alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Thi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i at e f orpubl i c at i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

The pane lunani m ous l y c onc lude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed . R . A p p . P . 3 4 (a) (2). NOT F OR P UB L I CA T I ON UN I TE D STATE S COURT OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CI RCUI T O SC A RO . PIN ED A , a . k. a . O s c arO r l ando P i neda, P et i t i o n er, v. E R IC H . H O L D E R , Jr ., A tto rn e y G e n e ra l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 09- 73610 A ge nc y N o. A 094- 203- 281 M E M ORAN DU M *

O n Pet i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

an O r de rof

the B o ardo f I m m ig ra tio nA p p e a ls Subm i tt e d D e c e m be r14, 2010 ** B efore: G O O D W IN , W A L L A C E , an dW . F L E T C H E R , C i rcuitJu d g es. O s c arO . Pi ne da , anat i ve and c i t i z e n of El Sal va dor , pe t i t i ons pr o s e f or r evi ew of the B oar d o f

I m m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ ( “B I A ”) orderdi sm i ss i ng hi s app ea l f r o m an im m ig r ati o n ju d g e ’ s r e m o v a l o r d e ran dd e n y in g h is m o ti o nto r e o p e n . W e have j ur i s di c t i on unde r8 U . S. C . § 1252. W e r e vi e w f orabus e of

di s c r e t i on the 

# FI L ED DEC 27 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U . S. C O U R T O F AP PE ALS09- 73610 2 d e n ia l o f am o ti o n to r e o p e n , an dr e v ie w d e n o v o qu e s ti o n s . Moh am m ed v. G on zales , 4 0 0 F . 3 d7 8 5 , 7 9 1 - 9 2 ( 9 th C i r . 2 0 0 5 ) . W e d e n y th e p e t i t i o nf o rr e v i e w. T he B I A di d n otabuse i t s di sc r et i on i n d enyi ng P i neda’ s m ot i on t o re op en b e c au s e h is c o n v ic tio n fo r p o s s e s s io no f c o c a in e b a s e fo r s a le , inv io latio no f C a l. He a l th & Sa f

e ty Co d e § 1 1 3 5 1 . 5 , i s ana g g r av at e df e l o n y u n d e r8 U. S. C. § 1 1 0 1 ( a ) ( 4 3 ) ( B ) , an dh e is th e r e f o r e in e li g ib le f

o rc an c e ll ati o no f

r e m o v a l. See 8 U . S . C . § 1 2 2 9 b (b)(1); R endo n v. Mukasey , 5 2 0 F . 3 d9 6 7 , 9 7 5 -76 (9th C i r. 2 0 0 8 ). P in e d a ’ s c o n te n ti o n r e g ar d in g th e b u r d e no f p r o o f is n o t p e r s u a s iv e . See 8 C . F . R . § 1 2 4 0 . 8 (d). Be c au s e Pi n e d ah a s n o tc o n t e s t e dr e mov ab i l i ty u n d e r8 U. S. C. § 1 1 8 2 (a )( 6 )( A )( i), w e n e e dn o t a d dre s s h is c o n te n tio n s re g ard in g h is re m o v ab ility u n d er 8 U . S . C . § 1 1 8 2 (a) (2)(A )( i )( I) o r ( II ). P E T I T I ON F OR R E VI E W DE NI E D.
No. 47625.

#### Protests 873086-G, etc., of Assola Bros. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 86 (Friday, May 4, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 25243]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-8574]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Marketing Service

[Docket <greek-i> AMS-2006-0111; FV-06-315]


United States Standards for Grades of Summer Squash

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice; withdrawal.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) is withdrawing the 
notice soliciting comments on its proposal to amend the voluntary 
United States Standards for Grades of Summer Squash. After reviewing 
and considering the comments received, the agency has decided not to 
proceed with this action.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 4, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vincent J. Fusaro, Standardization 
Section, Fresh Products Branch, (202) 720-2185. The United States 
Standards for Grades of Summer Squash are available by accessing the 
Fresh Products Branch Web site at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/standards/stanfrfv.htm.

