amortization of debt discount and expense             123             218             215             200             176
Interest component of rental expense                  650           1,318           1,539           1,624           1,887
                                                 --------        --------        --------        --------        --------
                                                 $ 80,613        $102,553        $ 82,210        $ 76,214        $ 82,034
                                                 ========        ========        ========        ========        ========

FIXED CHARGES:
Interest expense                                 $  9,912        $ 18,135        $ 17,317        $ 17,383        $ 16,696
Amortization of debt discount and expense             123             218             215             200             176
Allowance for funds used during
    construction (capitalized interest)                16              17              36              39             114
Interest component of rental expense                  650           1,318           1,539           1,624           1,887
                                                 --------        --------        --------        --------        --------
                                                 $ 10,701        $ 19,688        $ 19,107        $ 19,246        $ 18,873
                                                 ========        ========        ========        ========        ========

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                   7.53            5.21            4.30            3.96            4.35
                                                 ========        ========        ========        ========        ========
</TABLE>
#### Marks & Rosenfeld, Inc. *v.*United States

No. 7447.

Invoices dated Stoke on Trent, England, February 1945, etc.

Certified March 1945, etc.

Entered at New York, N. Y., April 11, 1945, etc.

Entry Nos. 727766; 726043.

(Decided November 20, 1947)

*Seigel, Mandell & Davidson*for the plaintiff.

*Paul P. Rao,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Johnson, Judge:

These appeals for reappraisement have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

(Stipulation omitted.)

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such values are the appraised values, less the additions made by the importer on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
<PAGE>

                                                                     Exhibit 4.5

                          USA VIDEO INTERACTIVE CORP.
                          ---------------------------

                            SHARE OPTION AGREEMENT
                             (CONSULTANT/EMPLOYEE)

TO:   ________________________

DATE: __________________, 2000

     USA VIDEO INTERACTIVE CORP. (the "Corporation") is pleased to advise you
that by resolution of the Board of Directors (the "Board") of the Corporation
dated _____________, 2000, you have been granted an option to subscribe for
and purchase from treasury common shares (the "Shares") of the Corporation.

     The Share Option Plan (the "Plan") has been constituted pursuant to a
Resolution of the Board dated January 2, 1990, and confirmed by the shareholders
of the Corporation at the Annual General Meeting on April 27, 1990. This
agreement incorporates by reference the terms and conditions of the Plan, a copy
of which has been provided to you.

     You have been granted the option to purchase a total of ________ Shares at
an exercise price of $ _________ U.S. per Share. All rights to purchase Shares
pursuant to this option shall expire at the close of business on
__________________, 200____.

     Under the terms of your Consulting/Employment Agreement with the
Corporation, you are to assist the Corporation with ________________. You are to
report to the _______________ of the Corporation who will determine whether the
tasks assigned to you have been completed in a satisfactory manner. Your right
to exercise the options is conditional upon and subject to the Corporation being
satisfied with your performance at the time you wish to exercise the options.
The Corporation reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to limit the number
of options you may exercise at any one time.

     You may exercise this option by delivering to the Corporation a notice
specifying the number of shares in respect of which your option is being
exercised and a certified cheque for the option price of the Shares being
purchased. Upon receipt of the certified cheque the Corporation shall instruct
its transfer agent to issue a share certificate to you.

                                                  Yours very truly,

                                                  USA VIDEO INTERACTIVE CORP.


                                                  Per:__________________________

SIGNED, SEALED AND DELIVERED            ACCEPTED AND AGREED TO this
in the presence of:                     ____ day of _________________, 2000.

____________________________            at ____________________________________.
Signature of Witness

____________________________            ________________________________________
Name of Witness (Print)

STOCK OPTION AGREEMENT-CONSULTANT OR EMPLOYEE