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

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Eye Institute Special Emphasis Panel; NEI Audacious Goals Initiative RFA on Translation-Enabling Models (U24).                    

*Date:*                         August 3, 2018.                    

*Time:*                         8:30 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         Hilton Garden Inn Bethesda, 7301 Waverly Street, Bethesda, MD 20814.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Anne E. Schaffner, Ph.D., Chief, Scientific Review Branch, Division of Extramural Research, National Eye Institute, 5635 Fishers Lane, Suite 1300, MSC 9300, Bethesda, MD 20892-9300, (301) 451-2020,                         *aes@nei.nih.gov*.                    

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.867, Vision Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: July 10, 2018.

Natasha M. Copeland, 

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2018-15045 Filed 7-12-18; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
#### LONDON DISTRIBUTING COMPANY, Appellant, v. Alfred J. BASTONE, Appellee.

No. 71-1101.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Aug. 1, 1972.

Paul E. Gifford and Norman Somberg, Miami, for appellant.

Nelson & Feldman, Miami Beach, for ap-pellee.

Before PEARSON and HENDRY, JJ., and LESTER M. IGNATIUS, Associate Judge.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by plaintiff from a final judgment entered in favor of the defendant, Alfred J. Bastone, in a suit upon a promissory note. The issues were tried by the judge without a jury, and after hearing the evidence, the court found for the defendant, Bastone. See: London Distributing Company v. Bastone, Fla.App. 1971, 244 So.2d 550.

Appellant contends that the undisputed evidence shows that the plaintiff was an *89accommodation maker and upon payment of the obligation became subrogated to the rights of the bank, and was entitled to recover against Bastone who was an endorser of the note.

The trial judge’s findings and judgment were based upon conflicting evidence adduced at the trial.

The trial judge’s findings of fact are entitled to the same weight as are given to the findings of a jury and will not be disturbed by an appellate court unless such findings are clearly shown to be erroneous.

We have carefully considered the record and have determined that the findings of the trial judge have not been shown to be manifestly unreasonable or clearly against the weight of the evidence.

Accordingly the judgment appealed is affirmed.

Affirmed.
Skip Navigation

#         Archive-It      

Login

      - HOME
      - EXPLORE
      - LEARN MORE
      - CONTACT US

### The leading web archiving service for collecting and accessing cultural heritage on the web 

Built at the Internet Archive

        - Explore
        - U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
        - News Releases

#  News Releases 

**Collected by:** U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 

**Archived since:**Sep, 2013

**Description:**
This collection includes HHS news and announcements from 1991+.

**Subject:**    	    Government - US Federal,     	    Science & Health

**Creator:**    	    OS/ASPA

## Narrow Your Results

**Creator**

Sort By:
- Count
- (A-Z)
              - HHS Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs (ASPA) (1)

**Categories**

Sort By:
- Count
- (A-Z)
              - Health Care (1)

**Group**

Sort By:
- Count
- (A-Z)
              - HHS News Releases (1)

Sites for this collection are listed below. Narrow your results at left, or enter a search query below to		      find a site, specific URL or to search the text of archived webpages.
Clear
            - Date :  2016           X        
            - Date :  2016           X        
            - HHS_Official :  Dr. Vindell Washington           X        

              - Sites
              - Search Page Text

Page 1 of 1  (1 Total Results)

**Sort By:**
                - Title (A-Z)
                - Title (Z-A)
                - URL (A-Z)
                - URL (Z-A)

### 	  Title:       HHS showcases industry progress in bringing interoperable medication lists to consumers    	  

### URL:     https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2016/12/13/hhs-showcases-industry-progress-bringing-interoperable-medication-lists-consumers.html

**Description:**	  	The Department of Health and Human Services' Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC) today, in partnership with leaders in the private sector, as well as patient and consumer advocates, coordinated a live demonstration of consumer-friendly applications (apps) that import data from some of the largest health information technology (IT) vendors in the country to allow individuals to access a consolidated list of their medications from a variety of sources in one place.Â	  

	  	Loading Wayback Capture Info...	  

Loading video data...

**Creator:**    	    HHS Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs (ASPA)

**Date:**        	2016        

**Group:**    	    HHS News Releases

**Categories:**    	    Health Care

**HHS Official:**        	Dr. Vindell Washington        

Page 1 of 1  (1 Total Results)

Archive It

#### Archive-It 

*Built at the Internet Archive*
2014 Archive-ItThe leading web archiving service for collecting and accessing  cultural heritage on the web 

      - Home
      - Learn More         - About Archive-It
        - News/Press
        - Meet the Team
        - Publications
      - Contact Us
#### James S. LIQUORI, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-305.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 11, 1970.

