alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION * IN THE**

**OF MARYLAND * COURT OF APPEALS** *** OF MARYLAND Petitioner, ** * *** Misc. Docket AG No. 17** **v. * September Term, 2018** ***** **SANDY N. WEBB *** ***** **Respondent. ***

ORDER

**This matter having come before the Court on the pr esentation of a certified copy of**  **the Opinion and Order of the Supreme Court of the S tate of Oregon dated May 24, 2018,**  **wherein the Respondent, Sandy N. Webb, was disbarre d from the practice of law for**  **violating the Oregon Rules of Professional Conduct. The Court having considered the**  **Petition and the parties’ Responses to this Court’s Show Cause Order, dated August 21,**  **2018, it is this 26th day of October, 2018, by the Court of Appeals of Maryland;**  **ORDERED, that Respondent, Sandy N. Webb, be, and sh e hereby is, disbarred from**  **the practice of law in the State of Maryland, pursu ant to Maryland Rule 19-737, for**  **violations of Rules 1.15 and 8.4(a), (c) and (d) of the Maryland Rules of Professional**  **Conduct and Maryland Code, Business Occupations & P rofession, § 10-306; and it is** 

**further ORDERED, that the Clerk of this Court shall str**  **ike the name of Sandy N. Webb from the register of attorneys in this Court and ce**  **rtify that fact to the Trustees of the Client Protection Fund of the Bar of Maryland and all Cler**  **ks of all judicial tribunals in this State in accordance with Maryland Rule 19-761(b).** 

**/s/ Mary Ellen Barbera Chief Judge**
From: Brachtl, Megan 

Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 12:54 PM

To: 'Szabo, Aaron'; Ling, Michael

Subject: RE: SO2 Data Requirements Rule: RLSO and Clean Version

Importance: High

Aaron – Attached please find the documents you requested. Please let me know if you have any 

questions.

Thanks,

Megan

Megan V. Brachtl, Group Leader

State and Local Programs Group

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(919) 541-2648

brachtl.megan@epa.gov

From: Szabo, Aaron [mailto:Aaron_L_Szabo@omb.eop.gov] 

Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 6:09 PM

To: Ling, Michael; Brachtl, Megan

Subject: SO2 Data Requirements Rule: RLSO and Clean Version

Mike and Megan,

When you are available, can you send me a final clean and redline-strikeout version (from the original 

version sent to OMB) of the SO2 Data Requirements rule? Thanks.

Aaron L. Szabo

Policy Analyst

Office of Management and Budget

202-395-3621

Aaron_L_Szabo@omb.eop.gov
# C_2018328EN.01005301.xml

| 17.9.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 328/53 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.9.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 328/53

---

Action brought on 13 July 2018 — Sintokogio v EUIPO (ProAssist)

(Case T-439/18)

(2018/C 328/72)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Sintokogio Ltd (Nagoya, Japan) (represented by: V. Dalichau, S. Kirschstein-Freund, B. Breitinger, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the word mark ProAssist — Application for registration No 1 327 746

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 May 2018 in Case R 2341/2017-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision concerning the EU Part of International Registration 1327746; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision concerning the EU Part of International Registration 1327746;

| — | alternatively amend the contested decision concerning the EU Part of International Registration 1327746; |
| --- | --- |

—

alternatively amend the contested decision concerning the EU Part of International Registration 1327746;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs of the appeal proceedings and of the proceedings before the Court. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs of the appeal proceedings and of the proceedings before the Court.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Infringement of the Principle of equal treatment and sound administration, Article 107 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of the Principle of equal treatment and sound administration, Article 107 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 833 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 833

  Recommending the designation of the first Wednesday of December as 
                  ``Government Customer Service Day''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 14, 2016

 Mr. Cuellar submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
            the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Recommending the designation of the first Wednesday of December as 
                  ``Government Customer Service Day''.

