alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential. 

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

______________________

MICH AE L W. LONG, Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES, Defendant

- Appellee.

______________________

2013

- 5027

______________________ Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims in No. 12

- CV

- 0647, Judge Eric G. Bruggink.

______________________

Decided: April 9, 2013

______________________

M ICHAEL W. L ONG , of LaGrange, Kentucky, pro se.

J AMES P. C ONNOR , Trial Attorney, Commercial Litig ation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, for defendant

- appellee. With him on the brief were S TUART F. D ELERY , Principal Dep uty Acting Assistant Attorney Ge neral, J EANNE E. D AVIDSON , Director, R EGINALD T. B LADES , J R ., Assistant Director

______________________MICHAEL LONG v. US 2

Before L OURIE , C LEVENGER , and R EYNA , Circuit Judges.

P ER C URIAM

Michea l W. Long appeals from the final judgment of the United States Court of Federal Claims dismissing without prejudice his complaint for want of jurisdiction. Micheal Long v. United States , No. 12

- CV

- 0647 ( Fed. Cl. Dec 7, 2012) , ECF No. 6 . We affirm

. I

Mr. Long filed his complaint against the United States on September 27, 2012. His complaint described historic injustices of slavery in this country and els ewhere, with specific reference to the history of African slave trade. The complaint alleged that the United States “depriv[ed]” Mr. Long of his “rights secured by the U.S. Constitution and the laws [ ] of the United States.” Mr. Long sought monetary damages from the United States.
The Court of Federal Claims by Order dismissed the complaint without prejudice. The court noted that it was obligated to dismiss any case over which it does not have jurisdiction. Citing United States v. Mitchell , 463 U.S. 206, 216

- 17 (1983), the court’s Order explained that it lacks jurisdiction over any complaint seeking mo ney damages from the United States that fails to reference a

money- mandating statute pursuant to which money damages can be assessed against the United States. Because Mr. Long’s complaint cited no money

- mandating source of authority, the court dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction.

II
Mr. Long timely appealed to this court. We review questions of jurisdiction without deference. See Dehne v.MICHAEL LONG v. US 3

United States , 970 F.2d 890, 892 (Fed. Cir. 1992). It is not sufficient that Mr. Long invoked jurisdi ction under the Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. 1491, which waives sovereign immunity to sue the United States for money damages, because the Tucker Act is not money

- mandating. We have reviewed Mr. Long’s complaint carefully, and we agree with the Court of Federal Claims that Mr. Long has not cited a money

- mandating authority. Therefore, we conclude that the Court of Federal Claims correctly di smissed Mr. Long’s complaint.
The final judgment of the Court of Federal Claims is affirmed

. C OSTS

No costs

.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATIONS 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 Perfumania Holdings, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending August 2, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Donna Dellomo, 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, to my knowledge:



| | 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



By:

/S/ Donna DellomoDonna DellomoChief Financial OfficerSeptember 16, 2008
Biotechnology Regulatory Services

Stakeholder Meeting

December 9, 2020, 1-3pm

Agenda

Welcome Doug McKalip, BRS Senior Policy Advisor 

New BRS Staff Ibrahim Shaqir, BRS Associate Deputy Administrator 

Overview of BRS activities for FY 2020 and a Look 

Ahead to FY 2021 Priorities Bernadette Juarez, BRS Deputy Administrator

SECURE Rule Features for 2020 and Beyond Alan Pearson, BRS Associate Deputy Administrator 

Status Update on FY 2020 Compliance Activities Doug Grant, Director, BRS Regulatory Operations 

Program

APHIS eFile Doug Grant, Director, BRS Regulatory Operations 

Program 

Wrap-Up and Closing Doug McKalip, BRS Senior Policy Advisor
# C_2019004EN.01003901.xml

| 7.1.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 4/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.1.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 4/39

---

Action brought on 30 October 2018 — Balani Balani and Others v EUIPO — Play Hawkers (HAWKERS)

(Case T-651/18)

(2019/C 4/51)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicants: Sonu Gangaram Balani Balani, Anup Suresh Balani Shivdasani and Amrit Suresh Balani Shivdasani (Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain) (represented by: A. Díaz Marrero, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Play Hawkers, SL (Elche, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union figurative mark HAWKERS — Application for registration No 15 746 209

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 August 2018 in Case R 396/2018-2

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision and give judgment declaring that the trade mark applied for, under No 15 746 209, and which was granted in part, is also granted for the rest of the goods applied for: Watches; Chronometers (watches); Sports watches; Jewellery; Imitation jewellery; Jewellery, including imitation jewellery and costume jewellery; Clocks and watches; Horological goods; Cases for clocks and watches; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision and give judgment declaring that the trade mark applied for, under No 15 746 209, and which was granted in part, is also granted for the rest of the goods applied for: Watches; Chronometers (watches); Sports watches; Jewellery; Imitation jewellery; Jewellery, including imitation jewellery and costume jewellery; Clocks and watches; Horological goods; Cases for clocks and watches;

| — | Order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay the costs.

Plea in law

Infringement of Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
# FILED
December 30, 1997 Cecil W. Crowson Appellate Cou rt Clerk IN THE COURT OF CR IMINAL A PPEALS OF TENN ESSEE AT NASHVILLE DECEMBER 1997 SESSION

STATE OF TENN ESSEE, ) ) C.C.A. No. 01C01-9701- CC-00033 Appellee, ) ) Montgomery County V. ) ) Honorable John H. Gasaway, III, Judge ) CARLA SMITH, ) (Assault & Driving on a Revoked License) ) Appellant. )

FOR THE APPE LLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE: Michael R. Jones John Knox Walkup District Public Defender Attorney General & Reporter Collier W. Goodlett, Jr. Daryl J. Brand Assistant Public Defender Assistant Attorney Gener al 109 S. Second Street Criminal Justice Div ision Clarksville, TN 37

040 450 James Robertson Parkwa y Nashville, TN 37243-0493 John W. Carney, Jr. District Attorney General Steven L. Garrett Assistant District A

ttorney General 204 Franklin Street, Suite 200

` Clarksville, TN 37 040

OPINION FILED: ___________________
AFFIRMED
PAUL G. SUMM ERS, Judge

O P I N I O N-2- The appellant, Carla Smith, pled guilty to assault a nd driving on a revoked license. She r eceived an effective sentence of el even months and twenty-nine days probation. A probation vi olation warrant issu ed alleging that the appellant failed to report, di d not fulfill educational requi rements, and did not pay various fees and fines. The hearing court found the alleg ations and the warrant to be valid and revoked the appellant’s probation. She appeals to this Court. We affirm the court’s disposition.
The appellant is no neophyte to the system. She has previ ously been on post-trial diver

sion and probation prior to this revocation. The cour t found sufficient evidence to sustain the allegations made in the r evocation warrant. We agree with the hearing court’s findings.
Appointed counsel for the appellant cites Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1976); and we duly note his position. Counsel also moves in his brie f to be allowed to withdraw. We respectfully deny the request for withdrawal at this time. Counsel may resubmit the motion pursuant to Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 14 at the appropriate time.

This Court finds that the evi dence does not preponderate agains t the findings of the trial court. Furthermore, there is no error of law which would mandate a reversal. The tri al judge did not abuse his d iscretion in revoki ng probation. See State v. Harkins , 811 S.W .2d 79, 8 2 (Tenn. 1991). He nce, we affirm the judgment of the trial cour t revoking probation pursuant to Tenn. Ct. of Crim. App. Rule 20.

______________________________ PAUL G. SUMMERS, Ju dge-3- CONCUR:

______________________________ JOSEPH B. JONES, Presiding Judge

______________________________ WILLIA M M. BARKER, Judge
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-13-00163-CR

Jerry VILLARREAL,

Appellant

v.

The State of 

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012CR10521W

Honorable Dick Alcala, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Delivered and Filed: May 15, 2013

DISMISSED

Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, appellant pled nolo contendere to aggravated 

assault with a deadly weapon. The trial court imposed sentence and signed a certification of 

defendant’s right to appeal stating that this “is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO 

right of appeal.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). After appellant filed his notice of appeal, the 

court clerk sent a copy of the certification to this court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(e). 

The clerk’s record contains a written plea bargain agreement, and the punishment 

assessed did not exceed the punishment recommended by the State and agreed to by the 
04-13-00163-CR

- 2 -

appellant; therefore, the trial court’s certification accurately reflects that appellant’s case is a plea 

bargain case and he does not have a right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). Rule 25.2(d) 

provides, “The appeal must be dismissed if a certification that shows the defendant has the right 

of appeal has not been made part of the record under these rules.” TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). 

Accordingly, on March 25, 2013, this court issued an order stating this appeal would be 

dismissed pursuant to Rule 25.2(d) unless an amended trial court certification that shows 

appellant has the right of appeal was made part of the appellate record. See Daniels v. State,110 

S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, order); TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); 37.1. No amended 

trial court certification has been filed; therefore, this appeal is dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish
#### State v. Kim

16921

10/25/94

Affirmed
Document Number: Revision: 

Previous Number:

Section/Area:

 Date:

Notes:

Office Procedures for Routing/Processing SIFs and RAs

CVB-WI-0193 02

PEL Reviewer Manual Ch. 4.12.1

CVB-WI-PEL-REV

21 May 2021

CVB-Released
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATIONS 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 E Com Ventures, Inc. (the Company) of Form 10-Q for the period
ending July 29, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Donovan Chin, 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, to my knowledge:



| | 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



By:

/S/ Donovan ChinDonovan ChinChief Financial OfficerSeptember 11, 2006
# C_2020077EN.01006101.xml

| 9.3.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 77/61 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.3.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 77/61

---

Order of the General Court of 22 January 2020 — La Marchesiana v EUIPO — Marchesi 1824 (MARCHESI)

(Case T-35/18) (1)

(2020/C 77/83)

Language of the case: English

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

---

(1)  OJ C 142, 23.4.2018.

---
**Annex 60. Item 10.1.1. – Sections 2.2.1. and 2.2.2. of Chapter 2.2.8. ‘Infection with white spot syndrome virus’**

Chapter 2.2.8.

infection with white spot syndrome virus

[...]

2.2.	Host factors

2.2.1.	Susceptible host species 

Species that fulfil the criteria for listing as susceptible to infection with WSSV according to Chapter 1.5. of the *Aquatic Animal Health Code* (*Aquatic Code*) are: 

~~Of all the species that have been tested to date, no decapod (order Decapoda) crustacean from marine, brackish or freshwater sources has been reported to be refractory to infection with WSSV (Flegel, 1997; Lightner, 1996; Lo & Kou, 1998; Maeda *et al*., 2000; Stentiford *et al*., 2009).~~

~~[**Note:** an assessment of species that meet the criteria for listing as susceptible to infection with WSSV in accordance with Chapter~~~~1.5.~~~~has not yet been completed]~~

2.2.2.	Species with incomplete evidence for susceptibility

Species for which there is incomplete evidence to fulfil the criteria for listing as susceptible to infection with WSSV according to Chapter 1.5. of the *Aquatic Code* are: 

In addition, pathogen-specific positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) results have been reported in the following species, but no active infection has been demonstrated: 

~~All life stages are potentially susceptible, from eggs to broodstock (Lightner, 1996; Venegas *et al*., 1999). WSSV genetic material has been detected in reproductive organs (Lo *et al*., 1997), but susceptibility of the gametes to WSSV infection has not been determined definitively.~~

[...]

____________
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
    HomeExplore the Capitol CampusThe Art Collection
Ephraim McDowell Statue
        
                  The Basics
      
Artist
      
Charles H. Niehaus

Materials
    Bronze

Year
    1929

Location
      
U.S. Capitol Visitor Center

This statue of Ephraim McDowell was given to the National Statuary Hall Collection by Kentucky in 1929.

Ephraim McDowell was born in Rockbridge County, Virginia, on November 11, 1771. His father was a veteran of the French and Indian War as well as a colonel during the Revolution. After the family moved to Kentucky the senior McDowell participated in the drafting of the Kentucky Constitution. The young McDowell, interested in medicine, studied at the Seminary of Worley and James and attended lectures in medicine at the University of Edinburgh, Scotland, from 1793 to 1794. Although he did not receive a degree from Edinburgh, he pursued his interest in anatomy and surgery.

McDowell practiced surgery and was a pioneer in abdominal surgical techniques, performing the first ovariotomy in the United States in 1809. One of his most famous patients was James K. Polk, for whom he removed a gall stone and repaired a hernia. McDowell was a member of the Philadelphia Medical Society in 1817 and a founder of Centre College in Danville, Kentucky, in 1819. He was also well known for his generosity, and he performed considerable work for charity.

