alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2022165EN.01003401.xml

| 19.4.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 165/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.4.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 165/34

---

Order of the General Court of 10 February 2022 — TO v EEA

(Case T-434/21) (1)

(Civil service - Compliance with a judgment of the General Court - Decision which was not contested in time - Res judicata - Conditional undertaking given by the AECC in the context of a favourable out-of-court settlement - Settlement offer not accepted by the applicant - No act adversely affecting the applicant - Inadmissibility)

(2022/C 165/43)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: TO (represented by: É. Boigelot, lawyer)

Defendant: European Environment Agency (represented by: O. Cornu, acting as Agent, supported by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 270 TFEU seeking, in the first place, annulment of the decision of 21 September 2020 by which the EEA, (i) refused to comply with the judgment of the Court of 11 June 2019, TO v EEA (T-462/17, not published, EU:T:2019:397) and (ii) rejected the requests made by the applicant on 16 September 2020 and, in the second place, an order requiring the EEA to pay the applicant, (i) the sum corresponding to the compensation in lieu of notice and the installation allowance, together with interest as from 22 September 2016, (ii) the sum of EUR 20 000 in compensation for the alleged non-material damage suffered on account of the disclosure of her personal data to third parties and (iii) the sum of EUR 20 000 in compensation for the alleged non-material damage suffered on account of the refusal to disclose to her the correspondence exchanged with her previous counsel both before and after the delivery of that judgment.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

| 2. | Orders TO to pay, in addition to her own costs, those incurred by the European Environment Agency (EEA). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders TO to pay, in addition to her own costs, those incurred by the European Environment Agency (EEA).

---

(1)  OJ C 349 of 30.8.2021.

---
# C_2023179EN.01003002.xml

| 22.5.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 179/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.5.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 179/30

---

Judgment of the General Court of 29 March 2023 — Tinnus Enterprises v EUIPO — Mystic Products (Fluid distribution equipment)

(Case T-535/21) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing fluid distribution equipment - Ground for invalidity - Non-compliance with requirements for protection - Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 - Features of appearance of a product solely dictated by its technical function - Article 8(1) of Regulation No 6/2002)

(2023/C 179/43)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Tinnus Enterprises LLC (Plano, Texas, United States) (represented by: T. Wuttke and J. Lewandowski, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Ivanauskas, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Mystic Products Import & Export, SL (Badalona, Spain)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment and alteration of the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 16 June 2021 (Case R 1004/2018-3).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Tinnus Enterprises LLC to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Tinnus Enterprises LLC to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

---

(1)  OJ C 431, 25.10.2021.

---
#### Roger H. HARPER, Appellant, v. James A. WECK, Appellee.

No. 70-42.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

April 30, 1970.

Appeal from Court of Record, Broward County; Russell E. Seay, Jr., Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 11**  **- 7087** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

– Appellee ,
v. BARRY L. COLEMAN, JR. , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States Dist rict Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Richmond
. James R. Spencer, Chief District Judge. ( 3:05

- cr - 00367

- JRS

- 1; 3:08

- cv - 00064

- JRS )

Submitted : December 20, 2011 Decided: January 5, 2012

Before AGEE and DIAZ , Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON , Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. Barry L. Coleman, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Angela Mastandrea

- Miller, Stephen Wiley Miller, Assistant United States Attorneys, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions a re not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Barry L. Coleman, Jr. appeals from the district court’s orders denying his motions to file a notice of appeal out of time and for reconsideration in his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 2006 & Supp. 2011) pr oceeding . We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. * United States v. Coleman , Nos. 3:05

- cr - 00367

- JRS

- 1; 3:08

- cv - 00064

- JRS (E.D. Va. June 13 & July 20, 2011). We dispe nse with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

* In addition, Coleman claims he received ineffective assistance of couns el when his attorney failed to file a timely notice of appeal. However, there is no constitutional right to counsel in a collateral attack. S ee Hunt v. Nuth , 57 F.3d 1327, 1340 (4th Cir. 1995) . Thus , e ven if counsel in his § 2255 proceeding was ineffecti ve, that performance cannot give rise to a cognizable claim for relief. United States v. MacDonald , 966 F.2d 854, 859 n.9 (4th Cir. 1992).
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 State

          - [Public Notice 10460]

Acting under the authority of and in accordance with section 1(b) of Executive Order 13224 of September 23, 2001, as amended by Executive Order 13268 of July 2, 2002, and Executive Order 13284 of January 23, 2003, I hereby determine that the person known as al-Ashtar Brigades (AAB), also known as Saraya al-Ashtar, committed, or poses a significant risk of committing, acts of terrorism that threaten the security of U.S. nationals or the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States.