Whereas the business of Government is the business of customer service;
Whereas polls show the majority of citizens have a negative view of Government;
Whereas polls show the majority of citizens believe the Federal Government can 
        improve customer service;
Whereas polls show that quality service delivery increases citizen trust in 
        Government;
Whereas the Government owes taxpayers effective, efficient, and responsible 
        government;
Whereas the GPRA Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-352) resulted in a cross-agency 
        priority goal of delivering world-class customer service to citizens by 
        making it faster and easier for individuals and businesses to complete 
        transactions and have a positive experience with the Government;
Whereas the GPRA Act of 2010 resulted in President Obama issuing an executive 
        order in 2011 to improve the quality of Government service to the 
        public;
Whereas there are an untold number of hard working and dedicated Federal 
        employees who are delivering exceptional customer service every day 
        without getting the recognition they deserve; and
Whereas the first Wednesday of December should be designated as ``Government 
        Customer Service Day'': Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) encourages the executive branch to find innovative ways 
        to instill a culture of customer centered service; and
            (2) encourages each agency to recognize employees who 
        deliver outstanding levels of service to the public.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA 

FIFTH DISTRICT 

CARLTON MCGEE, 

Petitioner, 

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED 

v. Case No. 5D17-1701 

STATE OF FLORIDA, 

Respondent. 

/ 

Opinion filed July 21, 2017

Petition for Belated Appeal 

A Case of Original Jurisdiction. 

Carlton McGee, Wewahitchka, pro se. 

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General 

Tallahassee, and, Marjorie Vincent-Tripp, 

Assistant Attorney General, Daytona 

Beach, for Respondent. 

PER CURIAM. 

The petition for belated appeal is granted. A copy of this opinion shall be filed 

with the trial court and be treated as the notice of appeal from the December 7, 2017 

judgments and sentences in Case No. 2016-CF-1772 in the Circuit Court in and for 

Orange County, Florida. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(c)(6)(D). 

PETITION GRANTED. 

ORFINGER, BERGER and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.
September 14, 1999

21938

#### State v. Melvin

Affirmed
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      Exhibit 15

                                                          [ARTHUR ANDERSEN LOGO]


REPORT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


To Education Management Corporation and Subsidiaries:

We have reviewed the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets of
Education Management Corporation (a Pennsylvania corporation) and Subsidiaries
as of September 30, 2000 and 1999, the related condensed consolidated statements
of income for the three-month periods ended September 30, 2000 and 1999 and the
condensed consolidated statements of cash flows for the three-month periods
ended September 30, 2000 and 1999. These financial statements are the
responsibility of the Company's management.

We conducted our review in accordance with standards established by the American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants. A review of interim financial
information consists principally of applying analytical procedures to financial
data and making inquiries of persons responsible for financial and accounting
matters. It is substantially less in scope than an audit conducted in accordance
with generally accepted auditing standards, the objective of which is the
expression of an opinion regarding the financial statements taken as a whole,
Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.

Based on our review, we are not aware of any material modifications that should
be made to the financial statements referred to above for them to be in
conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.

We have previously audited, in accordance with auditing standards generally
accepted in the United States, the consolidated balance sheet of Education
Management Corporation and Subsidiaries as of June 30, 2000 (not presented
herein), and, in our report dated July 27, 2000, we expressed an unqualified
opinion on that statement. In our opinion, the information set forth in the
accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheet as of June 30, 2000 is fairly
stated, in all material respects, in relation to the consolidated balance sheet
from which it has been derived.


                                                  /s/ Arthur Andersen LLP


Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
  October 19, 2000
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-6008

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

JOSE ANTONIO MOROZUMI, JR.,

 Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Martin K. Reidinger, 

District Judge. (1:07-cr-00054-MR-1; 1:09-cv-00393-MR)

Submitted: March 15, 2012 Decided: March 20, 2012

Before DUNCAN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jose Antonio Morozumi, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Jill Westmoreland 

Rose, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North 

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Jose Antonio Morozumi, Jr., seeks to appeal the 

district court’s order treating his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion 

as a successive 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2011) motion, and 

dismissing it on that basis. The order is not appealable unless 

a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of 

appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006). A certificate 

of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of 

the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) 

(2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a 

prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that 

reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s 

assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. 

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. 

Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). When the district court 

denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must 

demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is 

debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the 

denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude 

that Morozumi has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, 

we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
3

Additionally, we construe Morozumi’s notice of appeal 

and informal brief as an application to file a second or 

successive § 2255 motion. United States v. Winestock, 340 F.3d 

200, 208 (4th Cir. 2003). In order to obtain authorization to 

file a successive § 2255 motion, a prisoner must assert claims 

based on either: (1) newly discovered evidence, not previously 

discoverable by due diligence, that would be sufficient to 

establish by clear and convincing evidence that, but for 

constitutional error, no reasonable factfinder would have found 

the movant guilty of the offense; or (2) a new rule of 

constitutional law, previously unavailable, made retroactive by 

the Supreme Court to cases on collateral review. 28 U.S.C.A.

