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

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 643 

Honoring women who have served, and who are currently serving, as members 

of the Armed Forces and recognizing the recently expanded service opportunities available to female members of the Armed Forces. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 15, 2016 

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California submitted the following resolution; 

which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

RESOLUTION 

Honoring women who have served, and who are currently 

serving, as members of the Armed Forces and recognizing the recently expanded service opportunities available to female members of the Armed Forces. 

Whereas 201,719 women currently serve on active duty and 

156,415 in the National Guard and the reserves as members of the United States Armed Forces; 

Whereas 164 female members of the Armed Forces have been 

killed and 1,021 female members of the Armed Forces 

have been wounded while serving the United States in 

Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation Enduring Freedom, 

Operation Freedom’s Sentinel, and Operation New Dawn; 

Whereas 60 female members of the Armed Forces currently 

serve with the rank of general or flag officer; 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 643 IH 

Whereas female members of the Armed Forces have served 

in sensitive operations alongside Special Operations 

Forces as part of Cultural Support Teams; 

Whereas, in 2015, Captain Kristen Griest, First Lieutenant 

Shaye Haver, and Major Lisa Jaster became the first 

women to graduate from Army Ranger School; and 

Whereas, on December 3, 2016, Secretary of Defense Ashton 

Carter officially announced that all military occupations 

and positions are to be open to female members of the 

Armed Forces: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) honors women who have served, and who 

3 are currently serving, as members of the Armed 

4 Forces; 

5 (2) commends female members of the Armed 

6 Forces who have sacrificed their lives in defense of 

7 the United States; 

8 (3) recognizes that female members of the 

9 Armed Forces are an integral and invaluable part of 

10 the Armed Forces; 

11 (4) urges the Secretary of Defense to ensure 

12 that female members of the Armed Forces receive 

13 adequate, well-fitted equipment in order to ensure 

14 optimal safety and protection; 

15 (5) urges the Secretary of Defense to ensure 

16 that female members of the Armed Forces have acVerDate Sep 11 2014 21:31 Mar 15, 2016 Jkt 059200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\HR643.IH HR643

srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HRES 643 IH 

1 cess to adequate health services that fully address 

2 their specific medical needs; 

3 (6) encourages the Secretary of Defense to de4 velop new initiatives focused on recruiting and re5 taining more women in the officer corps; and 

6 (7) recognizes that the United States must con7 tinue to encourage and support female members of 

8 the Armed Forces as they fight for and defend the 

9 United States. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
# C_2019213EN.01003501.xml

| 24.6.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 213/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.6.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 213/35

---

Order of the General Court of 30 April 2019 — Promeco v EUIPO — Aerts (dishes)

(Case T-353/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Withdrawal of the application for declaration of invalidity - No need to adjudicate)

(2019/C 213/36)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Promeco NV (Kortrijk, Belgium) (represented by: H. Hartwig and A. von Mühlendahl, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral and H. O'Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO intervening before the General Court: Aerts NV (Geel, Belgium) (represented by: G. Glas and T. Carmeliet, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Grand Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 February 2018 (Case R 459/2016–G) relating to invalidity proceedings between Promeco NV and Aerts NV.

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. | Promeco NV shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Promeco NV shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

| 3. | Aerts NV shall bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Aerts NV shall bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 259, 23.7.2018.

---
# C_2020175EN.01001402.xml

| 25.5.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 175/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.5.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 175/14

---

Judgment of the General Court of 2 April 2020 –Veit v ECB

(Case T-474/18) (1)

(Civil service - ECB staff - Remuneration - Competitions - Equality of treatment between internal and external candidates - Classification in step)

(2020/C 175/16)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Sebastian Veit (Frankfurt am Main, Germany) (represented by: K. Kujath, lawyer)

Defendant: European Central Bank (represented by: F. von Lindeiner and M. Rötting, acting as Agents, and B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU and Article 50a of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union seeking annulment, first, of the ECB’s decision of 3 January 2018 in so far as it attributes to the applicant only salary step 17 in salary band F/G and, second, of the ECB’s decision of 25 May 2018 rejecting the applicant’s complaint.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Mr Sebastian Veit to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Sebastian Veit to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 352, 1. 10. 2018.

---
# United States Court of Appeals **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

May 13, 2013

ERRATA

______________________

Appeal No

. 2011

- 1301

CLS BANK INTERNATIONAL, Plaintiff

- Appellee,

AND

CLS SERVICES. LTD., Counterclaim Defendant

- Appellee,

v.

