alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2014052EN.01003501.xml

| 22.2.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 52/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.2.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 52/35

---

Judgment of the General Court of 16 January 2014 — Message Management v OHIM — Absacker (ABSACKER of Germany)

(Case T-304/12) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark ABSACKER of Germany - Earlier national figurative mark ABSACKER - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2014/C 52/64

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Message Management GmbH (Wiesbaden, Germany) (represented by: C. Konle, lawyer)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Absacker GmbH (Cologne, Germany)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 21 March 2012 (case R 1028/2011-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Absacker GmbH and Message Management GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Message Management GmbH to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Message Management GmbH to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 273, 8.9.2012.

1

---
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 Quarterly Report of Iowa Telecommunications Services, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2009 (the Report), I, Craig A. Knock, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, created by 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), as applicable, 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 results of operations of the Company.



|                     |  |                                                                                                                          
|-------------------- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: April 30, 2009 |  | /s/ Craig A. Knock                                                                                                       
|                     |  | Craig A. Knock                                                                                                           
|                     |  | Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer Principal Accounting Officer Iowa Telecommunications Services, Inc.



40
#### S. W. Shattuck, Jr., *et al.,*v. A. J. Weaver.

No. 15,922.

*Homestead*— Temporary *Absence.*The agreed facts held not to show a loss of the homestead right.

Error from Sédgwick district court; Thomas C. Wilson, judge.

Opinion filed April 10, 1909.

Affirmed.

*S. W. Shattuck, jr.,*for the plaintiffs in error; *David M. Dale, of*counsel.

*Rodolph Hatfield,*for the defendant in error.

*Per Curiam:*

That the plaintiff constituted the family of his deceased wife is settled by *Weaver v. Bank,*76 Kan. 540, overruling *Ellinger v. Thomas,*64 Kan. 180. (See, also, *Cross v. Benson,*68 Kan. 495.)

That temporary absence will not defeat the homestead right is settled by cases too numerous to need citation. That during the temporary absence of the owner premises may be rented without destroying their homestead character has been settled ever since the decision in *Hixon v. George,*18 Kan. 253. (See, also, *National Bank v. Warner,*22 Kan. 537; *Garlinghouse v. Mulvane,*40 Kan. 428, 431; *Shirack v. Shirack,*44 Kan. 653, 656; *Deering v. Beard,*48 Kan. 16, 19; *Pitney v. Eldridge,*58 Kan. 215; *Upton v. Coxen,*60 Kan. 1; *Bebb v. Crowe,*39 Kan. 342; *Hoffman v. Hill,*47 Kan. 611.) These decisions, and particularly *Deering v. Beard, Pitney v. Eldridge*and *Upton v. Coxen,*dispose of the arguments relating to present right of possession and two homesteads in one tract. Besides, the creditor has.no license to claim a homestead for the tenant in this case.

The facts being agreed to, burden of proof is not material. The' question is purely one of law — what *83shall the judgment be? The parties stipulated how the agreed statemént .of facts should be interpreted:

> “The said plaintiff has never abandoned or relinquished his residence upon said lots on said Mona avenue, unless by reason or by virtue of the facts herein-before set forth.”

The agreed facts show a removal for a temporary purpose. They do not include an intention not- to return.

The judgment of the district court is affirmed.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v *1036Patrick Guiteau, Appellant.

[614 NYS2d 960]

—Judgment unanimously reversed on the law and new trial granted. Memorandum: In its instructions to the jury on reasonable doubt, County Court incorrectly used the phrases "reasonably certain” and "reasonable degree of certainty” when defining the degree of proof to which the People must be held. As we have previously held, that language effectively reduces the People’s burden of proof and thereby deprives defendant of a fair trial *(People v Sneed,*193 AD2d 1139, *Iv denied*82 NY2d 759). Reversal is required, therefore, and a new trial is granted.

The verdict is not against the weight of the evidence *(see, People v Bleakley,*69 NY2d 490, 495). (Appeal from Judgment of Niagara County Court, Hannigan, J.—Assault, 1st Degree.) Present—Green, J. P., Pine, Balio, Fallon and Doerr, JJ.
#### Lola COHEN, as Executrix of the Estate of Morris Cohen, Deceased, Appellant, v. TEAK HOUSE, INC., a Florida Corporation, d/b/a Pekin Restaurant & Lounge, Appellee.