Appeal dismissed.
EXHIBIT 31.1

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER CERTIFICATION

I, Roubik Gregorian, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on this Form 10-K/A of Exar Corporation;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

Date: May 1, 2006



|                                               
|-----------------------------------------------
|/s/ ROUBIK GREGORIAN                           
|Roubik Gregorian                               
|Chief Executive Officer, President and Director
|(Principal Executive Officer)
IA

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1131

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 29, 1993

Referred to the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service

AN ACT

To extend the method of computing the average subscription

charges under section 8906(a) of title 5, United States

Code, relating to Federal employee health benefits

programs.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•S 1131 RFH

1 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF METHOD OF COMPUTING AVER2 AGE SUBSCRIPTION CHARGES FOR FEDERAL

3 EMPLOYEE HEALTH BENEFITS PROGRAMS.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Act entitled ‘‘An Act relating

5 to the method by which Government contributions to the

6 Federal employees health benefits program shall be com7 puted for 1990 or 1991 if no Government-wide indemnity

8 benefit plan participates in that year’’, approved August

9 11, 1989 (5 U.S.C. 8906 note; Public Law 101–76; 103

10 Stat. 556) is amended in subsection (a)(1) by striking out

11 ‘‘contract years 1990 through 1993’’ and inserting in lieu

12 thereof ‘‘contract years 1990 through 1996’’.

13 (b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of the

14 Congress that nothing in this section should be considered

15 to reflect any view on the appropriateness, merits, or tim16 ing, or any other aspect of any comprehensive health care

17 reform legislation.

Passed the Senate July 28 (legislative day, June

30), 1993.

Attest: WALTER J. STEWART,

Secretary.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 68 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 68

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                      February 4, 1993.
    Resolved, That Representative Steven Schiff, New Mexico, be and he is 
hereby, elected to the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
# C_2022266EN.01002702.xml

| 11.7.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 266/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.7.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 266/27

---

Order of the General Court of 7 April 2022 — Essity Hygiene and Health v EUIPO (Representation of a leaf)

(Case T-364/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation of the contested decision - Action which has become devoid of purpose - No need to adjudicate)

(2022/C 266/33)

Language of the case: Swedish

Parties

Applicant: Essity Hygiene and Health AB (Gothenburg, Sweden) (represented by: U. Wennermark, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Hanf and A. Bosse, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 31 March 2021 (Case R 2196/2017-1), concerning an application for registration of a figurative sign representing a leaf as an EU trade mark

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

| 2. | The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) shall pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 320, 9.8.2021.

---
# C_2022084EN.01003102.xml

| 21.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 84/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84/31

---

Appeal brought on 21 December 2021 by Amazon.com, Inc., Amazon Services LLC, Amazon EU Sàrl, Amazon Europe Core Sàrl against the order of the General Court (First Chamber) delivered on 14 October 2021 in Case T-19/21, Amazon.com and Others v Commission

(Case C-815/21 P)

(2022/C 84/42)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellants: Amazon.com, Inc., Amazon Services LLC, Amazon EU Sàrl, Amazon Europe Core Sàrl (represented by: A. Komninos, dikigoros, G. Tantulli, abogado)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought

The Appellants claim that the Court should:

| — | set aside the order under appeal; |
| --- | --- |

—

set aside the order under appeal;

| — | dismiss the plea of inadmissibility in its entirety; |
| --- | --- |

—

dismiss the plea of inadmissibility in its entirety;

| — | refer the case back to the General Court in order for the latter to examine the substance of the Application. |
| --- | --- |

—

refer the case back to the General Court in order for the latter to examine the substance of the Application.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Appellants claim that the order under appeal infringed Article 263 TFEU by concluding that the measure contested in the Application did not produce legal effects. Such infringement is the result of an erroneous interpretation of Article 11(6) of Regulation 1/2003 (1), which accords undertakings legal protection from parallel antitrust proceedings as between the Commission and national competition authorities. The order under appeal failed to recognize that the contested measure deprived Amazon of that protection.

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty (OJ 2003, L 1, p. 1).

---
257 La. 454

#### Francis H. HILLIARD v. Eldon Ray SHUFF.

No. 51069.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 18, 1971.

In re: Francis H. Hilliard, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Parish of Acadia. 241 So.2d 56.

It is ordered that the writ of review issue; that the Court of Appeal send up the record in duplicate of the case; and that counsel for plaintiff and defendant be notified.
<PAGE>   1

                                  EXHIBIT 21.0


                              LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES

The following list contains the names and jurisdictions of organization of
Habersham Bancorp's direct and indirect subsidiaries. Habersham Bancorp owns
100% of the outstanding stock of each listed entity, except for BancMortgage
Financial Corp. and Advantage Insurers, Inc., which are wholly owned
subsidiaries of Habersham Bank.

