alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 15 (Wednesday, January 24, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 3107]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-980]


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

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the North Carolina 
Advisory Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, that a conference 
call of the North Carolina Advisory Committee will convene at 1 p.m. 
EST and adjourn at 3 p.m. EST on Monday, February 26, 2007. The purpose 
of the conference call is to discuss plans for the Committee's upcoming 
briefing to be held in April 2007 on religious freedom for prisoners 
and the restoration of their voting rights.
    This conference call is available to the public through the 
following call-in number: 866-743-9936. Any interested member of the 
public may call this number and listen to the meeting. Callers can 
expect to incur charges for calls not initiated using the supplied 
call-in number or over wireless lines and the Commission will not 
refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls 
using the call-in number over land-line connections. Persons with 
hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling 
the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-977-8339 and providing the Service 
with the conference call number.
    To ensure that the Commission secures an appropriate number of 
lines for the public, persons are asked to register by contacting Peter 
Minarik, Southern Regional Office, at 404-562-7000, by Monday, February 
19, 2007.
    The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the 
rules and regulations of the Commission.

    Dated at Washington, DC, January 19, 2007.
Ivy L. Davis,
Acting Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.
 [FR Doc. E7-980 Filed 1-23-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
Before the First Division,

June 14, 1944

No. 49492.

#### Protests 94434-K, etc., of Albert Burki et al. (Los Angeles, etc.).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
#### GENERAL CONTAINER SERVICE, INC., Appellant, v. WILLIAM H. McGEE & CO., et al., Appellees.

No. 98-3156.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

June 9, 1999.

Mark E. Buechele, Miami Shores, for appellant.

Butler Burnette Pappas and Gerald T. Albrecht and Yoniece M. Dixon (Tampa), for appellees.

Before JORGENSON, GODERICH, and GREEN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

General Container Service, Inc., appeals a final order dismissing with prejudice its claim against the broker for its coinsurance. For the following reasons, we reverse.

General container suffered loss as a result of Hurricane Andrew. It had two insurance policies: one provided by Continental Insurance and the other by Phoenix Assurance which was brokered by the ap-pellee, William H. McGee *&*Company. Neither policy settled General container’s claim. Continental denied coverage because it claimed that General container’s policy had been retroactively canceled. Phoenix denied coverage because it claimed that its policy required coinsurance.

Following an internal audit, Continental sued General container alleging additional premiums were due under the Continental policy. General Container filed a counterclaim for Continental’s denial of coverage. Sometime after, General Container amended its counterclaim to im-plead Phoenix and the broker, McGee, as third-party counter-defendants. In its amended counterclaim, General Container alleged a cause of action against McGee as an coinsurer on the Ploenix policy. The trial court found that McGee was not a party to the insurance contract between General Container and Ploenix. Consequently, the trial court dismissed General container’s claim against McGee, erroneously, with prejudice. This appeal follows.

The mere possibility that the plaintiff has a cause of action requires that leave to amend the pleadings be given, provided the privilege to amend has not been abused. See *Slavin v. McCann Plumbing Co.,*73 So.2d 902 (Fla.1954); *Central Fla. Invs. v. Charles Levin, Timeshares,*659 So.2d 492, 493 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); *Delia & Wilson, Inc. v. Wilson,*448 *571So.2d 621, 622 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); *Janko v. City of Hialeah,*212 So.2d 800, 800-01 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968). In this case, though General Container may be foreclosed from bringing an action against McGee as a coinsurer, it is possible that McGee could be liable to General Container in its role as a broker. See *Warehouse Foods, Inc. v. Corporate Risk Mngmt.,*530 So.2d 422 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); *Caplan v. La Chance,*219 So.2d 89 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969). Moreover, since General container has not amended its pleadings as against McGee, there has been no abuse of the privilege.

Reversed and remanded with directions to permit the pleading to be amended.
# C_2015363EN.01000301.xml

| 3.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 363/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.11.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 363/3

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 9 September 2015 — Lito Maieftiko Gynaikologiko kai Cheirourgiko Kentro AE v European Commission

(Case C-506/13 P) (1)

1

((Appeal - Contract granting Community financial assistance for a project in the field of medical collaboration - Commission decision to recover in part an advance payment made - Action for annulment - Inadmissibility))

(2015/C 363/03)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Lito Maieftiko Gynaikologiko kai Cheirourgiko Kentro AE (represented by: E. Tzannini, dikigoros)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: S. Lejeune, acting as Agent, and E. Petritsi, dikigoros)

Other party to the proceedings:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1) | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1)

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2) | Orders Lito Maieftiko Gynaikologiko kai Cheirourgiko Kentro AE to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2)

Orders Lito Maieftiko Gynaikologiko kai Cheirourgiko Kentro AE to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 344, 23.11.2013.

1

---
# C_2013225EN.01008603.xml

| 3.8.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 225/86 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.8.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 225/86

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 14 June 2013 — Carosi v Commission

(Case F-54/12) (1)

1

2013/C 225/200

Language of the case: French

The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 194, 30.6.2012, p. 28.

