alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF AND FOR THE THIRTY-NINE WEEKS
ENDED MARCH 28, 1998.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                                           <C>                     
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                 9-MOS                   
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-27-1998  
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-29-1997  
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-28-1998  
<CASH>                                         217,084  
<SECURITIES>                                         0  
<RECEIVABLES>                                  239,228  
<ALLOWANCES>                                    (3,567) 
<INVENTORY>                                    624,524  
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,102,665  
<PP&E>                                         357,842  
<DEPRECIATION>                                (129,574) 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,340,710  
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          752,672  
<BONDS>                                        110,000  
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0  
<PREFERRED>                                          0  
<COMMON>                                           932  
<OTHER-SE>                                     472,634  
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,340,710  
<SALES>                                      4,100,356  
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,100,356  
<CGS>                                        3,504,826  
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,504,826  
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               457,349  
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0  
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               9,141  
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                134,902  
<INCOME-TAX>                                    51,938  
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             82,964  
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0  
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0  
<CHANGES>                                            0  
<NET-INCOME>                                    82,964  
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.91  
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.87  
        

</TABLE>
#### Joseph Manasse, Appellant, v. The Dutton Bank, a Corporation, and the Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York, a Corporation, Appellees.

, An Appeal from a Decree of the Circuit Court for Alachua County.

T. B. Ellis, Jr., for Appellanl;

W. S. Broome and J. C. Adkins, for Appellees.

Appeal dismissed on praecipe of counsel for appellanr, January 16, 1915.
# C_2019213EN.01003601.xml

| 24.6.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 213/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.6.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 213/36

---

Order of the General Court of 29 April 2019 — Engel v EUIPO — F. Engel (ENGEL)

(Case T-381/18) (1)

(European Union trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Withdrawal of the opposition - No need to adjudicate)

(2019/C 213/37)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Engel GmbH (Pfullingen, Germany) (represented by: C. Pfitzer, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: F. Engel K/S (Haderslev, Denmark) (represented by: L. Elmgaard Sørensen, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 March 2018 (Case R 1423/2017-2), relating to opposition proceedings between F. Engel and Engel.

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. | Engel GmbH and F. Engel K/S shall bear their own costs and Engel GmbH shall pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Engel GmbH and F. Engel K/S shall bear their own costs and Engel GmbH shall pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

---

(1)  OJ C 276, 6.8.2018.

---
#### Doe, In re

21972

01/23/2001

Granted
<PAGE>   1

                                                                       EXHIBIT 3


                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT

                                       OF

                AMENDED AND RESTATED CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION

                                       OF

                      FISHER SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL INC.


         FISHER SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL INC. (the "Corporation"), a corporation
organized and existing under and by virtue of the General Corporation Law of the
State of Delaware (the "DGCL"), DOES HEREBY CERTIFY:

         FIRST: That the Board of Directors of the Corporation in accordance
with the provisions of Section 242 of the DGCL, by the unanimous vote of its
members on March 16, 1998, filed with the minutes of the Board of Directors,
duly adopted resolutions setting forth a proposed amendment to the Certificate
of Incorporation of the Corporation declaring such amendment to be advisable and
directing that such amendment be submitted to and be considered by the
stockholders of the Corporation for approval at the 1998 Annual Meeting of
Stockholders. The resolution setting forth the proposed amendment is as follows:

                  RESOLVED, That the Certificate of Incorporation of the
                  Corporation be amended by changing the Fourth Article thereof
                  so that, as amended, such Article shall be and read as
                  follows:




<PAGE>   2


                  "The total number of shares of stock which the Corporation
                  shall have authority to issue is 115,000,000 shares, of which
                  100,000,000 shall be Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share
                  (the "Common Stock"), and 15,000,000 shares shall be Preferred
                  Stock, par value $0.01 per share (the "Preferred Stock").

         SECOND: That thereafter, the foregoing amendment to the Corporation's
Certificate of Incorporation was duly adopted by the holders of a majority of
the outstanding shares of Common Stock of the Corporation at the Annual Meeting
of Stockholders on May 12, 1998 in accordance with the provisions of Section 242
of the DGCL and the terms of the Certificate of Incorporation.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, FISHER SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL INC. has caused
this Certificate of Amendment to be signed by Paul M. Meister, its Executive
Vice President, and attested by Todd M. DuChene, its Vice President and
Secretary, this 18th day of May, 1998.

                                       FISHER SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL INC.

                                       By: /S/ PAUL M. MEISTER
                                           ------------------------
                                           Paul M. Meister
                                           Executive Vice President


ATTEST:


By: /S/ TODD M. DUCHENE
    -------------------
    Todd M. DuChene
    Vice President and Secretary
September 15, 2006

27473

#### Lighter v. Yuen

Affirmed
# C_2019328EN.01004701.xml

| 30.9.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 328/47 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.9.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 328/47

---

Judgment of the General Court of 11 July 2019 — Klymenko v Council

(Case T-274/18) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Ukraine - Freezing of funds - List of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources - Maintenance of the applicant’s name on the list - Council’s obligation to verify that the decision of an authority of a third State was taken in accordance with the rights of the defence and the right to effective judicial protection)

(2019/C 328/52)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Olexsandr Viktorovych Klymenko (Moscow, Russia) (represented by M. Phelippeau, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by A. Vitro and P. Mahnič, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/333 of 5 March 2018, amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2018 L63, p. 48) and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/326 of 5 March 2018 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2018 L 63, p. 5), in so far as the applicant’s name was maintained on the list of persons, entities and bodies subject to those restrictive measures.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/333 of 5 March 2018, amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/326 of 5 March 2018 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, in so far as Mr Oleksandr Viktorovych Klymenko’s name was maintained on the list of persons, entities and bodies subject to those restrictive measures; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/333 of 5 March 2018, amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/326 of 5 March 2018 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, in so far as Mr Oleksandr Viktorovych Klymenko’s name was maintained on the list of persons, entities and bodies subject to those restrictive measures;

| 2. | Orders the Council of the European Union to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 249, 16.7.2018.

---
# C_2020077EN.01004501.xml

| 9.3.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 77/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.3.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 77/45

---

Judgment of the General Court of 29 January 2020 — Aldi v EUIPO — Titlbach (ALTISPORT)

(Case T-697/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark ALTISPORT - Earlier international and EU word marks ALDI - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Comparison of the goods and services - Obligation to state reasons - Article 94 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 77/64)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Aldi GmbH & Co. KG (Mülheim an der Ruhr, Germany) (represented by: N. Lützenrath, U. Rademacher, C. Fürsen and M. Minkner, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Markakis and A. Söder, acting as agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Aleš Titlbach (Meziboří, Czech Republic)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 September 2018 (Case R 2683/2017-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Aldi and Mr Titlbach.

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 19 September 2018 (Case R 2683/2017-4) in so far as it concerns ‘toys’ in Class 28 of the Nice Agreement concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks of 15 June 1957, as revised and amended; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 19 September 2018 (Case R 2683/2017-4) in so far as it concerns ‘toys’ in Class 28 of the Nice Agreement concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks of 15 June 1957, as revised and amended;

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

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Orders the parties to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the parties to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 25, 21.1.2019.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 843 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
H. Res. 843

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                     September 7, 2016.
    Resolved, That at any time after adoption of this resolution the Speaker 
may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 5063) to limit donations made pursuant to settlement agreements to 
which the United States is a party, and for other purposes. The first reading of 
the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of 
the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not 
exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on the Judiciary. After general debate the bill shall be 
considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. It shall be in order to 
consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute 
rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on 
the Judiciary now printed in the bill. The committee amendment in the nature of 
a substitute shall be considered as read. All points of order against the 
committee amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived. No amendment to 
the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except 
those printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this 
resolution. Each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the 
report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be 
considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report 
equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be 
subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the 
question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. All points of order 
against such amendments are waived. At the conclusion of consideration of the 
bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House 
with such amendments as may have been adopted. Any Member may demand a separate 
vote in the House on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the 
bill or to the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute. The previous 
question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to 
final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or 
without instructions.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
Three months endedMarch 31,(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
    
    2011
    
    
    2010Basic Earnings Per ShareNet income
    
    $
    896
    
    
    $
    737Weighted average common shares
    
    
    2,734,799
    
    
    
    2,734,799Basice Earnings Per Share
    
    $
    0.33
    
    
    $
    0.27Diluted Earnings Per ShareNet income
    
    $
    896
    
    
    $
    737Weighted average common shares
    
    
    2,734,799
    
    
    
    2,734,799Weighted average effect of assumed
stock options
    
    
    13
    
    
    
    Total
    
    
    2,734,812
    
    
    
    2,734,799Diluted Earnings Per Share
    
    $
    0.33
    
    
    $
    0.27
 33.
Female is distinguished by a 

long, slender egg-laying organ

Eggs Larva Pupa

Larger than 

a house  y

Wings are 

clear with 

several yellow 

and brown 

stripes

LIFE CYCLE

Eggs

MEXICAN 

FRUIT FLY

Larvae are legless 

and range in 

color from white 

to yellowishorange 

Pale orange-yellow body Adult

A female 

Mexican fruit fl y 

can deposit 3 to 

5 eggs at a time 

and may lay over 

100 in a lifetime 

A Mexican fruit 

 y hatches 

from its pupa
THEHARM IT CAUSES

The Mexican fruit fl y is harmful to the environment 

and can cause billions of dollars in lost revenue for 

the U.S. agricultural economy, since a large number 

of commercially grown crops—including grapefruit, 

mango, orange, peach, and tangerine—would be 

rendered inedible if attacked by this pest’s larvae. 

WHAT YOU CAN DO • Do not bring or mail fresh fruits, vegetables, or 

plants into your State or any other unless agricultural 

inspectors have cleared them beforehand.

• Do not remove fresh produce from your property 

if it's under quarantine.

• Allow authorized agricultural workers access to 

your property to inspect for the Mexican fruit fl y.

• Report any sighting of this pest at HungryPests.com.

Fruit covered with Mexican fruit  ies

BACK

For more information visit: 

HUNGRYPESTS.COM

United States Department of Agriculture

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

The U.S. Department of Agriculture is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 

 Program Aid No. 2125-MXF Issued September 2012

WHAT TO LOOK FOR

• Visible adult fl ies are 

larger than a house 

 y and have a pale, 

orange-yellow body.

• The wings are clear 

with several yellow and 

brown stripes.

• The female is distinguished 

by a long and slender 

ovipositor, used to deposit 

eggs beneath the fruit.
# C_2020095EN.01002302.xml

| 23.3.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 95/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.3.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 95/23

---

Judgment of the General Court of 6 February 2020 — Compañía de Tranvías de la Coruña v Commission

(Case T-485/18) (1)

(Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Commission documents relating to the interpretation of a provision of EU law - Documents originating from a third party - Documents originating from a Member State - Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 - Partial refusal to grant access - Total refusal to grant access - Obligation to state reasons - Exception relating to the protection of court proceedings - Overriding public interest)

(2020/C 95/28)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Compañía de Tranvías de la Coruña, SA (Corunna, Spain) (represented by: J. Monrabà Bagan, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: W. Mölls and C. Ehrbar, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of the Commission’s decision of 7 June 2018 refusing, partially or totally, to grant the applicant access to documents relating to the Commission’s opinion sent to the French Republic concerning the fact that the metro lines contract is valid until 2039.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the European Commission of 7 June 2018 refusing, partially or totally, to grant Compañía de Tranvías de la Coruña, SA, access to documents relating to the Commission’s opinion sent to the French Republic concerning the fact that the metro lines contract is valid until 2039, in so far as it refused in part to grant access to the data other than personal data contained in the letter of 25 October 2010 sent by the Commission to the French authorities and in the letters of 27 July 2012 and 5 June 2013 sent by the Vice-President of the Commission, Mr Kallas, to the RATP; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the European Commission of 7 June 2018 refusing, partially or totally, to grant Compañía de Tranvías de la Coruña, SA, access to documents relating to the Commission’s opinion sent to the French Republic concerning the fact that the metro lines contract is valid until 2039, in so far as it refused in part to grant access to the data other than personal data contained in the letter of 25 October 2010 sent by the Commission to the French authorities and in the letters of 27 July 2012 and 5 June 2013 sent by the Vice-President of the Commission, Mr Kallas, to the RATP;

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

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Orders the Commission to bear its own costs and to pay one fifth of the costs incurred by Compañía de Tranvías de la Coruña; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Commission to bear its own costs and to pay one fifth of the costs incurred by Compañía de Tranvías de la Coruña;

| 4. | Orders Compañía de Tranvías de la Coruña to bear four fifths of its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Orders Compañía de Tranvías de la Coruña to bear four fifths of its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 381, 22.10.2018.

---
#### Melford TIEYAH, Plaintiff in Error, v. The STATE of Oklahoma, Defendant in Error.

No. A-12382.

Criminal Court of Appeals of Oklahoma.

Dec. 19, 1956.

Lewis F. Oerke, Lawton, for plaintiff in error.

Mac Q. Williamson, Atty. Gen., Sam H. Lattimore, Asst. Atty. Gen., for defendant in error.

POWELL, Judge.

Melford Tieyah, plaintiff in error, was charged by information filed in the county court of Comanche County with driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, was tried before a *600jury, found guilty and his punishment fixed by the jury at a fine of $100, and ten days imprisonment in the county jail. The latter portion of the verdict is a statutory requirement on a verdict of guilty. 47 O.S.A. § 93. Appeal has been perfected to this court.

The petition in error with casemade was filed in the Criminal Court of Appeals on July 30, 1956. A brief was due to be filed, as required by Rule 6 of this court, amended May 1, 1955, 22 O.S.A. c. 18, Appendix. (See Okl.Dec. 280-282, XXVII), within twenty days from said date. No 'brief has been filed, and defendant has not filed written request for further time. The case was set on the December 5, 1956 docket of this court for oral argument. No one appeared.

By a long line of cases, this court has held that when no counsel appears and no briefs are filed, the court will examine the pleadings, the instructions of the court and exceptions taken thereto, and the judgment and sentence, and if no prejudicial error appears, will affirm the judgment. Fitzgerald v. State, 77 Okl.Cr. 409, 142 P.2d 131; Redding v. State, Okl.Cr., 301 P.2d 371; Morgan v. State, Okl.Cr., 298 P.2d 1091.

We have examined the pleadings, the instructions of the court and the ex-, ceptions taken • thereto, and the judgment and sentence. Not only that, we have gone a step further and carefully examined the ■evidence. There were fact questions for the determination of the jury. The jury decided adversely to the defendant’s contentions.

There was ample competent evidence’ to’ support the verdict.. We find no error* The judgment must be, and is-Affirmed.

JONES, P. J., and BRETT, J., concur.