No. 76-1211.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

July 19, 1977.

Katz & Breitner, Coral Gables, for appellant.

A. M. Schwitalla and Jose M. Quignon, Jr., Miami, for appellee.

Before HENDRY, C. J., and PEARSON and BARKDULL, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff urges in his appeal from a summary final judgment that the trial court improperly applied the principle set forth in *Carol Management Corporation v. Maxwell Company,*156 So.2d 773 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963); and *Edelman v. Kolker,*194 So.2d 683 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967). Error has not been shown. See *Best v. Barnette,*130 So.2d 90 (Fla. 2d DCA 1961).

Affirmed.
No. 99-6668.

#### Provenzano *v.*Moore, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections.

Sup. Ct. Fla. In light of the recent amendments to § 922.10 of the Florida Statutes (providing that capital prisoners will be executed by lethal injection unless they affirmatively elect execution by electrocution), and the Florida Supreme Court’s recent conclusion that those amendments do not violate Art. X, § 9, of the Florida Constitution, *Sims*v. *State,*754 So. 2d 657 (2000), certiorari denied.
No. 40558.

#### Protest 957683-G of Hoyt Shepston & Sciaroni (San Francisco).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

Following the principle enunciated in *Ramallah*v. *United States*(T. D. 47681) the table covers in question were held dutiable at 40 percent under paragraph 923 as claimed.
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C Section 1350 as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906Of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

        Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of    the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned officers of Minrad    International, Inc. (the "Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's    knowledge, that:

        The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal period ended March 31,    2005 (the Form 10-QSB) of the Company fully complies with the requirement of    section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the    information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all material    respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

| Dated: May 13, 2005 | /s/    William H. Burns, Jr.                                             |
|---------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                | William H. Burns, Jr., President & CEO     (chief executive officer) |
|                |                                                                     |
|                |                                                                     |
|                | /s/    Richard Tamulski                                                  |
| Dated: May 13, 2005 | Richard Tamulski, Vice President of Finance    (chief financial officer) |
#### S. H. Pomerance Co., Inc. *v.*United States

No. 7788.

Entry No. 719508.

(Decided January 30, 1950)

*Edward K. Kennedy*for the plaintiff.

*David N. Edelstein,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Lawrence, Judge:

It has been agreed between the parties hereto that the issues herein relating to the merchandise the subject of this appeal are the same in all material respects as those decided in *United States*v. *Gothic Watch Co.,*23 Cust. Ct. 235, Reap. Dec. 7712, affirming the judgment in *Gothic Watch Co.*v. *United States,*19 Cust. Ct. 309, Reap. Dec. 7438, and that the record in Reap. Dec. 7712, *supra,*may be incorporated herein.

Upon the agreed facts, I find that the attempted appraisement embodied in the second return of value by the appraiser of the merchandise covered by this appeal was illegal, null, and void, and that the appraiser’s original return of value, as reported by him to the collector of customs, constituted his appraisal of the merchandise pursuant to section 500 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U. S. C. § 1500), and was final and conclusive in the absence of any appeal pursuant to section 501 of said act (19 U. S. C. § 1501).

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2021 

To nullify certain regulations regarding the mandatory replacement of certain 

traffic signs, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 16, 2011 

Mr. TOOMEY introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

A BILL 

To nullify certain regulations regarding the mandatory 

replacement of certain traffic signs, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Stopping Intrusive 

5 Government Now Act of 2011’’ or the ‘‘SIGN Act of 

6 2011’’. 

7 SEC. 2. ELIMINATION OF FEDERAL MANDATES FOR TRAF8 FIC SIGN RETROREFLECTIVITY. 

9 (a) FINDING.—Congress finds that it is the responsi10 bility of State and local governments to determine whether 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2021 IS

1 traffic signs of the State and local governments should 

2 provide necessary levels of retroreflectivity. 

