alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
House Calendar No. 203

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 505

[Report No. 103–658]

RESOLUTION

Waiving points of order against the conference restate banking and branching. eral Deposit Insurance Act to provide for inter- vised Statutes of the United States, and the Fed- the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, the Re- port to accompany the bill (H.R. 3841) to amend

AUGUST 3, 1994

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
IV

House Calendar No. 203

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 505

[Report No. 103–658]

Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the

bill (H.R. 3841) to amend the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956,

the Revised Statutes of the United States, and the Federal Deposit

Insurance Act to provide for interstate banking and branching.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 3, 1994

Mr. FROST, 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. 3841) to amend the Bank

Holding Company Act of 1956, the Revised Statutes

of the United States, and the Federal Deposit Insurance

Act to provide for interstate banking and branching.

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. 3841) to amend the Bank Holding

4 Company Act of 1956, the Revised Statutes of the United

5 States, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Act to provide
2

HRES 505 RH

1 for interstate banking and branching. All points of order

2 against the conference report and against its consideration

3 are waived. The conference report shall be considered as

4 read.
# C_2022463EN.01004101.xml

| 5.12.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 463/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.12.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 463/41

---

Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2022 — just-organic.com v EUIPO (JUST ORGANIC)

(Case T-802/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for the EU figurative mark JUST ORGANIC - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2022/C 463/58)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: just-organic.com GmbH (Essen, Germany) (represented by: C. Menebröcker, lawyer)

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

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 20 October 2021 (Case: R 1010/2021-2).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders just-organic.com GmbH to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders just-organic.com GmbH to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 73, 14.2.2022.

---
[No. 863-1.

Division One—Panel 2.

October 26, 1971.]

#### Orlando Viray *et al., Appellants,*v. Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company, Inc., *et al., Respondents.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 703413, David W. Soukup, J., entered July 10, 1970. *Reversed*by unpublished opinion pursuant to RCW 2.06.040.
#### Willie Lee BURNETT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 68-624.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Second District.

May 16, 1969.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
# C_2022340EN.01003502.xml

| 5.9.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 340/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.9.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 340/35

---

Judgment of the General Court of 13 July 2022 — Pejovič v EUIPO — ETA živilska industrija (RENČKI HRAM)

(Case T-284/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark RENČKI HRAM - Absolute ground for invalidity - Bad faith - Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2022/C 340/48)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Edvin Pejovič (Pobegi, Slovenia) (represented by: U. Pogačnik, lawyer)

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, intervener before the Court: ETA živilska industrija d.o.o. (Kamnik, Slovenia) (represented by: J. Sibinčič, lawyer)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant, Mr Edvin Pejovič, seeks the annulment and alteration of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 23 March 2021 (Case R 1050/2020-4) (‘the contested decision’).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 23 March 2021 (Case R 1050/2020-4); |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 23 March 2021 (Case R 1050/2020-4);

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

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Mr Edvin Pejovič for the purposes of the present proceedings and for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Mr Edvin Pejovič for the purposes of the present proceedings and for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal;

| 4. | Orders ETA živilska industrija d.o.o. to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Orders ETA živilska industrija d.o.o. to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 278, 12.7.2021.

---
256 La. 863

#### NATIONAL DAIRY PRODUCTS CORPORATION v. LOUISIANA MILK COMMISSION.

No. 50775.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 30, 1970.

In re: Kraftco Corporation (formerly National Dairy Products Corporation) applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of East Baton Rouge.

Writ refused. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal, we find no error of law in its judgment.
##### 



SUBSIDIARIES
    
    JURISDICTIONSkillSoft Corporation
    
    DelawareSkillSoft Ireland Ltd
    
    IrelandSkillSoft UK Limited
    
    EnglandSkillSoft Asia Pacific Pty Ltd
    
    AustraliaBooks24x7.com, Inc.
    
    DelawareSkillSoft Finance Limited
    
    Grand CaymanCBT Technology Limited
    
    IrelandSkillSoft Canada Limited
    
    CanadaSmartForce Business Skills Ltd
    
    IrelandSmartCertify Direct, Inc.
    
    FloridaSkillSoft Deutschland GmbH
    
    GermanySkillSoft New Zealand Ltd
    
    New ZealandSkillSoft France SARL
    
    FranceSmartForce Benelux B.V.
    
