alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Plaintiff, *v.*Walter Chapman, Defendant.

Court of General Sessions of County of New York,

September 1, 1959.

*490
      *Walter Chapman,*defendant in person.

*Frank S. Hogan, District Attorney (Peter J. O’Connor*of counsel), for plaintiff.

Thomas Dickens, J.

This motion for *coram nobis*relief is denied.

The mass of correspondence between defendant and the court personnel, the multiple applications made heretofore, and the stenographic minutes of the court sessions, — all, in their bearing upon the question involved here, point to this just conclusion : that the ground now urged to vacate the judgment of conviction, that is, the absence of defendant’s counsel during the time when the court had given the jury further instructions pursuant to their request, criticized by defendant as a noncompliance with section 427 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seems to have its derivation from an afterthought.

It is reasonable to entertain such belief because the record afore-mentioned discloses that nothing was at any time said by defendant which, in the slightest degree, touched on, or referred to, this subject. I am convinced upon the basis of this record, as I found it upon examination, that defendant is not truthful. (See *People*v. *Vasquez,*18 Misc 2d 614.)

In any event, I am inclined to conform my ruling to the judicial ruling which holds that this ground is not an approved one in *coram nobis.*Such ruling appears to apply even in the case of the absence of defendant himself. *(People*v. *Gazzingli,*N. Y. L. J., Nov. 16,1956, p. 14, col. 8; see, also, *People*v. *Merrill,*286 App. Div. 307; *People*v. *Shapiro, 2*Misc 2d 462, affd. 3 A D 2d 740, affd. 3 N Y 2d 203.)

The District Attorney is directed to enter an order in conformance with the decision herein and to forward a certified copy to defendant.
EXHIBIT 21.1

SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY

|STATE OR SUBSIDIARY                           |  | OTHER JURISDICTION
OF INCORPORATION
OR ORGANIZATION |  | NAME UNDER WHICH
THE SUBSIDIARY
DOES BUSINESS
|--------------------------------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------
|Bogen Corporation                             |  | Delaware                                            |  | Bogen Corporation                            
|(a) Bogen Communications, Inc. (1)            |  | Delaware                                            |  | Bogen Communications, Inc.                   
|(b) Bogen Communications (Barbados), Ltd. (2) |  | Barbados                                            |  | Bogen Communications (Barbados), Ltd.        
|(c) Apogee Sound International, LLC. (2)      |  | Delaware                                            |  | Apogee Sound International, LLC.             
|Thor USA                                      |  | Delaware                                            |  | Thor USA                                     
|Bogen Communications, LLC                     |  | Delaware                                            |  | Bogen Communications, LLC                    
|Speech Design International, Inc.             |  | Delaware                                            |  | Speech Design International, Inc.            
|(d) Speech Design GmbH (3)                    |  | Germany                                             |  | Speech Design GmbH                           
|(e) Satelco AG (4)                            |  | Switzerland                                         |  | Satelco AG                                   
|(f) Speech Design (Israel) Ltd. (4)           |  | Israel                                              |  | Speech Design (Israel)                       
|(g) Speech Design Carrier Systems GmbH (4)    |  | Germany                                             |  | Speech Design Carrier Systems                

---

---

QuickLinks
# C_2009141EN.01003403.xml

| 20.6.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 141/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.6.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 141/34

---

Order of the President of the Court of 3 March 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany)) — proceedings brought by Hermann Fischer, Rolf Schlatter, interested party: Regierungspräsidium Freiburg

(Case C-193/08) (1)

1

2009/C 141/63

Language of the case: German

Language of the case: German

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

---

(1)  OJ C 183, 19.7.2008.

1

---
#### Richard Reynolds, Claimant, *v.*State of New York, Defendant.

(Claim No. 33718.)

Court of Claims,

October 9, 1959.

*14
      *Robert L. Gold*and *Philip Goffey*for claimant.

*Louis J. Lefhowitz, Attorney-General (Laiurence Wayne*of counsel), for defendant.

Sidney Squire, J.