                    Consistent with the determination in section 10 of Executive Order 13224 that prior notice to persons determined to be subject to the Order who might have a constitutional presence in the United States would render ineffectual the blocking and other measures authorized in the Order because of the ability to transfer funds instantaneously, I determine that no prior notice needs to be provided to any person subject to this                           ( print page 32180)                        determination who might have a constitutional presence in the United States, because to do so would render ineffectual the measures authorized in the Order.                

                    This notice shall be published in the                     **Federal Register**                    .                

Dated: June 19 2018. 

Michael R. Pompeo,

Secretary of State.

[FR Doc. 2018-14830 Filed 7-10-18; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 4710-AD-P
#### Alfonso WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-250.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Dec. 4, 1973.

Appeal dismissed.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED MAY 22, 2014

NO. 03-14-00008-CV

Terry Lang, Appellant

v.

Robert Lang, Appellee

APPEAL FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW OF BURNET COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, GOODWIN, AND FIELD

DISMISSED ON APPELLANT’S MOTION -- OPINION BY JUSTICE GOODWIN

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the trial court on December 4, 2013. Terry Lang 

has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, and having considered the motion, the Court agrees that 

the motion should be granted. Therefore, the Court grants the motion and dismisses the appeal. 

The appellant shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and in the court below.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                             991
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    31258
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      31452
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 76485
<PP&E>                                           17896
<DEPRECIATION>                                    3762
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  106561
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            82079
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            25
<OTHER-SE>                                       16087
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    106561
<SALES>                                          42124
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 42124
<CGS>                                            35774
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    35774
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 855
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   4557
<INCOME-TAX>                                       315
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               2685
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      2685
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.11
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.2   NETWORK EQUIPMENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.   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 Network Equipment Technologies, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended March 28, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John F. McGrath, Jr., Vice President and Chief Financial Officer 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: 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.  May 28, 2008  /s/ JOHN F. MCGRATH, JR. John F. McGrath, Jr. Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
# C_2021431EN.01005702.xml

| 25.10.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 431/57 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.10.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 431/57

---

Order of the General Court of 27 August 2021 — PJ v EIT

(Case T-335/21) (1)

(2021/C 431/69)

Language of the case: French

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

---

(1)  OJ C 310, 2.8.2021.

---
#### Mary Q. VINCE v. Lawrence VINCE.

No. 9234.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit.

Feb. 28, 1973.

Gerard Kiefer, and Eddie Moore, Baton Rouge, for appellant.

*442Wm. H. Brown, Baton Rouge, for ap-pellee.

Before SARTAIN, BLANCHE and WATSON, JJ.

WATSON, Judge.

The judgment in this matter was signed on Thursday, August 3, 1972. The last day for applying for a new trial under LSA-C.C.P. 1974 was August 8, 1972. Since this is an appeal from a judgment awarding alimony, it must be taken within the thirty days provided by LSA-C.C.P. 3942. This thirty day period expired on September 7, 1972. Appeal bond was not filed until September 28, 1972; therefore the appeal was not perfected timely. The appeal is dismissed.

Dismissed.
#### Melvin DIXON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-925.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Jan. 25, 1974.

Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Richard S. Power, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and C. Marie Bernard, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. Hill v. State, Fla.App.1972, 256 So.2d 239; Kelly v. State, Fla.App.1971, 254 So.2d 22 and Stovall v. State, Fla.App.1971, 252 So.2d 376.

OWEN, C. J., and WALDEN and CROSS, JJ., concur.
# C_2021252EN.01000602.xml

| 28.6.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 252/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.6.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 252/6

---

Appeal brought on 18 January 2021 by Tinnus Enterprises LLC against the judgment of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) delivered on 18 November 2020 in Case T-574/19, Tinnus Enterprises v EUIPO

(Case C-29/21 P)

(2021/C 252/09)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Tinnus Enterprises LLC (represented by: A. Odle and R. Palijama, advocaten)

Other party to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office

By order of 5 May 2021, the Court of Justice (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) held that the appeal was not allowed to proceed and that Tinnus Enterprises LLC should bear its own costs.

---
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 Ambassadors International, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2006 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Brian R. Schaefgen, Chief Financial Officer of the Company 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 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                         
|---------------------------------------------------------
|                                                         
|/s/ Brian R. Schaefgen                                   
|Brian R. Schaefgen Chief Financial Officer
August 7, 2006

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany this Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350
and in accordance with SEC Release No. 33-8238, and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made
before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23


                        Consent of Independent Auditors




We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual Report (Form 10-K)
of Virco Mfg. Corporation of our report dated March 12, 1997 included in the
1996 Annual Report to Stockholders of Virco Mfg. Corporation.

Our audits also included the financial statement schedule of Virco Mfg.
Corporation listed in Item 14(a).  This schedule is the responsibility of the
Company's management.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on our
audits.  In our opinion, the financial statement schedule taken as a whole,
presents fairly in all material respects the information set forth therein.

We also consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Form S-8 No. 33-65096) pertaining to the Virco Mfg. Corporation 1993 Stock
Incentive Plan of our report dated March 12, 1997, with respect to the
consolidated financial statements incorporated herein by reference, and our
report included in the preceding paragraph with respect to the financial
statement schedule included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) of Virco Mfg.
Corporation.


Ernst & Young LLP

Los Angeles, California
April 28, 1997
# Official Journal C 281/2010

| | ISSN 1725-2423
  doi:10.3000/17252423.C_2010.281.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 281 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5316 October 2010 |

ISSN 1725-2423

doi:10.3000/17252423.C_2010.281.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 281

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5316 October 2010

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | Europol |
| 2010/C 281/01 | Financial Regulation applicable to Europol | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

Europol

2010/C 281/01

Financial Regulation applicable to Europol

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
<PAGE>   1
                                 EXHIBIT 10.23


                    AMENDMENT NO. 5 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


         AGREEMENT dated as of November 1, 1995 between Patrick L. Johnson
("Employee") and Roto-Rooter, Inc. (the "Company").

         WHEREAS, Employee and the Company have entered into an Employment
Agreement dated November 1, 1990 ("Employment Agreement"); and

         WHEREAS, Employee and the Company desire to amend the Employment
Agreement in certain respects.

         NOW, THEREFORE, Employee and the Company mutually agree that the
Employment Agreement shall be amended, effective as of November 1, 1995 as
follows:

         A.    The date of October 31, 1997 set forth in Section 1.2 of the
               Employment Agreement, is hereby deleted and the date of October
               31, 1998 is hereby substituted therefor.

         B.    The base salary amount of $160,500 per annum as set forth in the
               first sentence of Section 2.1 of the Employment Agreement is
               hereby deleted and the base salary amount of $165,500 per annum
               is hereby substituted therefor.

         Except as specifically amended by this Amendment No. 5 to Employment
Agreement, the Employment Agreement shall continue in full force and effect in
accordance with its original terms, conditions and provisions.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed this amendatory
agreement as of the date first above written.

                                         EMPLOYEE

                                        
                                        /s/ Patrick L. Johnson   
                                        -------------------------------------


                                        ROTO-ROOTER, INC.


                                        /s/ William R. Griffin   
                                        -------------------------------------
# C_2023104EN.01003301.xml

| 20.3.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 104/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.3.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 104/33

---

Order of the General Court of 1 February 2023 — NO v Commission

(Case T-708/21) (1)

(Action for failure to act - Infringement of EU law by certain Irish authorities - State aid - No invitation to act - Partial inadmissibility - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Abuse of dominant position - Adoption of a position by the Commission - No need to adjudicate in part)

(2023/C 104/51)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: NO (represented by: E. Smartt, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: I. Barcew, P. Caro de Sousa and L. Nicolae, acting as Agents)

Re:

By his action under Article 265 TFEU, the applicant asks the Court to declare that the European Commission unlawfully failed to define its position on his complaints submitted on 7 and 26 May 2020, his letter of 27 May 2021 and his letter of formal notice of 28 June 2021.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no longer any need to rule on the claim seeking a declaration that the European Commission failed to define its position on the complaints alleging infringement, in Ireland, of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU and Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles [101 and 102 TFEU]. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no longer any need to rule on the claim seeking a declaration that the European Commission failed to define its position on the complaints alleging infringement, in Ireland, of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU and Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles [101 and 102 TFEU].

| 2. | The remainder of the action is dismissed as inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The remainder of the action is dismissed as inadmissible.

| 3. | NO shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

NO shall pay the costs.

---

(1)  
  OJ C 84, 21.2.2022.

---