1

---
Amendment No. 1 to the 1997 Equity Participation Plan



 Exhibit 10.25 
 AMENDMENT NO. 1 
 TO 
 THE 1997 EQUITY PARTICIPATION PLAN 
 OF 
 IN-PATIENT CONSULTANTS MANAGEMENT, INC. 
 This
Amendment No. 1 (this “Amendment”) to The Equity Participation Plan of In-Patient Consultants Management, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“IPCM”), is effective as of April 29, 1998, with reference to the following:

 1. In-Patient Consultants Management, Inc., a California corporation (“IPCM California”), adopted the 1997 Equity Participation
Plan (the “Plan”), effective October 22, 1997, for the benefit of its eligible employees, consultants and directors. 
 2. The
Board of Directors of IPCM, successor by merger to IPCM California, desires to amend the Plan to increase the aggregate number of shares which may be issued upon exercise of options or rights or upon any such award under the Plan. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows: 
 1. As of the date hereof, Article II, Section 2.1(a) of the Plan shall be amended to read in its entirety as follows: 
  

	 	1.0.1	Shares Subject to Plan. 

 (a) The
shares of stock subject to Options, awards of Restricted Stock, Performance Awards, Dividend Equivalents, awards of Deferred Stock or Stock Payments shall be Common Stock, and initially shares of the Company’s Common Stock. The aggregate number
of such shares which may be issued upon exercise of such options or rights or upon any such awards under the Plan shall not exceed Three Million Two Hundred Fifty Thousand (3,250,000). The shares of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of such
options or rights or upon any such awards may be either previously authorized but unissued shares or treasury shares. 
 2. Except as amended
hereby, The 1997 Equity Participation Plan remains in full force and effect. 







 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Amendment this 29th day of April, 1998.

  

			
	In-Patient Consultants Management, Inc.,
	a Delaware corporation
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Adam D. Singer, M.D.

		
	Its:	 	 CEO
Exhibit 32.2

                            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 MILLENNIUM CAPITAL VENTURE HOLDINGS,
INC.(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending March 31, 2004, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Leonard Sternheim, President, Principal Financial Officer and
Principal Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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, as amended; and

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

/s/ Francis Mailhot
-------------------------------------
Francis Mailhot
President, Principal Financial Officer,
Principal Accounting Officer, Chairman
of the Board of Directors

March 16, 2005
### Nebraska Court of Appeals Memorandum Opinions NOT Selected for Posting to Court Website (r eleased the week prior to August 21, 2018 

### ) The following memorandum opinions were filed by the Nebraska Court of Appeals and can be viewed using SSCALES : A - 17 - 615 Prokop v. Ritnour A - 17 - 1093 Castonguay v. Vandenbosch A - 17 - 1246 Casaday v. Winterstein A - 17 - 1324 In re Interest of Hannah C. & Rayna C. The above - listed memorandum opinions c an be viewed online through the appellate court case search available by subscription through Nebra ska.gov: http://www.nebraska.gov/subscriber/ . Current subscribers to Nebraska.gov can search appellate court cases here: http s ://www.nebraska.gov/courts/s c ca les/ .
# C_2013079EN.01002001.xml

| 16.3.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 79/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.3.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 79/20

---

Action brought on 27 December 2012 — NIOC v Council

(Case T-578/12)

2013/C 79/36

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: National Iran Oil Co. (NIOC) (Tehran, Iran) (represented by: J.-M. Thouvenin, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 945/2012 of 15 October 2012, in so far as it concerns the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 945/2012 of 15 October 2012, in so far as it concerns the applicant;

| — | annul Council Decision 2012/635/CFSP of 15 October 2012, in so far as it concerns the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Council Decision 2012/635/CFSP of 15 October 2012, in so far as it concerns the applicant;

| — | declare that Council Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 of 23 March 2012 is inapplicable with regard to it; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that Council Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 of 23 March 2012 is inapplicable with regard to it;

| — | declare that Decision 2012/635/CFSP is inapplicable with regard to it; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that Decision 2012/635/CFSP is inapplicable with regard to it;

| — | order the Council to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Council to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on seven pleas in law which in essence are identical or similar to those relied on in Case T-577/12 NIOC and Others v Council.

NIOC and Others

Council

---
December 17, 1945

No. 50779.

#### Protest 94151-K of V. Casazza *&*Bro.

Motion of Government for rehearing granted.
# C_2013252EN.01004502.xml

| 31.8.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 252/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.8.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 252/45

---

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 19 June 2013 — BY v EASA

(Case F-8/12) (1)

1

(EASA staff - Member of the temporary staff - Dismissal for incompetence - Duty to have regard for the welfare of officials - External cause for professional difficulties - Psychological harassment - Illness - Damages)

2013/C 252/77

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: BY (Lasne, Belgium) (represented by: B.-H. Vincent, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) (represented by: F. Manuhutu, Agent and D. Waelbroeck and A. Duron, lawyers)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application to annul the decision to dismiss the applicant and the application for compensation for damage claimed to be suffered because of that dismissal and alleged harassment.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

| 1. | Orders the European Aviation Safety Agency to pay to BY the sum corresponding to nine months of net remuneration which he received prior to his dismissal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Orders the European Aviation Safety Agency to pay to BY the sum corresponding to nine months of net remuneration which he received prior to his dismissal;

| 2. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Orders the European Aviation Safety Agency to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by BY. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the European Aviation Safety Agency to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by BY.

---

(1)  OJ C 65, 3.3.2012, p.28.

1

---
# C_2013063EN.01001902.xml

| 2.3.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 63/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.3.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 63/19

---

Judgment of the General Court of 18 January 2013 — FunFactory v OHIM (Vibrator)

(Case T-137/12) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Application for a three-dimensional trade mark - Vibrator - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Obligation to state reasons - The first sentence of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 - Rights of the defence - The second sentence of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009)

2013/C 63/38

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: FunFactory GmbH (Brême, Germany) (represented by: K.-D. Franzen, laywer)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 19 January 2012 (Case R 1436/2011-4) concerning an application for registration of a three-dimensional sign representing a vibrator.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the application; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the application;

| 2. | Orders FunFactory GmbH to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders FunFactory GmbH to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 157, 2.6. 2012.

1

---
Exhibit 32.1

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

The undersigned, Sacha H. Spindler, CEO and Chairman of Pluris Energy Group Inc., hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
| (1) | the annual report on Form 10-KSB of Pluris Energy Group Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2006 (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 Pluris Energy Group Inc. |
|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Dated:  April 17, 2007

/s/ Sacha H. Spindler

Sacha H. Spindler

Chief Executive Officer and Chairman

(Principal Executive Officer)

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Pluris Energy Group Inc. and will be retained by Pluris Energy Group Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

 

CW1104716.1
#### Robert V. WESTMORELAND, et ux. v. LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HOSPITALS, et al.

No. 99-651

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.

June 1, 1999.

Tracy L. Short, AGA, Lake Charles, for Applicant/Defendant.

Cabra & Leach, Edwin Cabra, Leesville, Joel Phillip Loeffelholz, New Orleans, *The*Gray Law Firm, Anna R. Gray, Lake Charles, for Respondents.

BEFORE: SAUNDERS, WOODARD, and SULLIVAN, Judges.

*WRIT DENIED:*There is no error in the trial court’s ruling. Although we are aware of this court’s opinion in *Myers v. Ivey,*93-1166 (La.App. 3 Cir. 4/6/94); 635 So.2d 632, we choose not to follow *Myers, supra.*The plaintiff in this case is not attempting to circumvent the exclusive jurisdiction of the civil service commission as he has pursued his remedies with the commission. Although the allegedly tortious conduct of defendants is connected to the disciplinary action taken against plaintiff, the instant suit seeks damages for the tort of defamation which is not within the jurisdiction of the civil service commission.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1664 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1664

To amend titles 28 and 10, United States Code, to allow for certiorari 
 review of certain cases denied relief or review by the United States 
                 Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 6, 2011

Mrs. Feinstein introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend titles 28 and 10, United States Code, to allow for certiorari 
 review of certain cases denied relief or review by the United States 
                 Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Equal Justice for Our Military Act 
of 2011''.

SEC. 2. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED 
              FORCES.

    (a) In General.--Section 1259 of title 28, United States Code, is 
amended--
            (1) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``or denied'' after 
        ``granted''; and
            (2) in paragraph (4), by inserting ``or denied'' after 
        ``granted''.
    (b) Technical and Conforming Amendments.--
            (1) Title 10.--Section 867a(a) of title 10, United States 
        Code, is amended by striking ``The Supreme Court may not review 
        by a writ of certiorari under this section any action of the 
        Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces in refusing to grant a 
        petition for review.''.
            (2) Time for application for writ of certiorari.--Section 
        2101(g) of title 28, United States Code, is amended to read as 
        follows:
    ``(g) The time for application for a writ of certiorari to review a 
decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, or 
the decision of a Court of Criminal Appeals that the United States 
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces refuses to grant a petition to 
review, shall be as prescribed by rules of the Supreme Court.''.

SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    (a) In General.--Subject to subsection (b), the amendments made by 
this Act shall take effect upon the expiration of the 180-day period 
beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act and shall apply to 
any petition granted or denied by the United States Court of Appeals 
for the Armed Forces on or after that effective date.
    (b) Authority To Prescribe Rules.--The authority of the Supreme 
Court to prescribe rules to carry out section 2101(g) of title 28, 
United States Code, as amended by section 2(b)(2) of this Act, shall 
take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 32.1


                           SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION


     In connection  with the Quarterly  Report of Las Palmas Mobile Estates (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter  ending  March 31, 2008 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Diana L.  Hassan,  President  of the  Company,  certify,  pursuant  to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of
2002, that, to my knowledge:

     (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.


Date: May 13, 2008



                                        By: /s/ DIANA L. HASSAN
                                            ___________________________
                                                Diana L. Hassan
                                                President