In June 1830 McDowell was stricken with an acute attack of violent pain, nausea, and fever. He died on June 25, most likely a victim of appendicitis. In 1879 a monument was erected in his honor in Danville. Dr. McDowell was the great great grandfather of General John Campbell Greenway, whose statue was placed in the National Statuary Hall Collection by the state of Arizona. 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
**Ministerial Meeting to Discuss the U.S. EPA Notice of Data Availability Concerning Renewable Fuels Produced from Palm Oil**  **Meeting Date: Friday,**  **March 2 3**  **Building: RRB, OITA Fishbowl, RRB 3**  **rd Floor**  **Time: 9:45 (arrive) -**  **10:45 A** **M 1.**  **List of Delegation from Malaysia for the**  **Meeting with Assistant Administrator for**  **EPA** Name Designation 1 **Tan Sri Bernard Dompok**  **Minister of Plantation** 

**Industries and Commodities** 2 **Mr. M. Nagarajan Deputy Secretary General**  3 Dr. Choo Yuen May Director General of Malaysian Palm Oil Board (MPOB) 4 Dr. Yusof Bin Basiron CEO, Malaysian Palm Oil Council 5 Dr. Lim Weng Soon Director of processing and Engineering, MPOB 6 Rosidah Radzian Regional Manager/Science Attaché 7 Dayang Ratnasari Binti Abu Bakar Assistant Secretary 8. Dr. Phua Chiew Wei Scientist

**2. List of Delegation from Indonesia**  **– for Meeting with**  **Assistant Administrator of EPA** Name Designation
1 **Dr. Zaenal Bachruddin**  **Director General of**

**Processing and Marketing Ag. Products**  2 **Dr. Dino Patti Djalal Ambassador** 
3 Dr. Rosediana Suharto Executive Chairperson of

Indonesia Palm Oil Commission 4 Mr. Mesah Tarigan Director of International Marketing Development **3. Representative form Hudson & Knight LLP**- Mr. Kurt Blasé, Partner of Holland & Knight, LLP

(Nationality
– American)
**4. List of Representatives from U.S. EPA**  Gina McCarthy, Assistant Administrator, Office of Air and Radiation Margo T. Oge, Director, Office of Transportation and Air Quality Karl Simon, Director, Transportation and Climate Division Benjamin Hengst, Assistant Director, Transportation and Climate Division Sharyn Lie, Director, Climate and Economic Modeling Center Aaron Levy, Transportation and Climate Division Pam Teel, Office of International and Tribal Affairs Marta Montoro, Office of Air and Radiation
19627

#### Lum v. Zoning Board of Appeals

February 24, 1997

Order No. 97-19

Affirmed
#### In the Matter of Frank Ferlita.

Supreme Court, Orange County,

February 10,1971.

*578
      *Charles J. BoskosJd*for petitioner. *Knopf & Tamsen*for respondent.

John W. Sweeny, J.

Application has been made to the court for leave to file a separation agreement mmc pro *tunc*as of October 24,1968.

The affidavits before the court indicate that a separation agreement duly acknowledged was entered into between applicant and his wife on October 21, 1968.

Both parties understood that the agreement was to be filed pursuant to section 170 of the Domestic Relations Law by their respective attorneys but neither attorney attended to this matter. A letter is submitted in behalf of applicant’s wife stating that she would have no objections to such an order.

Although authority for such a directive is scarce, the court in *Matter of Leslie (Goodman),*N. Y. L. J., Aug. 25, 1970, p. 2, col. 2 allowed a similar application where it appeared that neither party would be prejudiced by the late filing of the agreement.

Finding no such prejudice in the instant ease and in light of the purposes and spirit of section 170 of the Domestic Relations Law, the application is hereby granted.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

June 24, 2014

d0616 

# Order

Clerk June 24, 2014

148795

VIRGINIA C. KUKUK,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v SC: 148795

COA: 310616

St. Clair CC: 10

- 002949

- CZ

HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL

ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE FOR

SEQUOIA MORTGAGE TRUST 2007

- 3,

MERRILL LYNCH CREDIT CORP.,

PHH MORTGAGE CORP., TROTT &

TROTT, P.C., and NEW CENTURY

MORTGAGE CORP.,

Defendants

- Appellees.

________________________________ ______/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 14, 2014

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
# C_2020019EN.01004801.xml

| 20.1.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 19/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.1.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 19/48

---

Judgment of the General Court of 26 November 2019 — Wyld v EUIPO — Kaufland Warenhandel (wyld)

(Case T-711/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark wyld - Earlier international word mark WILD CRISP - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Rejection in part of the application for registration)

(2020/C 19/57)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Wyld GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: M. Douglas, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: M. Fischer, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Kaufland Warenhandel GmbH & Co. KG (Neckarsulm, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 September 2018 (Case R 2621/2017-2), relating to opposition proceedings betweenKaufland Warenhandel and Wyld.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Wyld GmbH to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Wyld GmbH to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 35, 28.1.2019.

---