ALICE CORPORATION PTY. LTD., Defendant

- Appellant.

______________________

De cided: May 10, 201 3

P recedential Opinion

______________________

Please make the following change in Judge Newman’s concurring in part, dissenting in part opinion:

On page 9, lines 14–15 , please change “the Trademark, & Copyright Journal ” to

-- the Patent, Trademark, & Copyright
Journal

--.
December 14, 1998

21522

#### State v. Naile

Affirmed
# C_2019112EN.01001701.xml

| 25.3.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 112/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.3.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 112/17

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo (Spain) lodged on 5 December 2018 — Ayuntamiento de Pamplona v Orange España, S.A.U.

(Case C-764/18)

(2019/C 112/21)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Supremo

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Ayuntamiento de Pamplona

Respondent: Orange España, S.A.U.

Questions referred

| 1. | Is Directive 2002/20/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on the authorisation of electronic communications networks and services (Authorisation Directive), (1) as interpreted by the Court of Justice in relation to undertakings operating in the mobile telecommunications sector, and, specifically, the limitations set out in Articles 12 and 13 of that directive on the taxation powers of the Member States, applicable to undertakings providing fixed telephony and Internet services? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is Directive 2002/20/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on the authorisation of electronic communications networks and services (Authorisation Directive), (1) as interpreted by the Court of Justice in relation to undertakings operating in the mobile telecommunications sector, and, specifically, the limitations set out in Articles 12 and 13 of that directive on the taxation powers of the Member States, applicable to undertakings providing fixed telephony and Internet services?

| 2. | If the first question is answered in the affirmative (and it is held that that directive is applicable to providers of fixed telephony and Internet services), do Articles 12 and 13 of Directive 2002/20/EC allow Member States to impose a charge or fee calculated exclusively by reference to the gross annual revenue earned by the company — the proprietor of the installed facilities — from the provision of fixed telephony and Internet services in the territory concerned? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the first question is answered in the affirmative (and it is held that that directive is applicable to providers of fixed telephony and Internet services), do Articles 12 and 13 of Directive 2002/20/EC allow Member States to impose a charge or fee calculated exclusively by reference to the gross annual revenue earned by the company — the proprietor of the installed facilities — from the provision of fixed telephony and Internet services in the territory concerned?

---

(1)  OJ 2002 L 108, p. 21.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The Schedule contains summary financial information extrated from the Company's
condensed consolidated financial statements for the three months ended March 31,
1997 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                      75,951,282
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               59,457,321
<ALLOWANCES>                                 3,179,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           159,660,653
<PP&E>                                     512,799,226
<DEPRECIATION>                             107,706,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             904,749,081
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       81,303,628
<BONDS>                                    272,858,664
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        43,029
<OTHER-SE>                                 449,706,935
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               904,749,081
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            95,579,528
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               61,862,294
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           4,140,527
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             15,036,701
<INCOME-TAX>                                 6,201,839
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          8,834,862
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 8,834,862
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .21
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Navigate to Homepage
Search
Main navigation
  

        
              Explore the Capitol Campus
                          Art
                            Buildings & Grounds
                            Capitol Hill Facts
                            Visitor Resources
                            Our Blog
                            What We Do
                          Areas of Expertise
                            Programs & Ceremonies
                            Projects
                            Publications
                            Strategic Objectives
                            About Us
                          Who We Are
                            History of the AOC
                            News & Notices
                            Organizational Structure
                            Partnerships & Recognition
                            Work With UsSearch Breadcrumb
    Homecommentreply404Add new comment
Add new comment
        
                  Spencer Calhoun (not verified)PermalinkDecember 22, 2023 - 3:19amHello! Great article! I was on social media and found a post about the United Kingdom Parliament having a similar light to denote that debate is occurring in the chamber. I immediately thought about this article and wondered if there was a connection of some kind?
ReplyYour name
Email Address
        The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Comment
About text formats
Plain text
  
  
      
          No HTML tags allowed.
                      Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
                      Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically. Serve. Preserve. Inspire.