By separate orders to show cause, claimant moves for orders:

1. Permitting amendment of his bill of particulars, and

2. Directing the defendant to be examined before trial by claimant. The defendant opposes both motions.

The motion to amend the bill of particulars is granted as requested. A verified amendment to claimant’s bill of particulars, as set forth in the moving affidavit in support of said motion, shall be served and filed on or before October 16,1959.

The motion for examination before trial is granted as hereinafter limited. The defendant, by its Superintendent of Public Works, shall designate and produce its employees having knowledge of the facts, for examination before trial by claimant with respect to the matter requested, at the office of the Attorney-General in The Capitol, Albany, New York, on October 16, 1959 at 10:00 a.m.

At the same time and place the defendant, by said Superintendent, shall produce its books, records, plans, reports, correspondence, memoranda, etc., concerning the construction of the State highway and bridges involved herein as well as relating to maintenance, repair, inspection, supervision, dredging and snow removal and plowing on December 26, 1955 and for two years prior thereto, for use upon said oral examination pursuant to section 296 of the Civil Practice Act.

Separate short-form orders have been signed.
# C_2018399EN.01005601.xml

| 5.11.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 399/56 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.11.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 399/56

---

Action brought on 13 September 2018 — Atos Medical v EUIPO — Andreas Fahl Medizintechnik-Vertrieb (medical plasters)

(Case T-560/18)

(2018/C 399/72)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Atos Medical GmbH (Troisdorf, Germany) (represented by: K. Middelhoff, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Andreas Fahl Medizintechnik-Vertrieb GmbH (Cologne, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

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

Design at issue: Community design No 1339246-0004

Contested decision: Decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 June 2018 in Case R 2216/2016-3

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs, |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs,

Should the other party intervene in the proceedings, the applicant further claims that the Court should:

| — | order the other party to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the other party to bear its own costs.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 4(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 4(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002;

| — | Infringement of Articles 5 and 6 of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Articles 5 and 6 of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002;

| — | Infringement of Article 25(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 25(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002.

---
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 114 (Monday, July 30, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Page S5657]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                      MEASURES READ THE FIRST TIME

  The following bills were read the first time:

       H.R. 4078. An act to provide that no agency may take any 
     significant regulatory action until the unemployment rate is 
     equal to or less than 6.0 percent.
       S. 3457. A bill to require the Secretary of Veterans 
     Affairs to establish a veterans jobs corps, and for other 
     purposes.

                          ____________________
```
# C_2008272EN.01001102.xml

| 25.10.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 272/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.10.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 272/11

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundessozialgericht (Germany) lodged on 4 August 2008 — Christian Grimme v Deutsche Angestellten Krankenkasse

(Case C-351/08)

(2008/C 272/19)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundessozialgericht

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Christian Grimme

Applicant:

Defendant: Deutsche Angestellten Krankenkasse

Defendant:

Question referred

Are the provisions of the Agreement between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Swiss Confederation, of the other, on the free movement of persons (OJ 2002 L 114, p. 6) (1), in particular Articles 1, 5, 7 and 16 thereof and Articles 12, 17, 18 and 19 of Annex I thereto, to be interpreted as meaning that they preclude a rule which obliges a member of a managing board of a company limited by shares governed by Swiss law who is employed in Germany to be insured in the German statutory pension insurance scheme, whereas members of managing boards of companies limited by shares governed by German law are exempt from that obligation?

1

---

(1)  OJ 2002 L 114, p. 6.

1

---
**Exhibit 32**

**CERTIFICATIONS OF CEO AND CFOPURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q of Dendrite International, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarterlyperiod ended June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the “Report”), John E. Bailye, as Chief Executive Officerof the Company, and Jeffrey J. Bairstow, as Chief Financial Officer, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his or her knowledge:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirementsof section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 
| /s/ John E. Bailye      |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
| Name:                   |   |   | John E. Bailye |   |
| Title:                  |   |   | Chairman of the Board and   Chief Executive Officer |   |
| Date:                   |   |   | August 9, 2006 |   |
|                    |   |   |   |   |
|                    |   |   |   |   |
| /s/ Jeffrey J. Bairstow |   |
| Name:                   |   |   | Jeffrey J. Bairstow |   |
| Title:                  |   |   | Executive Vice  President and Chief Financial Officer |   |
| Date:                   |   |   | August 9, 2006 |   |
|                         |        |  |  |  |  |

 

 

----
```