Background

    AMS had identified the United States Standards for Grades of Summer 
Squash for possible revisions. The standards were last revised on 
January 6, 1984.
    On August 6, 2006, AMS published a notice in the Federal Register 
(71 FR 44607) soliciting comments on a possible revision to the United 
States Standards for Grades of Summer Squash. The comments are 
available by accessing AMS, Fresh Products Branch Web site at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/fv/fpbdocketlist.htm. The comment period ended October 
7, 2006.
    During that sixty-day comment period, one comment was submitted 
opposing the revisions. The commentor stated, ``the different varietal 
characteristics in each type could stop what would work as a ``fancy'' 
being packed for one area and put undue strain on the ``medium'' market 
because a particular variety of squash does not have the genetics to 
meet size criteria.'' The commentor also stated, ``some regions can 
only successfully grow certain seed varieties and with the 
characteristics of some varieties, size restrictions could make it 
prohibitive for some areas to produce summer squash all together.''
    After reviewing and considering the comments received, AMS has 
decided not to proceed with the proposed revisions to the standards.

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1621-1627.

    Dated: May 1, 2007.
Lloyd C. Day,
Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
 [FR Doc. E7-8574 Filed 5-3-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1441 

To provide assistance for workforce investment activities to unique populations 

in Alaska and Hawaii. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 28, 2011 

Mr. INOUYE (for himself and Mr. BEGICH) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, 

Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To provide assistance for workforce investment activities to 

unique populations in Alaska and Hawaii. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Workforce Investment 

5 for Unique Populations in Hawaii and Alaska Act of 

6 2011’’. 

7 SEC. 2. ASSISTANCE TO UNIQUE POPULATIONS IN ALASKA 

8 AND HAWAII. 

9 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provi10 sion of law, the Secretary of Labor is authorized to provide 


pwalker on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1441 IS

1 assistance to the Cook Inlet Tribal Council, Incorporated, 

2 and the University of Hawaii Maui College, for the unique 

3 populations who reside in Alaska or Hawaii, respectively, 

4 to improve job training and other workforce investment 

5 activities (as defined in section 101 of the Workforce In6 vestment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2801 et seq.)). 

7 (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There 

8 are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section 

9 such sums as may be necessary for each of fiscal year 

10 2012 and each subsequent fiscal year. 

Æ 


pwalker on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
No. 56700.

protests 152394-K, etc. (New York).

#### Bendix Chemical Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of cornmint oil the same in all material respects as that the subject of *A. Maschmeijer, Jr., Inc.*v. *United States*(39 C. C. P. A. 139, C. A. D. 476), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
**Exhibit32.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with theQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of MathStar, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarterended June 30, 2007 (the “Quarterly Report”), I, Douglas M. Pihl, President andChief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that:

1.               TheQuarterly 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.               Theinformation contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| Date:   August 9, 2007 | By:    |       /s/ Douglas M.  Pihl |   |
|---------------------------------------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                  |   | Douglas M. Pihl                                          |
|                                  |   | President and Chief Executive Officer                    |

 

----
(Reap. Dec. 8418)

Entry No. 9026, etc.

#### Wheeler & Miller et al. *v.*United States

(Decided April 21, 1955)

*Lawrence & Tuttle*for the plaintiffs.

*Warren E. Burger,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Oliver, Chief Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule “A,” hereto attached and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> It is hereby stipulated as follows concerning the merchandise referred to below:

> 1) The merchandise covered by these appeals consists of sheathing felt imported from England, which is such or similar to the sheathing felt involved in *485*US v. Morse et al.,*decided in ARD 38 and ARD 45, and therein held to be subject to appraisement upon the basis of export value. The record in said case is hereby-incorporated herein.