    NetherlandsSkillSoft Asia Pacific PTE Ltd
    
    SingaporeTargeted Learning Corporation
    
    Maine
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 19

- 20 813 Summary Calendar

KATHY COON

,

Plaintiff

− Appell ant,

v ersus

CORELOGIC, INCORPORATED; FNC , INCORPORATED,

Defendant s − Appell ees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas No. 4:1 8

- C V

- 2260

Before DAVIS, SMITH, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Kathy Coon appeals the summary judgment on her various statutory

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set f orth in
5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED
March 31, 2020

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 19-20813 Document: 00515365929 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/31/2020No. 19

- 20 813

2 and common

- l aw claims regarding her termination as a long

- time employee of

FNC, Incorporated, which she sued along with its owner, CoreLogic, Incor

porated. On October 28, 2019, the district court issued a lengthy and impres

sively thorough Order explaining why Coon had not established a prima facie

case and why, even if she had, she is entitled to no relief.

We have reviewed the briefs, the pertinent law, and the briefs. The dis

missal resulting from the summary judgment is AFFIRMED, essentially for

the reasons convincingly explained by the district court. Case: 19-20813 Document: 00515365929 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/31/2020
#### ESCOM ENTERPRISES, INC., Appellant, v. Vernon J. HUTCHISON, et al., Appellees.

No. 73-3.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

May 29, 1973.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Broward County; James F. Minnet, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
# C_2022213EN.01003701.xml

| 30.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 213/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 213/37

---

Judgment of the General Court of 30 March 2022 — Daimler v EUIPO (Representation of three-pointed stars on a black background I)

(Case T-277/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU pattern mark - Representation of three-pointed stars on a black background I - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2022/C 213/49)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Daimler AG (Stuttgart, Germany) (represented by: N. Siebertz, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Schäfer and E. Markakis, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 March 2021 (Case R 1895/2020-5), concerning an application for registration of a pattern sign representing three-pointed stars on a black background I as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Daimler AG to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Daimler AG to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 278, 12.7.2021.

---
#### Archie L. KENNINGTON and Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, Petitioners, v. Leah Robbins GILLMAN and Ezra Paul Gillman, Respondents.

No. T-85.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Oct. 30, 1973.

*406John N. Boggs, of Barron, Redding, Boggs & Hughes, Panama City, for petitioners.

Jim J. Austin, of Urquhart & Chapman, Panama City, for respondents.

RAWLS, Chief Judge.

By petition for a writ of common law certiorari, petitioners aver that the Circuit Court, sitting as an appellate court in reviewing a direct appeal from the Small Claims Court in and for Bay County, Florida, departed from the essential requirements of law. The thrust of petitioners’ argument is that such departure was occasioned by the Small Claims Court refusing to accept into evidence the cost estimate for repairing a damaged motor vehicle.1

The extraordinary writ of cer-tiorari is highly discretionary on the part of a Superior Court.2 It cannot be used as a substitute for an appeal or to give a party a second appeal. Evidentiary questions are to be resolved by the trial court and its action was properly reviewable on direct appeal by the appellate court. The correctness of the appellate court’s decision is not reviewable in an attempted second appeal by a superior court in the name of certiorari. It is only when a judgment has been rendered in the absence of any competent evidence to support the judgment or material fundamental errors in applying the law that such a departure from the essential requirement of law will arise to justify a superior court to exercise its ancient power to issue the common law writ of certiorari.3 An exa'mination of the record in this cause discloses ample competent substantial evidence to support the judgment rendered.

Petitioner having failed to demonstrate that the error on the part of the appellate court, if there was error, was of such a material, fundamental nature to justify the issuance of the writ, it is the judgment of this Court that certiorari be denied.

JOHNSON, J., and HOWELL, Associate Judge, concur.

1

.The issue in the trial court concerned the amount of property damage to which plaintiff was entitled to recover. Plaintiff insisted that the market value of the damaged chattel before and after the accident was the proper test; defendant insists that their proffer of the cost of repair of the subject chattel should have been considered by the trial court.

2

. 5 Fla.Jur. Certiorari § 5 (1960) ; and 1 Crandall, Florida Common Law Practice § 472 (1928).

3

. Cohen v. State, 99 So.2d 563 (Fla.1957); and Newman v. State, 174 So.2d 479 (2 Fla.App.1965).
# C_2022073EN.01006802.xml

| 14.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 73/68 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 73/68

---

Order of the General Court of 26 November 2021 — Cepewa v EUIPO — Out of the blue (Lieblingsmensch)

(Case T-48/21) (1)

(2022/C 73/86)

Language of the case: German

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

---

(1)  OJ C 88, 15.3.2021.

---
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

Nos. 99-20454 & 99-20563 Conference Calendar

PHILLIP CHARLES MELONCON, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus JEROME GODINICH, JR., Defendant-Appellee.