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 36 (Tuesday, February 24, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 9744]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-03832]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management

[MMAA104000]

Central Gulf of Mexico Planning Area (CPA) Outer Continental 
Shelf (OCS) Oil and Gas Lease Sale 235 (CPA Sale 235); Correction

AGENCY: Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), Interior.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: On February 6, 2015, BOEM published in the Federal Register 
the Final Notice of Sale (FNOS) for CPA Sale 235 (80 FR 6758). The FNOS 
refers to documents entitled ``List of Blocks Available for Leasing'' 
and ``Unleased Split Blocks.'' The referenced list and map were 
included in the FNOS Package, and the FNOS Package was made available 
at the BOEM address and Web site set forth in the FNOS. The list and 
map identifies blocks to be offered in CPA Sale 235; however, due to a 
clerical error, one block, South Marsh Island Area, North Addition, 
Block Number 242, was inadvertently omitted from the list and map.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Samuels, Leasing Division 
Chief, robert.samuels@boem.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of February 6, 2015, 
in FR Doc. 2015-02273, on page 6759, the documents entitled ``List of 
Blocks Available for Leasing'' and ``Unleased Split Blocks'' are 
referenced. These documents have been corrected to include the 
information below, which has been inserted between the entries ``South 
Marsh Island Area, North Addition, Block Number 241.'' and ``South 
Marsh Island Area, North Addition, Block Number 243.''
L
Y
Map/Official Protraction Diagram (OPD) Name
    South Marsh Island Area, North Addition
Map/OPD Number
    LA3D
Block Number
    242
A/P
    P
Available Federal Acreage
    3,068.219971
Minimum Bid Per Acre
    $25.00
Lease Term
    5
    Minimum Bid Per Block
    $76,725
Rent Per Acre
    $7.00
Bid System
    RS20
Stipulation(s)
    8

The corrected ``List of Blocks Available for Leasing'' is available at 
the BOEM address and Web site set forth in the FNOS.