> 2) Sheathing felt such as or similar to the sheathing felt covered by these appeals was freely offered for sale for exportation to the United States in usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade at the prices stated during the respective periods, viz:

> Per crate of 10 rolls of sheathing felt 25 yds. long Period of exportation by 32" wide

> April 2, 1951 to January 20, 1952 £11- 8-6

> January 21, 1952 to August 31, 1952 £12-11-6

> September 1, 1952 to January 25, 1953 £12- 6-0

> January 26, 1953 to date £11-15-0

> All less nondutiable charges as invoiced

> 3) There was no higher foreign value during the respective periods, and upon this stipulation the appeals enumerated in attached schedule may be deemed submitted, they being limited to sheathing felt.

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 sheathing felt here involved, and that such values, for the sheathing felt exported during the respective periods, were as follows:

> English currency per crate of 10 rolls of sheathing felt 25 Period of exportation yds. long by 32" wide

> April 2, 1951, to January 20, 1952 £11. 8.6

> January 21, 1952, to August 31, 1952 £12.11.6

> September 1, 1952, to January 25, 1953 £12. 6.0

> January 26, 1953, to date £11.15.0

> All less nondutiable charges as invoiced

Insofar as the appeals relate to all other merchandise, they are hereby dismissed.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
No. 46986.

#### Protests 853031-G, etc., of John C. Sleater Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following *Bullocks*v. *United States*(6 Cust. Ct. 110, C. D. 441) the merchandise in question was held not subject to countervailing duty.
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ENACTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of MBT Financial Corp. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, John L. Skibski, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as enacted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (1) The 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 Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.


/s/ John L. Skibski
-------------------------------------
John L. Skibski
Chief Financial Officer
November 7, 2008

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to MBT Financial Corp. and will be retained by MBT Financial Corp. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### In re: EAST COAST BEVERAGE CORP., Debtor. Gary J. Rotella & Associates, P.A., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. East Coast Beverage Corp., Defendant-Appellee.

No. 04-14697

D.C. Docket No. 04-60360-CV-JIC.

BKCY No. 02-22675-BKC-PG.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Aug. 30, 2005.

Gary J. Rotella, Gary J. Rotella & Associates, Fort Lauderdale, FL, pro se.

*260Steven Neil Lippman, Teseher, Lippman & Valinsky, Fort Lauderdale, FL, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before BARKETT and MARCUS, Circuit Judges, and GEORGE,* District Judge.

*

 Honorable Lloyd D. George, United States District Judge for the District of Nevada, sitting by designation.

PER CURIAM.

Gary J. Rotella & Associates, P.A. (“Rotella”) appeals the district court’s order dismissing as moot his appeal from the bankruptcy court’s award of fees. The district court reasoned that because the debtor’s plan of reorganization had been substantially consummated, the court lacked the ability to reverse the transactions made under the plan’s terms and grant the requested relief. On appeal, Rotella argues that: (i) East Coast Beverage Corp. (“the debtor”) waived the equitable mootness issue by failing to raise it before the bankruptcy court; (ii) there is no record evidence that the plan has been substantially consummated; (iii) even if the plan has been substantially consummated, there is no evidence that the court could not fashion effective relief.

As an initial matter, we hold that the mootness issue was not waived and the district court had the authority to consider whether the plan’s substantial consummation mooted Rotella’s claim. Furthermore, while the district court erred in making findings of fact as to whether the reorganization plan had been substantially consummated, that fact is now undisputed. Moreover, in light of Rotella’s failure to seek a stay, the numerous transactions effectuated under that plan’s provisions preclude the grant of any meaningful relief. Rotella’s appeal was thus properly dismissed as moot.

AFFIRMED.
# C_2017151EN.01003101.xml

| 15.5.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 151/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.5.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 151/31

---

Judgment of the General Court of 29 March 2017 — J & Joy v EUIPO — Joy-Sportswear (JN-JOY)

(Case T-388/15) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - EU word mark JN-JOY - Earlier national figurative mark joy SPORTSWEAR - Relative grounds for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the goods - Similarity of the signs - Assessment criteria - Composite mark - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2017/C 151/38)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: J & Joy SA (Waremme, Belgium) (represented by: A. Maqua, C. Pirenne and C. Smits, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: H. O’Neill, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Joy-Sportswear GmbH (Ottensoos, Germany) (represented by: T. Kiphuth, lawyer)

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

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 April 2015 (Case R 1353/2014-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Joy-Sportswear and J & Joy.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders J & Joy SA to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders J & Joy SA to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 381, 16.11.2015.