3 (b) PROHIBITION ON STANDARD.—The Secretary of 

4 Transportation (referred to in this Act as the ‘‘Sec5 retary’’) shall not promulgate, implement, or enforce a 

6 minimum retroreflectivity level standard for a traffic con7 trol device that is applicable to a State or local govern8 ment. 

9 (c) MODIFICATION OF MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAF10 FIC CONTROL DEVICES FOR STREETS AND HIGHWAYS.— 

11 The Secretary shall modify the Manual on Uniform Traf12 fic Control Devices for Streets and Highways, 2009 Edi13 tion (incorporated by reference in part 655 of title 23, 

14 Code of Federal Regulations (as in effect on the date of 

15 enactment of this Act)), to eliminate— 

16 (1) the minimum retroreflectivity level stand17 ards for traffic control devices contained in section 

18 2A.08 of that Manual; and 

19 (2) the schedule for the implementation of the 

20 standards contained in table I–2 of the Manual. 

21 (d) REPEAL.—Section 406 of the Department of 

22 Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 

23 1993 (Public Law 102–388; 106 Stat. 1564) is amended 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 2021 IS

1 by striking ‘‘to include—’’ and all that follows through 

2 ‘‘(b) a standard’’ and inserting ‘‘to include a standard’’. 

Æ 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
# C_2014431EN.01001601.xml

| 1.12.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 431/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.12.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 431/16

---

Order of the President of the Court of 24 September 2014 — European Commission v Republic of Cyprus

(Case C-386/13) (1)

1

(2014/C 431/23)

Language of the case: Greek

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

---

(1)  OJ C 260, 7.9.2013.

1

---
<PAGE>


                                                                   Exhibit 99.2


                            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 Quarterly Report of Atlas-Energy for Nineties-Public #7
Ltd. (the "Partnership") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2002 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Nancy J. McGurk, Chief Financial Officer of the Managing General
Partner, 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; and

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




/s/ Nancy J. McGurk


Nancy J. McGurk
Chief Financial Officer of the Managing General Partner
November 12, 2002
**Exhibit
      23.2**








**Consent
      of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**





Electronic
      Clearing House, Inc.


Camarillo,
      California





We
      hereby
      consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
      Form
      S-8 (File Nos. 333-30347 and 333-103396) and on Form S-3 (File No. 333-110297)
      of our reports dated December 14, 2006, relating to the consolidated financial
      statements, the effectiveness of Electronic Clearing House, Inc.’s internal
      control over financial reporting, and schedule of Electronic Clearing House,
      Inc. appearing in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
      September 30, 2006.





Signature


BDO
      Seidman, LLP


Los
      Angeles, California


December
      14, 2006
c51236_ex4-6.htm -- Converted by SEC Publisher, created by BCL Technologies Inc., for SEC Filing






EXHIBIT 4.6 


 INTEGRAL VISION, INC.

10% Secured Working Capital Class 2 Note 


 Note Number


 October 10, 2007 Amendment (to be attached to original notes) 


	Original Note : dated	Payee:       , in the amount of $





     The above referenced note currently shares an undivided interest in the specified orders securing these notes with other Class 2 notes which Integral Vision, Inc. (“Integral’) will issue (or
has issued) in the aggregate amount of $2,500,000.00.


     This amendment hereby modifies this term to as follows: The above referenced notes will share an undivided interest in the specified orders securing these notes with other Class 2 notes which Integral
will issue (or has issued) in the aggregate amount of $3,122,000.00.


     From this date forward, the specified orders securing the above referenced notes shall be as follows:


     
All sums received by Integral in payment for orders received by Integral after October 10, 2007
for flat panel display inspection equipment (excluding funds necessary to pay vendors for parts, materials, or contract services to build said inspection systems ordered [with the total of these excluded amounts limited to no more than 50% of the
gross order amount]) and also excluding funds received by Integral for orders to modify or upgrade flat panel inspection equipment previously ordered from Integral and excluding sums received by Integral which Integral is obligated to pay as
commissions to agents on said inspection system orders.


     The maturity date for the above referenced note is hereby extended from October 15, 2007 to December 14, 2007.


