alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2018094EN.01003301.xml

| 12.3.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 94/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.3.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 94/33

---

Action brought on 22 January 2018 — Marriott Worldwide v EUIPO — AC Milan (AC MILAN)

(Case T-28/18)

(2018/C 094/44)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Marriott Worldwide Corp. (Bethesda, Maryland, United States) (represented by: A. Reid, Solicitor)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: AC Milan SpA (Milan, Italy)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the figurative mark containing the word elements ‘AC MILAN’ – International registration designating the European Union No 1 182 615

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Procedure before EUIPO

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 November 2017 in Case R 356/2017-2

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision and reject the EUTM application for the contested services; and |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision and reject the EUTM application for the contested services; and

| — | order EUIPO to pay the applicant’s costs of and occasioned by this appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the applicant’s costs of and occasioned by this appeal.

Plea in law

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001.

---
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES -OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      In connection with the Quarterly Report of Belden & Blake Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2004, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the knowledge of the undersigned:

      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.

Date: August 10, 2004                     /s/ Frost W. Cochran
                                          -------------------------------------
                                          Frost W. Cochran, Director, President
                                          and Chief Executive Officer

This certification accompanies the Form 10-Q and shall not be treated as having
been filed as part of the Form 10-Q.

                                       24
18839

#### James v. State

Affirmed
May 22, 2003

24569

#### State v. Montibon

Affirmed
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 239 (Thursday, December 14, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 86687]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-27407]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail and USPS Ground Advantage[supreg] 
Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: December 14, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
December 4, 2023, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage[supreg] Contract 
129 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at 
www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2024-94, CP2024-96.

Sean Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2023-27407 Filed 12-13-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record

Plant ID 07728

Removed 

from Public 

(Non-CBI) 

Docket1

Copyright 

Flag2

File Name Description

x 07728\07728_012811 Communication.pdf

Email communications regarding questions on the 

survey response

x 07728\07728_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

07728\07728_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist

07728\07728_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted

x 07728\07728_Part A.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 07728\07728_Part B.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 07728\07728_Part C.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 07728\07728_Part D.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 07728\07728_Part H.xls Plant submitted survey file

07728\Supplemental Documents\07728_D2-3 Attachment -- Phase I Mercury Report.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

07728\Supplemental Documents\07728_D4-22 Laskin Cell A-D Closure Plan.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

07728\Supplemental Documents\07728_Final Pilot Testing Report.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

07728\Supplemental Documents\07728_Laskin Map-1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

07728\Supplemental Documents\07728_Laskin Map-2.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 07728\Supplemental Documents\07728_LEC Water Balance Diagram Pond-1,Ret-Pond-1,WWT-1, WT-A.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 07728\Supplemental Documents\07728_LEC Water Diagram D-2 Additional .pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 07728\Supplemental Documents\07728_Water Balance Flow diagram Pond 1, WWT-1,WT-A.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

07728\Supplemental Documents\07728_ICR CoverLetter.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

1

 Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database . 

2

 Copyright documents are available from the docket.
## In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 22

- 00319

- CV

C OLUMBIA M EDICAL C ENTER OF A RLINGTON S UBSIDIARY , L.P. D / B / A M EDICAL C ITY A RLINGTON AND HCA INC.

, Appellants

V

.
J ARED B USH , J R ., I NDIVIDUALLY AND
AS R EPRESENTATIVE OF THE E STATE

OF I REILLE W ILLIAMS

- B USH , D ECEASED , AND N EXT F RIEND OF J.B.

AND L.B., M INORS , Appellee §

§

§

§ On Appeal from the 17th District Court

of Tarrant County ( 017

- 312807

- 19 )

April 20, 2023

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Wallach

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there

was error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the trial

court is reversed and the case is rem anded to th e trial court with instruc tions to

dismiss the claims of Appellee Jared Bush, Jr., Individually and as Representative ofthe Estate of Ireille Williams

- Bush, Deceased, and Next Friend of J.B. and L.B.,

Minors against Appellant s Columbia Medical Ce nter of Arlington Subsidiary, L.P.

d/b/a Medical City Arlington and HCA INC. with pre j udice and to rule on

A ppellants ’ re ques t for attor ney ’ s f ees under Tex as Civ i l Prac tice a nd Rem edies Code

Section 74.351 (b) (1) and (2).

It is further ordered that Ap p e ll ee Jared Bush, Jr., Individually and as

Representative of the Estate of Ireille Williams

- Bush, Deceased, and Next Friend of

J.B. and L.B., Minors shall pay all of the costs of this appeal, for which let execution

issue.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By __ /s/ Mike Wallach

__________________ Justice Mike Wallach
## In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06

- 16

- 00042

- CV

MARTIN JIMENEZ, Appellant

V.