    Dated: February 18, 2015.
Abigail Ross Hopper,
Director, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management.
[FR Doc. 2015-03832 Filed 2-23-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-MR-P
```
Page 1 of 3

Disposition Comments

Docket No: FAA-2013-0332 These comments are in

Directorate ID: 2013-NM-009-AD response to an SNPRM

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

Next Step: FRAN SNPRM

 No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are 

required.

 Has the referenced service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? If yes, 

list latest revision and attach a copy. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously 

published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance.

Instructions: Summarize all comments by issue (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of 

each issue. All comments relating to the same issue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues 

from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and 

describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA-IR-M-8040.1C Chapter 9.

ISSUE 1: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD: 

If NO, we don’t agree because 

ISSUE 2: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD:
Page 2 of 3

If NO, we don’t agree because 

For additional issues, double-click here
Page 3 of 3

Signature Section

Signature indicates concurrence with this action.

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

ASE Printed Name: Date

Branch Manager Date
Exhibit
      No. 32











CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO


18
      U.S.C.
      ss. 1350,


AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








In
      connection with Amendment No. 3 to the Annual Report of Universal Express,
      Inc.
      (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB/A for the year ended June 30, 2006 as filed
      with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
      Richard Altomare, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Accounting Officer of the
      Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)
      the
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





(2)
      the
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








Dated:
        March 26,
        2007                                By: 
/s/
        Richard
        Altomare
 Richard
        Altomare
 Chief
        Executive Officer and Chief Accounting Officer





This
      certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for
      purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
      amended.





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
      authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
      in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
      by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the
      Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
      upon request.
# C_2008285EN.01001301.xml

| 8.11.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 285/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.11.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 285/13

---

Order of the Court of 19 June 2008 — US Steel Košice s.r.o. v Commission

(Case C-6/08 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Directive 2003/87/EC - Scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading - Integrated pollution prevention and control - Slovak Republic - Act of Accession - Allocation of allowances - Period 2008-2012 - Conditions - Whether directly affected - Inadmissibility)

(2008/C 285/21)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: US Steel Košice s.r.o. (represented by: C. Thomas, Solicitor, and E. Vermulst, advocaat)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: U. Wölker and D. Lawunmi, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re:

Appeal against the order of the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber) of 1 October 2007 in Case T-27/07 US Steel Košice s r.o. v Commission of the European Communities dismissing as inadmissible an application for annulment of the Commission's decision of 29 November 2006 concerning the national allocation plan for greenhouse gas emission allowances notified by Slovakia for the period from 2008 to 2012 in accordance with Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ 2003 L 275, p. 32) — Natural or legal persons — Acts of direct and individual concern to them — Direct concern — Criteria

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The appeal is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The appeal is dismissed.

| 2. | US Steel Košice s.r.o. shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

US Steel Košice s.r.o. shall pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 64, 8.3.2008.

1

---
### !STATE OF MISSISSIPPI HALEY BARBOUR GOVERNOR MISSISSIPPIDEPARTMENTOFENVIRONMENTAL

### QU. TRUDY D. FISHER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
July 28,2010

Mr. A. StanleyMeiburg Acting Regional Administrator United StatesEnvironmental Protection Agency 

### -Region 4 61 Forsyth Street, SW Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8909
Re: Implementation of the EPA Tailoring Rule



### . Dear Mr. Meiburg:
In response to the EPA's request for information from the states in implementing the greenhouse gas (GHG) tailoring rule, Mississippi Department ofEnvironmental Quality (MDEQ) staff has analyzed state law and current ~is'sissi~~i Commission on Environmental Quality (Commission) regulations to determine whether the state can implement the GHG tailoring rule. The state can implementthe GHG tailoring rule. Mississippi's law provides the Commission with statutory authority under Miss. Code Ann. 

### $9 49-17-1, 

### et seq. to administer and regulate federal pollution control legislation and programs, including the Title V and prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) permitting programs. This authority gives the Commission the abilityto implement the EPA's PSD and Title V GHG Tailoring Rule as well. The current regulations for the statePSD program (APC-S-5) are adopted by reference up to the June 15, 2007 Code of Federal Regulations. The Title V state regulations (APC-S-6) are not adopted by reference but are substantially similar, with the exception of the definitionspromulgated by the new rule. These regulations (APC-S-5 and APCS-6) must be amended in accordance with Miss. Code Ann. 

## $8 49-17-25 and 25-43-3.101, 

### etseq. in order forMDEQ to be able to implement the GHG tailoring rule. The regulatory amendment process to amend the regulations concerning the PSD and Title V programs should be completed by January 2, 2011, pending public interest and the potential controversy related to the EPA's PSD and Title

### V GHG Tailoring Rule.

Trudy

# $Fisher Executive Director
800 Independence Ave., S.W. Washington, DC 20591

AFS-12-158-P November 7, 2012

Mr. Joseph E. Olsavsky Senior Manager, H RC Regulatory Affairs Philips Respironics 1740 Golden Mile Highway Monroeville, PA 15146

Dear Mr. Olsavsky:

In your January 5, 2012, letter, you petitione d the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to amend Special Federal Aviation Re gulation 106, Section 2 an d Section 3(a) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) . This amendment would include Philips Respironics Simply Go Portable Oxygen Con centrators (POC) as an approved POC for

on board aircraft.

The FAA amended SFAR 106 on October 16, 2012 (77 FR 63217) to add the following POC devices that may be carried on and us ed by a passenger on board an aircraft:

 AirSep Focus

 AirSep Freestyle 5

 Inogen One G3

 Inova Labs LifeChoice Activox

 Respironics Simply Go

 Precision Medical EasyPulse

 SeQual SAROS

Therefore, we will take no further action on this petition and Docket No. FAA-2009-1059 is being closed.

Sincerely,

/s/ Ida M. Klepper Manager, Airmen and Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure