alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 11-1913

DEREK N. JARVIS, 

 Plaintiff - Appellant, 

 v. 

ANALYTICAL LABORATORY SERVICES, INCORPORATED, 

 Defendant - Appellee. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District 

Judge. (8:10-cv-01540-RWT) 

Submitted: December 20, 2011 Decided: December 22, 2011 

Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. 

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Derek N. Jarvis, Appellant Pro Se. Charles Grant Byrd, Jr., 

ALSTON & BYRD, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 

Certiorari dismissed, March 19, 2012
2

PER CURIAM:

Derek N. Jarvis appeals the district court’s order 

granting summary judgment to Analytical Laboratory Services, 

Inc., in Jarvis’ employment discrimination action. We have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, 

we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Jarvis 

v. Analytical Lab. Servs., No. 8:10-cv-01540-RWT (D. Md. Aug. 

22, 2011). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and 

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

AFFIRMED
Unassociated Document


    Exhibit
      10.2

    


    Summary
      of Consignment Contract

    


    On
      January 3, 2008, Hangzhou Wang Da Electric Company Limited (the “Supplier”)
      entered into a Consignment Contract (the “Contract”) with Hangzhou Lotour
      Digital Products Business Company Limited (the “Buyer”), whereby the Supplier
      shall provide the Buyer with certain mobile phones and mobile phone accessories
      products that the Buyer has an exclusive right to sell (the “Products”), for
      sale in the branch stores owned by the Buyer. 

    


    The
      Supplier entered into this Contract on behalf of itself and any of its
      subsidiaries, branches, branch offices or authorized agents. The Buyer entered
      into this Contract on behalf of itself and any of its subsidiaries, branches,
      branch offices or authorized agents. 

    


    Under
      this Contract, in each case, the Buyer shall place a purchase order to the
      Supplier. The Supplier shall confirm the Supplier’s orders upon the receipt of
      them and deliver the Products to the Buyer in accordance with the delivery
      time
      and orders as mutually agreed upon. Title to, and ownership in, all Products
      shall remain in the Supplier until such time as the payment for the goods may
      be
      settled.

    


    The
      payment for the goods shall be settled every fifteen (15) days (each, the
“Settlement Period”). For each settlement, the Supplier shall be entitled to an
      amount equal to the sales sum made by the Buyer for the Products during such
      a
      Settlement Period minus the Buyer’s costs, expenses and commissions with
      connection thereto. The Supplier shall be responsible for providing, at its
      own
      cost, the Buyer with sample products and display facilities within the Buyer’s
      stores and product guarantee for the Products sold by the Buyer, and sending
      its
      sales representatives to the Buyer’s stores for the purpose of promoting the
      Products. The Buyer shall be entitled to 2% of the sales sum as general
      commission and other discretional commissions as mutually agreed upon by both
      parties. 

    


    This
      Contract shall be valid from January 3, 2008 through December 31, 2008. This
      Contract is governed by PRC law.
November 13, 1941

No. 47011.

#### Protest 11447-K of Abercrombie & Fitch Co.

C. D. 541. Government’s motion for rehearing denied. (See C. D. 602.)
EXHIBIT 99.1



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


In connection with the Annual Report of Nebraska Book Company, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the year ending March 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Mark W.
Oppegard, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
1350, as adopted 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/ Mark W. Oppegard
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Mark W. Oppegard
                                            Chief Executive Officer
                                            May 30, 2003
# C_2015081EN.01001301.xml

| 9.3.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 81/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.3.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 81/13

---

Judgment of the General Court of 22 January 2015 — Teva Pharma and Teva Pharmaceuticals Europe v EMA

(Case T-140/12) (1)

1

((Medicinal products for human use - Orphan medicinal products - Application for marketing authorisation for the generic version of the orphan medicinal product imatinib - EMA decision refusing to validate the application for marketing authorisation - Market exclusivity))