Name and Jurisdiction

Habersham Bank, a Georgia state bank.
The Advantage Group, Inc. a Georgia corporation.
BancMortgage Financial Corp., a Georgia corporation.
Advantage Insurers, Inc., a Georgia corporation.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This schedule  contains summary  financial  information  extracted from the
condensed  consolidated balance sheet of Dictaphone Corporation at September 30,
1999 and the condensed  consolidated statement of operations for the nine months
ended  September  30, 1999 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                    1,000

<S>                                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                   9-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                              SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          8,742
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  95,451
<ALLOWANCES>                                    2,346
<INVENTORY>                                    45,216
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              153,373
<PP&E>                                         74,147
<DEPRECIATION>                                 36,970
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                456,400
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         103,339
<BONDS>                                       353,106
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          48,152
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                          130
<OTHER-SE>                                    (61,714)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  456,400
<SALES>                                       190,911
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              264,132
<CGS>                                         141,257
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 236,636
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             30,092
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,928)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,753)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,681)
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,681)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       0


</TABLE>
#### HOUSE OF PRAYER, INC., Appellant, v. Ann B. MILLER, as Executrix of the Estate of Nathaniel A. Bell, Appellee.

No. 73-285.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 11, 1973.

Appeal dismissed.
# C_2023024EN.01003701.xml

| 23.1.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.1.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/37

---

Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2022 — Epsilon Data Management v EUIPO — Epsilon Technologies (EPSILON TECHNOLOGIES)

(Case T-512/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU figurative mark EPSILON TECHNOLOGIES - Genuine use of the mark - Article 18(1), second subparagraph, point (a), and Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Nature of the use - Form differing in elements which do not alter the distinctive character - Use in connection with the services in respect of which the mark was registered)

(2023/C 24/50)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Epsilon Data Management LLC (Plano, Texas, United States) (represented by: J. Bussé and C. De Preter, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: I. Harrington, D. Gája and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Epsilon Technologies, SL (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: J. Carbonell Callicó and E. Felip Corrius, lawyers)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 1 June 2021 (Joined Cases R 1611/2020-5 and R 1839/2020-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Epsilon Data Management LLC to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Epsilon Technologies, SL. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Epsilon Data Management LLC to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Epsilon Technologies, SL.

---

(1)  OJ C 412, 11.10.2021.

---
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO



18 U.S.C. §1350,



AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO



SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Ricardo Bernandes, in my capacity as the Chief Financial Officer of California Steel Industries, Inc., for purposes of 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, hereby certify that:



the annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2004, filed by California Steel Industries, Inc., on March 28, 2005, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934; and the information contained in such annual report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of California Steel Industries, Inc.



Dated: March 28, 2005



By:

/s/ Ricardo BernardesRicardo Bernardes,Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
251 La. 69

#### In re: METROPOLITAN CRIME COMMISSION et al.

Ne. 48923.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 20, 1967.

In re: E. C. Upton, Jr., President of the Metropolitan Crime Commission of New Orleans, Inc., et al. applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus.

The application is denied. We find no error of law in the ruling complained of.
251 La. 68

#### Mary Quine GORE et al. v. Walker Y. RONALDSON.

No. 48865.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 20, 1967.

In re: Mrs. Walker Y. Ronaldson et al. applying for certiorari, or writ of review to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of East Baton Rouge. 200 So.2d 46.

Writ refused. No error of law in the judgment of the Court of Appeal.
#### Henry Arville NULL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 52789.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 2, 1978.

Rehearing Denied April 5, 1978.

Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Frank B. Kessler, Chief Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Marsha G. Madorsky and Joy B. Shearer, Asst. At-tys. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See *Morgan v. Cook,*344 So.2d 577 (Fla.1977).

OVERTON, C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, ENGLAND, HATCHETT and KARL, JJ., concur.
#### Gary E. PASCHKE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-454.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 30, 1973.

Walter R. Talley, Public Defender, Bradenton, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Charles Corees, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant, Gary E. Paschke, entered a plea of guilty to the offense of breaking and entering with intent to commit a felony; he had previously entered a plea of not guilty to the said offense. Appellant was, thereupon, sentenced to serve a term of five years in the state prison with credit being given for time served in the county jail.

Subsequently, notice of appeal was filed to this court to review the judgment and sentence, appellant being represented by the public defender who had filed a brief in this court in behalf of Gary E. Paschke.

After reviewing the facts contained in the record the public defender states in his brief that he “. . . cannot find anything which would arguably support an appeal.” Whereupon, he requested to be relieved as attorney of record for appellant under the rationale of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493. The record shows that the clerk of this court, on January 12, 1973, caused to be mailed to appellant an order advising him that within 30 days, if he so desired, he could file a brief with this court submitting any matter that he deemed advisable in connection with this appeal. To date we have not received a brief or response from the appellant.

*302The only assignment of error raised by appellant in this appeal was that the plea of guilty entered in this cause in the trial court was not freely and voluntarily given. The colloquy in the record before us between the trial judge, the Honorable Gilbert A. Smith, and appellant indicates beyond any question of doubt that appellant entered the plea of guilty knowingly and understandingly as provided in Rule 3.-170(a), RCrP., 33 F.S.A.

We have carefully examined the entire record on file here on behalf of appellant, Paschke, and find nothing therein sufficient to justify a reversal of the trial court’s action and, therefore, the judgment and sentence appealed is hereby

Affirmed.

HOBSON, A. C. J., and McNULTY and BOARDMAN, JJL concur.