§ 2255(h) (West Supp. 2011). Morozumi’s claims do not satisfy 

either of these criteria. Therefore, we deny authorization to 

file a successive § 2255 motion.

We dispense 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.

DISMISSED
_______________________________________ __ _____________ _______________ _____________ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

September 21, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,
Chief Justice

133658-59 Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. LOLA MELBOURNE, Stephen J. Markman, Plaintiff-Appellee, Justices

v SC: 133658 COA: 263783 Wayne CC: 00-010650-NO LAWN WORKS, Defendant, and

WAYNE BOWLING AND RECREATION, INC., Defendant-Appellant.

LOLA MELBOURNE, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 133659 COA: 263819 Wayne CC: 03-314738-CK WAYNE BOWLING AND RECREATION, INC., Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, th e application for leave to appeal the March 6, 2007 judgment of the Court of Appeals is cons idered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

l0914 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

September 21, 2007

Clerk
#### Basuel v. Young

19549

2/20/98

Vacated and Remanded
# C_2019423EN.01004301.xml

| 16.12.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 423/43 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.12.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 423/43

---

Judgment of the General Court of 3 October 2019 – Wanda Films and Wanda Visión v EUIPO – Dalian Wanda Group (WANDA FILMS)

(Case T-533/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark WANDA FILMS - Earlier EU word mark WANDA - Relative ground for refusal - Restriction of the application for registration - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2019/C 423/53)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Wanda Films, SL (Pozuelo de Alarcón, Spain) and Wanda Visión, SA (Pozuelo de Alarcón) (represented by: C. Planas Silva, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: P. Sipos and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Dalian Wanda Group Co. Ltd (Dalian, China) (represented by: M. Hawkins, Solicitor, and by T. Dolde and K. Lüder, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 June 2018 (Case R 401/2017-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Dalian Wanda Group and Wanda Films.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Wanda Films, SL and Wanda Visión, SA to pay the costs, including those incurred by Dalian Wanda Group Co. Ltd for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Wanda Films, SL and Wanda Visión, SA to pay the costs, including those incurred by Dalian Wanda Group Co. Ltd for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

---

(1)  OJ C 399, 5.11.2018.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 807 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 807

Expressing support for designation of May 5, 2017, as ``National Day of 
      Awareness for Missing and Murdered Native Women and Girls''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              July 5, 2016

  Mr. Zinke (for himself, Mr. Young of Alaska, Mrs. Kirkpatrick, Mrs. 
Lawrence, Mr. Cramer, Ms. Brown of Florida, Ms. Lee, Mr. Aderholt, Mr. 
Pearce, Ms. McCollum, and Mr. Cole) submitted the following resolution; 
        which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Expressing support for designation of May 5, 2017, as ``National Day of 
      Awareness for Missing and Murdered Native Women and Girls''.