(2015/C 081/16)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Teva Pharma BV (Utrecht, Netherlands); and Teva Pharmaceuticals Europe BV (Utrecht) (represented by: D. Anderson, QC, K. Bacon, Barrister, G. Morgan and C. Drew, Solicitors)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Medicines Agency (EMA) (represented by: T. Jabłoński, M. Tovar Gomis and N. Rampal Olmedo, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: E. White, P. Mihaylova and M. Šimerdová, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of the EMA’s decision of 24 January 2012 refusing to validate the applicants’ application for authorisation to place imatinib Ratiopharm, a generic version of the orphan medicinal product imatinib, on the market, in so far as concerns therapeutic indications for the treatment of chronic myeloid leukaemia.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1) | Dismisses the action. |
| --- | --- |

1)

Dismisses the action.

| 2) | Orders TEVA Pharma BV and Teva Pharmaceuticals Europe BV to bear their own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Medicines Agency (EMA). |
| --- | --- |

2)

Orders TEVA Pharma BV and Teva Pharmaceuticals Europe BV to bear their own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Medicines Agency (EMA).

| 3) | Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3)

Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 165, 9.6.2012.

1

---
# C_2014292EN.01003501.xml

| 1.9.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 292/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.9.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 292/35

---

Judgment of the General Court of 16 July 2014 — Germany v Commission

(Case T-295/12) (1)

1

((State aid - Animal carcass and slaughter waste disposal services - Maintaining epidemic reserve capacity - Decision declaring aid to be incompatible with the internal market - Advantage - Service of general economic interest - Compensation relating to a public service obligation - Effect on trade between Member States and distortion of competition - Need for aid - Subsidiarity - Duty to state reasons))

2014/C 292/42

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: T. Henze and J. Möller, Agents, assisted by T. Lübbig and M. Klasse, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Egerer and T. Maxian Rusche, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action for annulment of Commission Decision 2012/485/EU of 25 April 2012 on State aid SA.25051 (C 19/10) (ex NN 23/10) granted by Germany to the Zweckverband Tierkörperbeseitigung in Rhineland-Palatinate, Saarland, Rheingau-Taunus-Kreis and Landkreis Limburg-Weilburg (OJ 2012 L 236, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 273, 8.9.2012.

1

---
# C_2014093EN.01002202.xml

| 29.3.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 93/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 93/22

---

Judgment of the General Court of 12 February 2014 — Beco v Commission

(Case T-81/12) (1)

1

(Dumping - Imports of stainless steel fasteners originating in China and Taiwan - Application for recovery of charges levied - Second subparagraph of Article 11(8) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 - Legal certainty)

2014/C 93/37

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Beco Metallteile-Handels GmbH (Spaichingen, Germany) (represented by: T. Pfeiffer, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: H. van Vliet and T. Maxian Rusche, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2011) 9112 final of 13 December 2011, concerning an application for a refund of anti-dumping duties paid on imports of stainless steel fasteners originating in the People's Republic of China and Taiwan.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls Commission Decision C(2011) 9112 final of 13 December 2011, concerning an application for a refund of anti-dumping duties paid on imports of stainless steel fasteners originating in the People's Republic of China and Taiwan; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls Commission Decision C(2011) 9112 final of 13 December 2011, concerning an application for a refund of anti-dumping duties paid on imports of stainless steel fasteners originating in the People's Republic of China and Taiwan;

| 2. | Orders the European Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 118, 21.4.2012.

1

---
##### 



Exhibit
10.7
 CODE SECTION 409A AMENDMENT
TO THE
NORTEL NETWORKS U.S. DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 NOW, THEREFORE,
   6.6Method of Distribution Following Plan Termination.Generally, all Benefits
shall be paid in a lump sum cash payment following termination of the Plan as provided for
under Section 9.4. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if a lump sum payment will result in an
excess parachute payment to a Participant, as that term is defined in the Code, the
Committee, in its sole discretion, may determine that such Participants Account shall be
paid by some other method. Notwithstanding the foregoing, effective January 1, 2008, the
Plan will only permit an acceleration of the time and form of payment where the right to
the payment arises in accordance with the following:
 (a)    Within thirty (30) days before or twelve (12) months after a Change in Control,
provided that all distributions are made no later than twelve (12) months following such
termination of the Plan and further provided that all the Companys arrangements which are
substantially similar to the Plan are terminated so the Participant and all participants in
the similar arrangements are required to receive all amounts of compensation deferred under
the terminated arrangements within twelve (12) months of the termination of the
arrangements;
 (b)    Upon the Companys dissolution or with the approval of a bankruptcy court provided that
the amounts deferred under the Plan are included in the Participants gross income in the
latest of (i) the calendar year in which the Plan terminates; (ii) the calendar year in
which the amount is no longer subject to a substantial risk of forfeiture; or (iii) the
first calendar year in which the distribution is administratively practical; or