1

---
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1341 

To provide a point of order against consideration of any measure that would 

increase the statutory limit on the public debt above $14.294 trillion 

unless that measure has been publicly available for a full 7 calendar 

days before consideration on the floor of the Senate. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 11, 2011 

Mr. SESSIONS (for himself, Mr. VITTER, Ms. AYOTTE, and Mr. LEE) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration 

A BILL 

To provide a point of order against consideration of any 

measure that would increase the statutory limit on the 

public debt above $14.294 trillion unless that measure 

has been publicly available for a full 7 calendar days 

before consideration on the floor of the Senate. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. PUBLIC AVAILABILITY OF DEBT MEASURES. 

4 It shall not be in order in the Senate to proceed to 

5 any measure that would increase the statutory limit on 

6 the public debt above $14.294 trillion unless that measure 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1341 IS

1 has been available on a public website for a full 7 calendar 

2 days before consideration on the floor of the Senate. 

fi 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18
- 6385

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. GABRIEL VASHON SEAY, a/k/a Gabriel Seay , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Greenbelt

. Deborah K. Chasanow , Senior District Judge. ( 8:14

- cr - 00614

- DKC

- 1; 8:15

- cv - 03367

- DKC )

Submitted : September 24, 2018 Decided: October 10, 2018

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and NIEMEYER and WYNN , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Gabriel Vashon Seay, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer Regina Sykes, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opi nions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Gabriel Vashon Seay seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certi ficate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on th e merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrel l , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constituti onal right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Seay has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument beca use the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
# C_2016136EN.01003501.xml

| 18.4.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 136/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.4.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 136/35

---

Order of the General Court of 16 February 2016 — Industrias Químicas del Vallés v Commission

(Case T-296/15) (1)

1

((Action for annulment - Plant protection products - Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/408 - Establishing a list of candidates for substitution - Inclusion of metalaxyl on that list - Lack of individual concern - Regulatory act entailing implementing measures - Inadmissibility))

(2016/C 136/50)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Industrias Químicas del Vallés, SA (Mollet del Vallès, Spain) (represented by: C. Fernández Vicién, I. Moreno-Tapia Rivas and C. Vila Gisbert, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: I. Galindo Martín, P. Ondrůšek and G. von Rintelen, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment in part of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/408 of 11 March 2015 on implementing Article 80(7) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market and establishing a list of candidates for substitution (OJ 2015 L 67, p. 18).

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as being inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as being inadmissible.

| 2. | Industrias Químicas del Vallés, SA shall bear the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Industrias Químicas del Vallés, SA shall bear the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 254, 3.8.2015.

1

---
EXHIBIT
      32.1





CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO


18
      U.S.C.
      Sec.1350,


AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of O2Diesel Corporation (the “Company”) on
      Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30,
      2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here
      of
      (the “Report”), I, Alan Rae, Chief Executive Officer of the Company and I, David
      H. Shipman, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
      U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge that:





(1)
      The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





(2)
      The
      information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:
        November 14, 2007




By:
            /s/
                Alan Rae
            By:
            /s/
                David H. ShipmanName:
            Alan
                Rae
            Name:
            David
                H. ShipmanTitle:
            Chief
                Executive Officer
              (Principal
                Executive Officer)
            Title:
            Chief
                Financial Officer
              (Principal
                Financial and Accounting Officer)




This
      certificate is being made for the exclusive purpose of compliance by the Chief
      Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company with the
      requirements of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and may not
      be disclosed, distributed or used by any person or for any reason other than
      as
      specifically required by law.





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
      provided to O2Diesel Corporation and will be retained by O2Diesel Corporation
      and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
      request.