              Contact Us
                            Accountability
                            Hill Staff Resources
                            AOC Staff Resources
Utility
  

        
              Privacy Policy
                            Image Terms of Use
                            Inspector General
                            U.S. Botanic Garden
                            U.S. Capitol Visitor CenterFacebook
	Twitter
	Flickr
	YouTube
	Instagram
	Subscribe
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997          
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           7,406
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,539
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                20,546
<PP&E>                                          15,316
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  37,537
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           16,234
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           114
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,363
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    37,537
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                10,623
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    7,392
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 206
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (52)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        41
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (93)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (93)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.01)
        

</TABLE>
# C_2021019EN.01004601.xml

| 18.1.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 19/46 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.1.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 19/46

---

Judgment of the General Court of 18 November 2020 — Aquind v ACER

(Case T-735/18) (1)

(Energy - Article 17 of Regulation (EC) No 714/2009 - Decision of ACER refusing a request for exemption relating to new electrical interconnectors - Appeal before the Board of Appeal of ACER - Intensity of the review)

(2021/C 19/47)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Aquind Ltd (Wallsend, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Goldberg and C. Davis, Solicitors, and E. White, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) (represented by: P. Martinet, E. Tremmel, C. Gence-Creux and A. Hofstadter, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of (i) Decision A-001-2018 of the Board of Appeal of ACER of 17 October 2018 which upheld Decision No 05/2018 of ACER of 19 June 2018 refusing a request for exemption relating to an electrical interconnector connecting the electricity transmission systems in the United Kingdom and France, and (ii) the decision of ACER thus upheld.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls Decision A-001-2018 of the Board of Appeal of the European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) of 17 October 2018; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls Decision A-001-2018 of the Board of Appeal of the European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) of 17 October 2018;

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

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Orders ACER to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Aquind Ltd. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders ACER to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Aquind Ltd.

---

(1)  OJ C 103, 18.3.2019.

---
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

                          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 DUSA Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, D. Geoffrey Shulman, Chief
Executive Officer 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.

                                                   /s/ D. Geoffrey Shulman
                                                   -----------------------
                                                   D. Geoffrey Shulman

Date:    August 13, 2002
What is a Native Species?

A native species is a plant or animal that has always been a part of a particular environment. Such animals play a role in the chain of events for feeding (food web) or habitat and have evolved with the environment and adapted to it. When there are changes in the environment - such as where a new similar animal is added or when the habitat changes - it can disrupt the native species, who now has to compete for food with the new animal or has to find different habitat in order to live because its original habitat is no longer available. Such has been the case for many native aquatic species whose numbers have declined due to competition with new invader species or because of loss of important habitat to development. Why is Native Species Conservation Important? Native species conservation is important because many native species populations are declining due to degraded habitat and the spread of aquatic nuisance species. Without help, some declining species never recover and eventually may become extinct - or no longer in existence. When species declines are detected, efforts are made to protect the species and their habitat by designating it as threatened or an endangered in hopes of preventing it from becoming extinct. Link to our threatened and endangered aquatic species program . Preventing a species from declining to such levels where it is in peril is as important - if not more important - than allowing the species to reach such low levels that it requires protection as a threatened or endangered species. We work to detect declines in native fish populations and to assist those species before they reach low levels that require threatened or endangered listing. We accomplish this by working with partners to increase support and assistance to declining native fish and other aquatic resources andto ensure that habitats and native biological communities remain intact and at self-sustaining levels. Some Native Species Found in Region 3 Below are some native species that we work with in Region 3. Select an image to link to more information about the species. Page 1 of 2 USFWS Region 3 Fisheries
-Native Fish

3/7/2011 http://www.fws.gov/midwest/Fisheries/topic
-nativespecies.htmView a poster presentation on Service activities with Administration of the National Paddlefish

Database (pdf, 315 Kb). - Get the Free Adobe Reader required to view pdf files. Other interesting native species conservation links:
 USFWS Ashland FRO,WI - Native Fish Restoration  USFWS Alpena FRO,MI - Native Fish Restoration  USFWS La Crosse FRO,WI - Native Fish Restoration Top • Aquatic Species Conservation • Fisheries Home Department of Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife USA.gov Privacy Act/Disclaimer Contact Us About Us

Accessibility Notices FOIA Coaster brook trout Lake sturgeon Lake trout

Paddlefish Shovelnose sturgeon Page 2 of 2 USFWS Region 3 Fisheries
-Native Fish

3/7/2011 http://www.fws.gov/midwest/Fisheries/topic
-nativespecies.htm
#### State v. Heide

17893

12/14/94

Reversed
#### State v. Ublado

16703

5/11/95

Affirmed