alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2020287EN.01004401.xml

| 31.8.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 287/44 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.8.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 287/44

---

Action brought on 17 July 2020 — SBG v EUIPO — VF International (GEØGRAPHICAL NØRWAY)

(Case T-458/20)

(2020/C 287/64)

Language in which the application was lodged: French

Parties

Applicant: Super Brand Licencing (SBG) (Villeurbanne, France) (represented by: T. de Haan and A. Sion, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: VF International Sagl (Stabio, Switzerland)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the word mark GEØGRAPHICAL NØRWAY — International registration designating the European Union No 933 206

Procedure before EUIPO: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 April 2020 in Case R 1178/2019-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO and the intervener to pay the costs, including the costs incurred by the applicant in respect of the proceedings before the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO and the intervener to pay the costs, including the costs incurred by the applicant in respect of the proceedings before the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO.

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council, by reason of the incorrect assessment of the existence of bad faith at the time when the application for the mark was filed. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council, by reason of the incorrect assessment of the existence of bad faith at the time when the application for the mark was filed.

---
House Calendar No. 141

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 388

[Report No. 103–436]

RESOLUTION

Waiving points of order against the conference reposes. separation incentive payments; and for other pur- porary authority to agencies relating to voluntary restrictions on employee training; to provide tem- title 5, United States Code, to eliminate certain port to accompany the bill (H.R. 3345) to amend

MARCH 16, 1994

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
IV

House Calendar No. 141

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 388

[Report No. 103–436]

Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the

bill (H.R. 3345) to amend title 5, United States Code, to eliminate

certain restrictions on employee training; to provide temporary authority

to agencies relating to voluntary separation incentive payments; and

for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 16, 1994

Mr. MOAKLEY, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

RESOLUTION

Waiving points of order against the conference report to

accompany the bill (H.R. 3345) to amend title 5, United

States Code, to eliminate certain restrictions on employee

training; to provide temporary authority to agencies relating to voluntary separation incentive payments; and

for other purposes.

1 Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it

2 shall be in order to consider the conference report to ac3 company the bill (H.R. 3345) to amend title 5, United
2

HRES 388 RH

1 States Code, to eliminate certain restrictions on employee

2 training; to provide temporary authority to agencies relat3 ing to voluntary separation incentive payments; and for

4 other purposes. All points of order against the conference

5 report and against its consideration are waived. The con6 ference report shall be considered as read.
#### ZADOCK WHALEY *vs.*JOHN WHALEY.

In the action for use and occupation, title to the premises may be tried.

On proof of title in plaintiff and possession by defendant, the law implies a contract to pay rent.

Case for use and occupation. Pleas, non assumpsit; payment; discount, and the act of limitations.

*Hitffngton*for plaintiff

stated the claim to be for one half the rents of a farm since January 1828. The farm in question was owned by John Whaley, sen’r., who devised it to his wife for life, with remainder in fee to his two sons, James and Daniel. His widow had possession until 1828, when she died and defendant took possession, having administered on her estate. Daniel Whaley died in the life time of his mother, leaving an only son the plaintiff

Objection was made to the plaintiff being permitted to give evidence of his *title*to the premises.

*Johnson*.

Title cannot be tried in this action. Plaintiff can recover only on the ground of contract.

*Bates*.

No contract or promise can be implied from an adverse holding. If possession be adverse or tortious, this action will not lie. *Woodfall*349-50-52; 1 *Esp. JV. P.*57; 6 *Johns.*48; *2 Saund. PI. ¿y Ev.*891; *2 II. lilac.*321.

*Frame*.

The tort may be waived, and plaintiff may recover on an implied contract. 3 *Stark. Ev.*1516-7. If he show title the law implies a promise, and he may recover against a trespasser. Adverse possession, unless it give a title, is no bar to the action. *Woodfall*350; *Comp.*246. Here is no adverse possession. Mrs. Whaley had possession for thirty years, and the possession of a particular tenant for life is the possession of the remainder man.

*Frame*and *Huffington*for plaintiff

*Johnson*and *Bates*for defendant.

*By the Court.*

The plaintiff is at liberty to proceed and show his title, and the defendant to controvert it by proof of title in himself. 2 *Saund. Pl. & Ev.*893-4; *Woodfall*351. The law will infer a contract, when title is established and occupation shown.

The plaintiff eventually had a verdict.
Exhibit 23.2Consent of Cawley, Gillespie & Associates, Inc.     As independent petroleum engineers, we hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in theregistration statements (No. 33-57348, No. 333-34617, No. 333-66938 and No. 333-117533) on FormsS-8 of Parallel Petroleum Corporation of information from our reserves report dated January 29,2007 and all references to our firm included in or made a part of the annual report on Form 10-K/Aof Parallel Petroleum Corporation for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006./s/ Cawley, Gillespie & Associates, Inc.Ft. Worth, Texas
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

MID

- WEST TEXTILE CO.,

Appellant,

v.