---



##### 



(c)    Upon the Companys termination of this and all other arrangements that would be
aggregated with this Plan pursuant to Treasury Regulations Section 1.409A-1(c) if the
Participant participated in such arrangements (Similar Arrangements), provided that (i)
the termination and liquidation does not occur proximate to a downturn in the financial
health of the Company, (ii) all termination distributions are made no earlier than twelve
(12) months and no later than twenty-four (24) months following such termination, and (iii)
the Company does not adopt any new arrangement that would be a Similar Arrangement for a
minimum of three (3) years following the date the Company takes all necessary action to
irrevocably terminate and liquidate the Agreement;
     th
 NORTEL NETWORKS
LIMITEDBy:
    /s/ Gordon A. DaviesTitle: Gordon A. Davies, Deputy General Counsel and Corporate Secretary By:
    /s/ Tracy S.J. Connelly McGilleyTitle: Tracy S.J. Connelly McGilley,

Assistant Secretary -2-
No. 96-5918.

#### Hatney *v.*United States.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
**EXHIBIT 23.1****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements of JacuzziBrands, Inc. listed below of our report dated November 15, 2005, with respect to theconsolidated financial statements of Rexair Holdings, LLC and Subsidiary, included in thisAnnual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended September 30, 2005. **•** Registration Statement No. 333-84461 on Form S-3, as amended, dated August 17,1999 and related Prospectus  **•** Registration Statement No. 333-111479 on Form S-4, as amended, dated January 9,2004 and related Prospectus  **•** Registration Statement No. 333-47101 on Form S-4, as amended, dated May 13, 1998and related Joint Proxy Statement/Prospectus  **•** Registration Statement No. 333-70537 on Form S-4, as amended, dated June 10, 1999and related Prospectus  **•** Registration Statement No. 333-112281 on Form S-8 dated February 17, 2004 andrelated Prospectus  **•** Registration Statement No. 333-30976 on Form S-8 dated February 23, 2000  **•** Registration Statement No. 333-56675 on Form S-8 dated June 12, 1998  **•** Registration Statement No. 333-56615 on Form S-8 dated June 11, 1998 /s/ Plante & Moran, PLLC
No. 96-5934.

#### Lucas *v.*United States.

C. A. 8th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER Appellate case name: Jane Doe v. Yum! Brands, Inc.; Pizza Hut, Inc.; Muy Pizza Houston, LLC Appellate case number s : 01

- 19

- 0084 4

- CV , 01

- 19

- 00845

- CV , 01

- 19

- 0084 6

- CV
Trial court case nu mber s : 2017

- 42257 , 2017

- 42257A , 2017

- 42257 B
Trial court: 1 57th District Court of Harris County
The clerk’s record was filed in all three appeals on December 9, 2019 and appellant ’ s b riefs were due February 7, 2020. A p pellant now assert s relevant d ocument s were not included in the clerk ’ s record and, o n February 3, 2020, filed requests in the trial court to supplement the clerk’s record

. Appellant has filed an un opposed motion to continue appellate briefing deadlines in all three appeals pending su pplemen tation of the appellate record in each

. Appel lant ’ s motion is granted. Appellant ’ s brief in each of the above

- referenced appeals is due 30 days from the filing of the supplemental clerk ’ s record. It is so ORDERED. Judge’s signature:

___________ /s/ Russell Lloyd

___________ Acting individually

Date: February 6 , 2020
No. 96-6912.