Whereas, according to a study commissioned by the Department of Justice, in some 
        tribal communities, American Indian women face murder rates that are 
        more than 10 times the national average;
Whereas, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, homicide 
        was the third leading cause of death among American Indian and Alaska 
        Native women between 10 and 24 years of age and the fifth leading cause 
        of death for American Indian and Alaska Native women between 25 and 34 
        years of age;
Whereas little data exist on the number of missing American Indian and Alaska 
        Native women in the United States;
Whereas, on July 5, 2013, Hanna Harris, a member of the Northern Cheyenne Tribe, 
        was reported missing by her family in Lame Deer, Montana;
Whereas the body of Hanna Harris was found 5 days after she went missing;
Whereas Hanna Harris was determined to have been raped and murdered and the 
        individuals accused of committing those crimes were convicted;
Whereas the case of Hanna Harris is only one example of many similar cases; and
Whereas Hanna Harris was born on May 5, 1992: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) supports the designation of ``National Day of Awareness 
        for Missing and Murdered Native Women and Girls''; and
            (2) calls on the people of the United States and interested 
        groups to--
                    (A) commemorate the lives of missing and murdered 
                American Indian and Alaska Native women whose cases are 
                documented and undocumented in public records and the 
                media; and
                    (B) demonstrate solidarity with the families of 
                victims in light of these tragedies.
                                 <all>
```
1Subject:FW: data from Goldman et al. (2012)Attachments:table 3 figure.xlsxFrom:Mulholland, James A <james.mulholland@ce.gatech.edu>Sent:Thursday, October 31, 2013 12:35 PMTo:Richmond-Bryant, JenniferSubject:RE: data from Goldman et al. (2012)Attached are data for figure 4. Unfortunately,Ino longer have the data for figure 5.From:Richmond-Bryant, Jennifer [mailto:Richmond-Bryant.Jennifer@epa.gov]Sent:Thursday, October 31, 2013 11:59 AMTo:Mulholland, James ASubject:RE: data from Goldman et al. (2012)Hi Jim,Thank you so much for your quick response and for clarifying the results displayed in those figures. Before we attempt to exchange the data, doyou have the summary data that were used to produce those figures? If the summary data exist somewhere, it might be easier to transmit those inlieu of our reproducing your results.Thanks again for your help,JenFrom:Mulholland, James A [mailto:james.mulholland@ce.gatech.edu]Sent:Thursday, October 31, 2013 11:52 AMTo:Richmond-Bryant, JenniferSubject:RE: data from Goldman et al. (2012)Hi Jen,FYI, the simulation results used in those figures arenot simulations of specific days, but simulations that match the distribution features of the NO2/NOx dataover the 1999-2004 time period.2JimFrom:Richmond-Bryant, Jennifer [mailto:Richmond-Bryant.Jennifer@epa.gov]Sent:Thursday, October 31, 2013 11:17 AMTo:james.mulholland@ce.gatech.eduSubject:data from Goldman et al. (2012)Dear Dr. Mulholland:I am writing to request the NO2 and NOx data that were presented in Figures 4 and 5 in Goldman et al. (2012) “Characterization of ambient airpollution measurement error in a time-series health study using a geostatistical simulation approach.” Atmos. Environ. 57:101-108. We would liketo include these data in a table on exposure measurement error for the ISA for Oxides of Nitrogen. If possible, it would be very helpful to us if youcould either send me the data or let me know if the data are not available by 11/7. Thank you so much for your time and assistance with this! Ihope you’re doing well otherwise.Best regards,Jen Richmond-BryantJen Richmond-Bryant, Ph.D. | National Center for Environmental Assessment | 109 TW Alexander Drive, MD B243-01, Research Triangle Park, NC | office: 919-541-4518 |mobile: 919-360-146612345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728A B C D E F G H I J K LMNO P Q R SCM UA PWA AWA TPWANO2 0.24397 0.38313 0.37959 0.38238 0.45162NOx 0.32532 0.45039 0.45771 0.47184 0.51894CO 0.30067 0.41319 0.41999 0.42635 0.49192SO2 0.11063 0.15933 0.16971 0.16716 0.27265O3 0.85956 0.90221 0.90021 0.90175 0.92007PM10 0.54238 0.68077 0.67524 0.68021 0.73725PM2.5 0.75538 0.84641 0.84482 0.84391 0.86936SO4 0.78477 0.86834 0.86596 0.86799 0.88895NO3 0.75112 0.83062 0.82878 0.83078 0.85126NH4 0.62319 0.7562 0.75204 0.75745 0.79147EC 0.31111 0.45818 0.46362 0.46468 0.52632OC 0.52664 0.69232 0.68797 0.69574 0.7445400.20.40.60.81

population

‐ weighted R 2 (Z,Z*)CMUAPWAAWATPWANO2NOxCOSO2O3PM10PM2.5SO4NO3NH4ECOCtable3figure.xlsxtable3Page1of22930313233343536373839404142434400.20.40.60.81

population

‐ weighted R 2 (Z,Z*)CMUAPWAAWATPWANO2NOxCOSO2O3PM10PM2.5SO4NO3NH4ECOCtable3figure.xlsxtable3Page1of2
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATIONS BY THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Education Management Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert T. McDowell, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby
certify in such capacity, 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 for the periods reflected therein.



Date: February 9, 2005



By:

/s/    ROBERT T.
MCDOWELLRobert T. McDowell Chief Financial Officer
March 28, 2006

26829

#### State v. Smith

Affirmed