GUADALUPE FIERRO,

Appellee. §

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 13

- 00093

- CV

Appeal from the

210 th Judicial District Court

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC# 2011

- DCV05558)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the Appellant’s motion to dismiss appeal and

concludes the motion should be granted and the appeal should be dismissed, in accordance with

the opinion of this Court. We therefore dismiss the appeal.

It is further ordered that each party bear their own costs. This decision shall be certified

below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 15TH DAY OF MAY, 2013.

YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rivera, and Rodriguez, JJ.
#### Linda Low, Appellant, v New York City Transit Authority, Respondent.

[655 NYS2d 983]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Goldstein, J.), entered April 11, 1996, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff alleged that she slipped and fell in a puddle of water in the defendant’s subway car. There is no evidence in the record that the defendant had actual notice of the puddle. To constitute constructive notice, a defect must be visible and apparent and it must exist for a sufficient length of time prior to the accident to permit the defendant’s employees to discover and remedy it *(see, Gordon v American Museum of Natural History,*67 NY2d 836, 837; *Negri v Stop & Shop,*65 NY2d 625, 626). The record contains no evidence that anyone, including the plaintiff, observed the puddle prior to the accident. Moreover, the weather records submitted by the defendant indicated that it was still raining at the time of the occurrence and accordingly that the puddle could have just arisen from water dripping from the clothing or umbrellas of other passengers who had boarded the car immediately prior to the plaintiff.

The plaintiffs other contentions are without merit. Bracken, J. P., O’Brien, Santucci, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.
#### George CUMBIE and Mildred Cumbie, his wife, Appellants, v. The HOSPITAL AND WELFARE BOARD OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, Appellee.

No. 69-476.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

July 2, 1970.

Appeal dismissed.
Exhibit 32.2  CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. §1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  In connection with the
Annual Report of Endocardial Solutions, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, J. Robert Paulson, Jr., Chief
Financial 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/ J. Robert Paulson,
  Jr.J. Robert Paulson, Jr.Chief Financial OfficerMarch 15, 2004
#### In re ESTATE of Clifton E. WILSON, Deceased.

No. 44499.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Oct. 18, 1973.

Certiorari dismissed. 282 So.2d 680.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 410 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 410

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                        April 28, 1994.
    Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker 
may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule XXIII, declare the House resolved into the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 3221) to provide for the adjudication of certain claims against the 
Government of Iraq. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. 
General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour 
equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of 
the Committee on Foreign Affairs. After general debate the bill shall be 
considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. It shall be in order to 
consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute 
rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on 
Foreign Affairs now printed in the bill. Each section of the committee amendment 
in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. Points of order 
against the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute for failure to 
comply with clause 7 of rule XVI are waived. No amendment to the committee 
amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order unless printed in the 
portion of the Congressional Record designated for that purpose in clause 6 of 
rule XXIII before the beginning of consideration of the bill. The amendment 
caused to be printed in the Record by Representative Bereuter of Nebraska 
(relating to certain commercial claims) may amend portions of the bill not yet 
read for amendment. After disposition of all other amendments to the committee 
amendment in the nature of a substitute, it shall be in order to consider an 
amendment caused to be printed in the Record by Representative Bonior of 
Michigan (relating to humanitarian assistance) and an amendment caused to be 
printed in the Record by Representative Solomon of New York (relating to war 
crimes) in the order stated. Points of order against each of those amendments 
for failure to comply with clause 7 of rule XVI are waived. After disposition of 
those amendments, no further amendment to the committee amendment in the nature 
of a substitute shall be in order. At the conclusion of consideration of the 
bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House 
with such amendments as may have been adopted. Any Member may demand a separate 
vote in the House on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the 
bill or to the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute. The previous 
question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to 
final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or 
without instructions.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
#### J. F. McCOY, Petitioner, v. FLORIDA-GEORGIA TRACTOR COMPANY, INC., etc., Respondent.

No. 42838.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Nov. 17, 1972.

Certiorari denied. 265 So.2d 710.

ERVIN, Acting C. J., and CARLTON, ADKINS, BOYD and McCAIN, JJ., concur.
# C_2022482EN.01000201.xml

| 19.12.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 482/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.12.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 482/2

---

Order of the Court of 3 November 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Judiciaire de Perpignan — France) — RV v Institut national de la statistique et des études économiques (INSEE) and Others

(Case C-32/21) (1)

(Removal from the register)

(2022/C 482/02)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal Judiciaire de Perpignan

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: RV

Defendants: Institut national de la statistique et des études économiques (INSEE), Préfet des Pyrénées-Orientales, Commune de Serralongue

Operative part of the order

Case C-32/21 is removed from the Court Register.

---

(1)  Filing date: 19.1.2021.

---
October 24, 2013 

Kevin D. Schlemmer, Chief 

Essential Air Service & Domestic Analysis Division 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Ave. SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

RE: Order 2013-10-3 

Servicing Kalaupapa, Hawaii 

Dear Mr. Schlemmer; 

As a resident of the Kalaupapa community, I just want to say that we love this company, Makani Kai Air. 