PILGRIM ’ S PRIDE CORPORATION, Appellee

On Appeal from the 276th District Court

Camp County, Texas

Trial Court No. CV

- 14

- 2436

Before Morriss, C.J., Moseley and Burgess, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Burgess2 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION

Martin Jimenez timely filed a notice of appeal June 23, 2016. The clerk ’ s record was filed

August 1, 2016. The reporter ’ s record was filed August 5, 2016. Jimenez ’ brief was due to be

filed in this Court on September 6, 2016. When neither a brief nor a motion to extend time for

filing sa me was received by September 6, this Court advised Jimenez by letter dated September 22,

2016, that the brief was late. We further extended the deadline for filing the brief to October 7,

2016. We warned Jimenez that failure to file the brief by October 7, 2016

, would subject this

appeal to dismissal for want of prosecution. S ee T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 38.8(a ) (1), 42.3(b), (c).

We have received no responsive communication from Jimenez and have not received his

appellate brief. Having not received any response to this Court ’ s letter of September 22, 2016,

Jimenez ’ appeal is ripe for dismissal for want of prosecution. Consequently, p ursuant to Rules

38.8 and 42.3 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, we dismiss this appeal for want of

prosecution. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3 (b), (c).

Ralph K. Burgess

Justice

Date Submitted: October 25 , 2016

Date Decided: October 26 , 2016
From: Christopher Bolduc [mailto:cabolduc@lbl.gov]

Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 6:35 PM

To: Richard Parker

Cc: Andrew Delaski; Art Rosenfeld; Bob Smith; Brian Coffey; Caitlin Johnson;

Carlos Siqueiros; Caskey, John; Chad Kennedy; Chris Brown; Creevy, Jim; Dan

Cohen; Daniel Young; Eduardo Robles; Edwards, Brenda; Eric Peterson; Freeman,

Jeremiah; Gary Fernstrom; Greg Rosenquist; Jenn ifer Tiedeman; Jerry Schoen; Jim

Raba; Joanna Mauer; John Cymbalsky; Katie Coughlin; Matthew Nardotti; Maxine

Savitz; Meg Waltner; Michael Rivest; Millure, Dave; Phil Harter; Polinski,

Raymond; Rob Greeson; Robert Berman; Robert van Buskirk; Robin Roy; Ryan, Paul;

Scott Beck; Steve Nadel; Steve Rosenstock; Ted Johnstone; Thomas Patzner; Thomas

Petrosino; Tim Ballo; Vijay Te ndulkar; Wes Patterson; Zhimei Luo

Subject: Re: LV Transformer Call;

Dear Colleagues,

As requested, attached are the draft NIA results by efficiency level with both

ZDMH, and SA1 excluded from the analysis.

Thank you,

‐ Chris Bolduc

On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Richard Parker <richardparkerdc@gmail.com>

wrote:

> Dear Col leagues,

>

> Attached hot off the press are the updated and revised LCC/PBB and NIA

> results for low voltage transformers, DL 6

‐ 8, with engineering

> scatterplots included. Please note that a new TSL (TSL 7) has been

> added to reflect the NEMA premium EL. You wil l see that the TSL

> numbering system is not listed in order of increasing stringency.

>

> See you on the call at 2:00 pm on Monday, Nov. 28.

>

> All best,

> RIchard Parker

> Facilitator

>

‐‐

‐‐‐‐

Chris Bolduc

Energy Efficiency Standards Group

Environmental Energy Technologies Division Lawr ence Berkeley National Laboratory

t. 416

‐ 535

‐ 7546 c. 647

‐ 832

‐ 4021
#### Robert WHITEHEAD, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Willie EAGLETON, Warden of ECI; Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 05-6772.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Sept. 23, 2005.

Decided: Oct. 13, 2005.

Robert Whitehead, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Melody Jane Brown, Office of the Attorney General of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

*441Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Robert Whitehead seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing as untimely his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability mil not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find both that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. *Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Whitehead has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Whitehead’s motion for appointment of counsel, deny a certificate of appealability, and dismiss the appeal. 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*
Breadcrumb

1. Home

2. Print 

3. Pdf 

4. Node 

5. Entity Print 

Commenting Opportunities: Plant

Health

Last Modified: 

Print

Tell us what you think!

As ecosystems evolve, our efforts to protect plant health need to evolve with them.

That’s why APHIS Plant Protection and Quarantine invites people like you to

participate in the decision-making and regulatory process. Check out this page for
opportunities for public comment, from pest and disease topics to risk management

and more.

Latest Commenting Opportunities

3/12/24

APHIS Seeks Public Comment on the Draft Rangeland Grasshopper and Mormon

Cricket Suppression Program Environmental Assessment in Idaho

2/19/24

APHIS Invites U.S. Stakeholders to Comment on NAPPO Documents

7/25/23

USDA Reminds Stakeholders to Submit PPA-7721 Suggestions before the August 9,

2023, Deadline

7/10/23

USDA Reminds Stakeholders to Submit PPA-7721 Suggestions by August 9, 2023, for

the Plant Pest and Disease Management and Disaster Prevention Program

Send Suggestions on List of Diseases and Pests

Animal and Plant Diseases and Pests of Concern

For the 2018 Farm Bill, APHIS developed a list of 59 pests and diseases that pose the

most significant threat to U.S. agriculture. If you have information about a pest not

included on our list or has the potential to harm agriculture, please let us know here.

Related Links

APHIS: All Federal Register Posts

APHIS News and Updates

Stay in the Know

For the latest news about Plant Protection and Quarantine, sign up for email

updates.

Subscribe
# C_2019255EN.01003901.xml

| 29.7.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 255/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.7.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 255/39

---

Judgment of the General Court of 6 June 2019 — Torrefazione Caffè Michele Battista v EUIPO — Battista Nino Caffè (Battistino)

(Case T-220/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark Battistino - Earlier EU word mark BATTISTA - Declaration of partial invalidity - Proof of genuine use of the earlier trade mark - Article 57(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 64(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2019/C 255/50)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Torrefazione Caffè Michele Battista Srl (Triggiano, Italy) (represented by: V. Franchini, F. Paesan and R. Bia, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervening before the General Court: Battista Nino Caffè Srl (Triggiano, Italy) (represented by: D. Russo, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 January 2018 (Case R 400/2017-5), relating to invalidity proceedings between Battista Nino Caffè and Torrefazione Caffè Michele Battista.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 22 January 2018 (Case R 400/2017-5); |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 22 January 2018 (Case R 400/2017-5);

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

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Orders EUIPO and Battista Nino Caffè Srl to bear the costs incurred in the course of the proceedings before the Court. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders EUIPO and Battista Nino Caffè Srl to bear the costs incurred in the course of the proceedings before the Court.

---

(1)  OJ C 190, 4.6.2018.

---
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

JOSE MACIAS,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D14-3509

[May 4, 2016]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. 

Lucie County; Robert R. Makemson, Judge; L.T. Case No. 

562013CF000310A.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Jeffrey L. Anderson, 

Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Luke R. 

Napodano, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

DAMOORGIAN, J.

A jury found Appellant, Jose Macias, guilty of one count of lewd or

lascivious battery, one count of lewd or lascivious molestation, one count 

of kidnapping, and one count of a burglary of a dwelling with an assault 

or battery. The court adjudicated Appellant guilty and sentenced him on 

all counts except for the lewd or lascivious molestation count which it 

“held in abeyance.” On appeal, Appellant takes issue with several of the 

court’s evidentiary rulings at trial. He also argues that the court’s 

decision to hold his lewd or lascivious molestation conviction in abeyance 

constitutes a violation of double jeopardy. 

We find no error in any of the court’s underlying evidentiary rulings 

and thus affirm Appellant’s convictions and sentences for lewd or

lascivious battery, kidnapping, and burglary of a dwelling with an 

assault or battery without further comment. However, we agree with 

Appellant that the court’s decision to hold the lewd or lascivious 

molestation count in abeyance violated double jeopardy as Appellant 

could not be convicted of both lewd or lascivious battery and lewd or
2

lascivious molestation arising out of the same conduct. Graves v. State, 

95 So. 3d 1033, 1036 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012). The State properly concedes 

error on this issue. Accordingly, we reverse and remand with 

instructions that the trial court vacate the verdict of guilt as to lewd or

lascivious molestation count. See Burford v. State, 8 So. 3d 478, 480–81

(Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (remanding for vacation of conviction for offense 

which was held “in abeyance” because the conviction violated double 

jeopardy). 

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

GROSS and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
<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 29, 1997, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                    9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           JUN-28-1997
<PERIOD-START>                              JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                MAR-29-1997
<CASH>                                          257,088
<SECURITIES>                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   182,485
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (2,042)
<INVENTORY>                                     625,055
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              1,085,308
<PP&E>                                          254,817
<DEPRECIATION>                                  (91,630)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                1,258,133
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           737,616
<BONDS>                                         110,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<COMMON>                                            916
<OTHER-SE>                                      399,925
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  1,258,133
<SALES>                                       3,462,015
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              3,462,015
<CGS>                                         2,975,389
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 2,975,389
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                368,015
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                9,136
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 115,431
<INCOME-TAX>                                     44,442
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              70,989
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                     70,989
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      0.75
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      0.75
        

</TABLE>
#### Smith v. City & County

23746

06/28/2002

Vacate and remanded
February 2021

There were 9 surveillance inspections conducted at 9 different sites for a total of 45 

fish sampled this month. Samples are targeted to moribund and fresh mortalities 

when possible. The water temperatures remained low in response to the cold air 

temperatures. All sites with fish in the water remained Category 1 and were 

scheduled for monthly sampling. No cages were confirmed positive this month.

Date Number of 

Samples

Confirmed Positive Cages Cumulative 

Program Samples

March 2020 55 0 23000

April 2020 50 0 23050

May 2020 50 0 23100

June 2020 80 0 23180

July 2020 56 0 23236

August 2020 50 0 23286

September 2020 50 0 23336

October 2020 45 0 23381

November 2020 35 0 23416

December 2020 45 0 23461

January 2021 45 0 23506

February 2021 45 0 23551
#### Assn. of Apt. Owners of Imperial Plaza v. Dillingham Const. Pacific, Ltd.

20933

6/24/98

Vacated & Remanded