#### Velasco *v.*Horgan et al.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLANewsNews Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Small business, acquisition professionals share successes

By Dianne RyderDLA Public Affairs

                Fort Belvoir, Virginia  –              DLA Small Business ProgramsDLA AcquisitionSocioeconomic programs

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

Small Businessacquisitionsmall business goalssocioeconomic programs
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.38

                    SUMMARY OF 2004 SHORT-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN

Under the 2004 Short-Term Incentive Plan (the "Plan"), all employees of the
Company and its subsidiaries are entitled to a cash bonus based upon the
Company's consolidated net income for the 2004 calendar year. The amount of the
bonus will be a percentage, ranging from 35% to 150%, of a pre-determined target
bonus amount, based upon the level of net income achieved in relation to the
targeted level of net income for the year. The target bonus amount is a
percentage of the employee's base salary and is determined based upon the
employee's position. Employees must be employed by the Company at the time the
bonus is issued in 2005, in order to be eligible to receive payment.
# C_2015096EN.01001201.xml

| 23.3.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 96/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.3.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 96/12

---

Judgment of the General Court of 11 February 2015 — Fetim v OHIM — Solid Floor (Solidfloor The professional’s choice)

(Case T-395/12) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark Solidfloor The professional’s choice - Earlier national figurative mark SOLID floor, earlier trade name and domain name Solid Floor Ltd - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Similarity of the goods and services - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 096/14)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Fetim BV (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: L. Bakers, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: Ó. Mondéjar Ortuño, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Solid Floor Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Malynicz, Barrister)

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

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 15 June 2012 (Case R 884/2011-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Solid Floor Ltd and Fetim BV.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Fetim BV to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Fetim BV to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 355, 17.11.2012.

1

---
# C_2015198EN.01003001.xml

| 15.6.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 198/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.6.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 198/30

---

Judgment of the General Court of 30 April 2015 — VTZ and Others v Council

(Case T-432/12) (1)

1

((Dumping - Imports of certain seamless pipes and tubes, of iron or steel, originating in Russia and Ukraine - Definitive anti-dumping duty - Expiry review - Likelihood of recurrence of injury - European Union interest - Manifest error of assessment - Obligation to state reasons))

(2015/C 198/39)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Volžskij trubnyi zavod OAO (VTZ OAO) (Volzhksy, Russia); Taganrogskij metallurgičeskij zavod OAO (Tagmet OAO) (Taganrog, Russia); Sinarskij trubnyj zavod OAO (SinTZ OAO) (Kamensk-Uralsky, Russia); Severskij trubnyj zavod OAO (STZ OAO) (Polevskoy, Russia) (represented by: J.-F. Bellis, F. Di Gianni, G. Coppo and C. Van Hemelrijck, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: S. Boelaert, acting as Agent, assisted initially by G. Berrisch and A. Polcyn, and subsequently by A. Polcyn and D. Geradin, lawyers)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. França and A. Stobiecka-Kuik, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant:

Re:

Re:

APPLICATION for annulment of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 585/2012 of 26 June 2012 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain seamless pipes and tubes, of iron or steel, originating in Russia and Ukraine, following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009, and terminating the expiry review proceeding concerning imports of certain seamless pipes and tubes, of iron or steel, originating in Croatia (OJ 2012 L 174, p. 5), in so far as it applies to the applicants.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Volžskij trubnyi zavod OAO (VTZ OAO), Taganrogskij metallurgičeskij zavod OAO (Tagmet OAO), Sinarskij trubnyj zavod OAO (SinTZ OAO) and Severskij trubnyj zavod OAO (STZ OAO) to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Volžskij trubnyi zavod OAO (VTZ OAO), Taganrogskij metallurgičeskij zavod OAO (Tagmet OAO), Sinarskij trubnyj zavod OAO (SinTZ OAO) and Severskij trubnyj zavod OAO (STZ OAO) to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union;

| 3. | Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 366, 24.11.2012.

1

---
-80 -79 -78 -77 -76 -75 -74 -73

 37

 38

 39

 40

★ ▲

▲

▲

▲

★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 100

18 12 06 00

08/26

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 26 Aug 06

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.48 N 77.37 W Meters AGL

★

■

■ ■

■

★ ■ ■

■ ■

★

●

●

●

●

★

●

●

● ●