Please grant them the Essential Air Service contract for another year! They are friendly, professional and 

treat us like they really enjoy servicing our community. They do great things like arriving on time, 

providing a ramp for the patients, greeting us all with a warm "aloha", taking care of our luggage, 

contacting us when bad weather necessitates the cancelation or rescheduling flights and the list goes 

on and on. The planes are always clean as is their main terminal in Honolulu. 

After years of less than stellar service with disagreeable management from other air carriers, it is a great 

joy to have Makani Kai a part of our community. 

I wholeheartedly support reissuing of the Essential Air Service contract to Makani Kai Air for servicing 

Kalauapapa. 

Sincerely, 

Jane Claire Cappelle
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 48 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 48

Providing amounts from the contingent fund of the House for expenses of 
 investigations and studies by the Committee on Ways and Means in the 
            first session of the One Hundred Third Congress.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 26, 1993

Mr. Rostenkowski submitted the following resolution; which was referred 
                to the Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Providing amounts from the contingent fund of the House for expenses of 
 investigations and studies by the Committee on Ways and Means in the 
            first session of the One Hundred Third Congress.

    Resolved, That (a) for expenses of investigations and studies by 
the Committee on Ways and Means (hereinafter in this resolution 
referred to as the ``Committee''), including expenses for procurement 
of consultant services under section 202(i) of the Legislative 
Reorganization Act of 1946, there shall be paid out of the contingent 
fund of the House not more than $4,992,000.
    (b) Not more than $10,000 of the amount specified in subsection (a) 
may be used for consultant services referred to in such subsection.
    Sec. 2. Payments under this resolution shall be made on vouchers 
authorized by the Committee, signed by the Chairman of the Committee, 
and approved by the Committee on House Administration.
    Sec. 3. Amounts shall be available under this resolution for 
investigations and studies carried out during the period beginning at 
noon on January 3, 1993, and ending immediately before noon on January 
3, 1994.
    Sec. 4. Amounts made available under this resolution shall be 
expended in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Committee on 
House Administration.

                                 <all>
```
# C_2020247EN.01002901.xml

| 27.7.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 247/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.7.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 247/29

---

Action brought on 22 May 2020 — Nosio v EUIPO — Tros del Beto (ACCUSÌ)

(Case T-300/20)

(2020/C 247/39)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Nosio SpA (Mezzocorona, Italy) (represented by: J. Graffer, G. Rubino, A. Ottolini, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Tros del Beto, SLU (Marçà, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union word mark ACCUSÌ — Application for registration No 16 014 921

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 13 March 2020 in Case R 871/2019-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | declare the signs dissimilar; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare the signs dissimilar;

| — | admit the opposed application to registration. |
| --- | --- |

—

admit the opposed application to registration.

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
#### Elias LESTER and Resolute Insurance Company, a Rhode Island corporation, Petitioners, v. STATE of Florida for the Use and Benefit of DADE COUNTY, Respondent.

No. 43996.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Sept. 28, 1973.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 15, 1973.

Certiorari denied. 279 So.2d 103.

CARLTON, C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
# C_2022051EN.01001402.xml

| 31.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 51/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/14

---

Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 6 October 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Hamburg — Germany) — TUIfly GmbH v FI, RE

(Case C-253/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court - Air transport - Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 - Article 5 - Article 7 - Article 8(3) - Denied boarding, cancellation or long delay of a flight - Compensation and assistance to passengers - Concept of ‘cancellation’ - Diversion of a flight to an airport not serving the same town, city or region as that for which the booking was made - Re-routing of passengers by coach)

(2022/C 51/18)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landgericht Hamburg

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: TUIfly GmbH

Respondents: FI, RE

Operative part of the order

Article 5(1)(c), Article 7(1) and Article 8(3) of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91, must be interpreted as meaning that a diverted flight landing at an airport which is not that for which the booking was made and which does not serve the same town, city or region is capable of conferring on the passenger a right to compensation for cancellation of a flight.

---

(1)  OJ C 289, 19.7.2021.

---
# C_2020215EN.01005702.xml

| 29.6.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 215/57 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.6.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 215/57

---

Action brought on 5 May 2020 — Kondyterska korporatsiia ‘Roshen’ v EUIPO — Krasnyj Octyabr (Representation of a lobster)

(Case T-254/20)

(2020/C 215/66)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Dochirnie pidpryiemstvo Kondyterska korporatsiia ‘Roshen’ (Kiev, Ukraine) (represented by: I. Lukauskienė, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Krasnyj Octyabr (Moscow, Russia)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark (Representation of a lobster) — European Union trade mark No 15 948 185

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 March 2020 in Case R 1916/2019-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

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

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

| — | Misapplication of the right to be heard in conjunction with Articles 94(1) and 95(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Misapplication of the right to be heard in conjunction with Articles 94(1) and 95(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Misapplication of Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Misapplication of Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Misapplication of Article 59(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Misapplication of Article 59(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Misapplication of Article 59(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Misapplication of Article 59(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Misapplication of Article 59(3) in conjunction with Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Misapplication of Article 59(3) in conjunction with Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---