     This amendment will only be effective if all other currently outstanding Class 2 Note Holders amend their notes to the same terms that are in this amendment (as of October 9, 2007 there are $2,564,000
Class 2 Notes outstanding [principal amount]).







	 	 	 
	NOTEHOLDER	 	INTEGRAL VISION, INC.;
	 	 	 
	 

  	 
  	
By _____________________________
  
	
By _____________________________
  	 
  	
Name: Mark R. Doede
  
	 

  	 
  	
Title: President
  
	 

  
	
Its _____________________________
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

# Recruiting the next generation of warfighter support at DLA Aviation at Ogden

By Leon Moore, Public Affairs SpecialistDLA Aviation Public Affairs Office

                RICHMOND, Va.  –              
Defense Logistics Agency Aviation at Ogden Chief of Staff Andrew Bingham was joined by Joe Grant, division chief for DLA Aviation at Ogden’s Storage and Distribution Division and Management Assistant Katie Wolfe, manning the DLA booth during a career fair held in Ogden, Utah, Jan. 24.

Bingham said the trio answered questions and shared information about employment opportunities available at DLA Aviation at Ogden with the more than 800 people who attended the fair.

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

DLA AviationDLA Aviation at OgdenPeople and Culture
David P Knutson/R6/USDAFS 

01/08/2009 04:45 PM To 

John T Wells/R6/USDAFS@FSNOTES 

cc 

Joel T King/R6/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Janet E Joyer/R6/USDAFS@FSNOTES 

bcc 

Subject 

Re: Butcherknife/Slate Heritage Effects 

 

Hi John. Janet & I discussed the level of info that we generally include 

in these types of NEPA documents and we agreed that there is no need to 

provide the level of detail embeded in your example. I have included the 

portion that would be appropriate for the "Effects" section- Effects of 

the Proposed Action: No previously documented significant heritage sites 

would be affected by the implementation of this project. In terms of 

section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and the 36 

CFR Part 800 regulations, the Butcherknife/Slate Fuels Reduction Project 

will be a “no historic properties” undertaking. 

This statement, and the Project Review Form (Attachment "C"), are all that 

we need to provide for this document. Essentially, this information 

reports that we are in compliance with the Section 106 requirements 

without disclosing other FOIA-exempt details. 

If you have questions or concerns let Janet or me know and we'll work 

through it with you. 

 

 

David Knutson 

Archaeological Technician 

Rogue River-Siskiyou N.F. 

Medford BLM, Ashland RA 

e-mail: dknutson@fs.fed.us 

Office: (541) 618-2078 

* It'll Shine When it Shines * 

John T Wells/R6/USDAFS 

01/08/2009 03:52 PM 

To 

David P Knutson/R6/USDAFS@FSNOTES 

cc 

Joel T King/R6/USDAFS@FSNOTES 

Subject 

Butcherknife/Slate Heritage Effects 

 

 

Hi Dave, 

Joel and I are finalizing the EA for this project. The only item in my 

possession for the cultural review of this project is Form C. There is 

precious little information available on this form that is useful in an EA 
narrative. Therefore, I need your help. 

What it is needed for the Effects section of the EA is a small bit of 

narrative that explains (at minimum): the dates of any field surveys 

undertaken, the "results" of those surveys (without spatial reference, of 

course, but with enough specificity for the reader to know broadly what 

was "found") and the impacts expected from implementing the project. As I 

understand the situation, no impacts are expected -- but that forecast 

needs to be overtly stated (perhaps w/some explanation of why, should 

there be a cultural artifact in proximity to project actions). I have 

attached here the narrative (modified somewhat already) that was included 

in the East IV EA. 

If you could provide narrative appropriate for this project, where the 

yellow highlights occur, I'd appreciate it! 

Thanx! 

John 

Environmental Coordinator 

Wild Rivers Ranger District 

Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest 

26568 Redwood Highway 

Cave Junction, OR 97523 

Email: jtwells@fs.fed.us 

Voice: 541.592.4051 or 541.471.6500 

Fax: 541.592.4010 

Cell: 541.951.5932
No. 99-1111.

#### Semple, Administrator of the Estate of Semple, Deceased, et al. *v.*City of Moundsville.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.