-------------------- Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-98-CV-2755

-------------------- February 16, 2000 Before EMILIO M. GARZA, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * Phillip Charles Meloncon (#702760), a state prisoner, filed a civil rights action alleging that his appointed attorney, Jerome Godinich, Jr., had conspired with the prosecutor to secure the conviction for which he is incarcerated by advising him to waive his right to grand jury indictment and to consent to the filing of a felony information. The district court did not err in dismissing the complaint as frivolous under the rule in HeckO R D E R Nos. 99-20454 & 99-20563

- 2 - v. Humphrey , 512 U.S. 477, 487 (1994). Because these appeals are frivolous, they are DISMISSED. See Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983); 5th Cir. R. 42.2. Meloncon’s pending motions are DENIED. The dismissal of these appeals as frivolous counts as two strikes for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Because of the strike for the district court’s dismissal of the underlying judgment as frivolous, see Adepegba v. Hammons , 103 F.3d 383, 387 (5th Cir. 1996), Meloncon has accumulated three strikes in this case alone. Meloncon has at least one other strike related to his prior civil rights case. See Meloncon v. Nuchia , No. 97- 20659 (5th Cir. July 7, 1998). Because Meloncon has accumulated at least four strikes, he is BARRED from proceeding in forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Jerome Godinich, Jr.’s motion for an award of attorney’s fees and costs is DENIED.

APPEAL DISMISSED; MOTIONS DENIED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
AUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS, STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
AND STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          57,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                6,792,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                 17,867,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            25,823,000
<PP&E>                                      17,384,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               8,549,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              38,938,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,784,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        68,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  18,051,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                38,938,000
<SALES>                                     26,444,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            26,444,000
<CGS>                                       21,523,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               29,939,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             802,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (4,297,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (3,021,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (3,021,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.51)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.51)
        

</TABLE>
[No. 288-3.

Division Three.

September 17, 1971.]

#### Dino E. Tombari, *Appellant,*v. John M. Bennett *et al., Respondents.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Spokane County, No. 193975, Richard J. Ennis, J., entered October 14, 1969. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion pursuant to RCW 2.06.040.
#### John R. KENNEDY v. Paul HARDY.

No. 44773.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

March 4, 1968.

Billy E. Harris, Quitman, for appellant.

P. Gerald Adams, Meridian, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### In the Interest of R. R. T., Jr., E. V. T., W. E. T., G. E. T., minors.

No. 69-670.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 5, 1970.

Appeal dismissed.
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 128 (Tuesday, July 3, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 39463]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-16200]

========================================================================
Notices
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules 
or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings 
and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings, 
delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency 
statements of organization and functions are examples of documents 
appearing in this section.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 3, 2012 / 
Notices

[[Page 39463]]

AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION

Board of Directors Meeting

    Meeting: African Development Foundation, Board of Directors 
Meeting.
    Time: Tuesday, July 17, 2012, 8:45 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.
    Place: African Development Foundation, Conference Room, 1400 I 
Street NW., Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20005.
    Date: Tuesday, July 17, 2012.
    Status:

1. Open session, Tuesday, July 17, 2012, 8:45 a.m. to 11:45 a.m.; and
2. Closed session, Tuesday, July 17, 2012, 12:00 p.m. to 1:00 p.m.

    Due to security requirements and limited seating, all individuals 
wishing to attend the open session of the meeting must notify Sarah 
Conway at (202) 233-8811 or sconway@usadf.gov of your request to attend 
by 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, July 12, 2012.

Lloyd O. Pierson,
President & CEO, USADF.
[FR Doc. 2012-16200 Filed 7-2-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
"THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF GEORGIA-PACIFIC CORPORATION FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 1998, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS."
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                               7
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     1406
<ALLOWANCES>                                        12
<INVENTORY>                                       1269
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  2887
<PP&E>                                           14162
<DEPRECIATION>                                    8024
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   12999
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             2657
<BONDS>                                           4140
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            74
<OTHER-SE>                                        3306
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     12999
<SALES>                                           6526
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  6526
<CGS>                                             5070
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     5070
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   461
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     2
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 225
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    234
<INCOME-TAX>                                        98
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                136
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   (15)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       121
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0<F2>
<FN>
<F1>Georgia-Pacific Group EPS - Primary 0.36
The Timber Company EPS - Primary 0.95
<F2>Georgia-Pacific Group EPS - Diluted 0.36
The Timber Company EPS - Diluted 0.94
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
#### Joseph LOWE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. I-494.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. First District.

Sept. 5, 1967.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
# C_2022368EN.01002001.xml

| 26.9.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 368/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.9.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 368/20

---

Order of the President of the Court of 29 April 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State — Netherlands) — K.R., Other party: Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid

(Case C-637/21) (1)

(2022/C 368/32)

Language of the case: Dutch

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

---

(1)  OJ C 24, 17.1.2022.

---