alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4687 

To designate the health care center of the Department of Veterans Affairs 

in Tallahassee, Florida, as the Sergeant Ernest I. ‘‘Boots’’ Thomas 

VA Clinic, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 19, 2017 

Mr. LAWSON of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To designate the health care center of the Department of 

Veterans Affairs in Tallahassee, Florida, as the Sergeant 

Ernest I. ‘‘Boots’’ Thomas VA Clinic, and for other 

purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. REDESIGNATION OF A DEPARTMENT OF VET4 ERANS AFFAIRS CLINIC IN FLORIDA. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The Health Care Center of the 

6 Department of Veterans Affairs located at 2181 Orange 

7 Avenue in Tallahassee, Florida, shall after the date of the 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4687 IH

1 enactment of this Act be known and designated as the 

2 ‘‘Sergeant Ernest I. ‘Boots’ Thomas VA Clinic’’. 

3 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in any law, regula4 tion, map, document, paper, or other record of the United 

5 States to the clinic referred to in paragraph (1) shall be 

6 considered to be a reference to the Sergeant Ernest I. 

7 ‘‘Boots’’ Thomas VA Clinic. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
EX-10.2
                        PROMISSORY NOTE

                        PROMISSORY NOTE

Principal Amount $20,000.00                           Date: November 17, 2002

     FOR VALUE RECEIVED, RMD Technologies, Inc. hereby promise to pay
to the order of Patrick A. Galliher or Suzanne E, Galliher the sum of
Twenty Thousand Dollars, together with interest thereon at the rate of
1% per month on the unpaid balance. Said sum shall be paid upon demand.

     This note shall at the option of any holder thereof be
immediately due and payable upon the occurrence of any of the
following:  1) Breach of any condition of any security interest,
mortgage, loan agreement, pledge agreement or guarantee granted as
collateral security for this note. 2) Breach of any condition of any
loan agreement, security agreement or mortgage, if any, having a
priority over any loan agreement, security agreement or mortgage on
collateral granted, in whole or in part, as collateral security for
this note. 3) Upon the death, incapacity, dissolution or liquidation
of any of the undersigned, or any endorser, guarantor to surety
hereto. 4) Upon the filing by any of the undersigned of an assignment
for the benefit of creditors, bankruptcy or other form of insolvency,
or by suffering an involuntary petition in bankruptcy or receivership
not vacated within thirty (30) days.

     In the event this note shall be in default and placed for
collection, then the undersigned agree to pay all reasonable attorney
fees and costs of collection. All payments hereunder shall be made to
such address as may from time to time be designated by any holder.

     The undersigned and all other parties to this note, whether as
endorsers, guarantors or sureties, agree to remain fully bound until
this note shall be fully paid and waive demand, presentment and
protest and all notices hereto and further agree to remain bound,
notwithstanding any extension, modification, waiver, or other
indulgence or discharge or release of any obligor hereunder or
exchange, substitution, or release of any collateral granted as
security for this note. No modification or indulgence by any holder
hereof shall be binding unless in writing; and any indulgence on any
one occasion shall not be an indulgence for any other or future
occasion. Any modification or change in terms, hereunder granted by
any holder hereof, shall be valid and binding upon each of the
undersigned, notwithstanding the acknowledgement of any of the
undersigned, and each of the undersigned does hereby irrevocably grant
to each of the others a power of attorney to enter into any such
modification on their behalf. The rights of any holder hereof shall be
cumulative and not necessarily successive. This note shall take effect
as a sealed instrument and shall be construed, governed and enforced
in accordance with the laws of the State of California.

                                       RMD Technologies, Inc.


                                       By: /s/  Pat Galliher
                                       Pat Galliher, President
# C_2010288EN.01003301.xml

| 23.10.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 288/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.10.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 288/33

---

Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2010 — Axis v OHIM — Etra Investigación y Desarrollo (ETRAX)

(Case T-70/08) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark ETRAX - Earlier national figurative marks containing the word elements ETRA I+D - Relative ground for refusal - Admissibility of the appeal before the Board of Appeal - Rule 49(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 and Article 59 of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 60 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2010/C 288/62)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Axis AB (Lund, Sweden) (represented by: J. Norderyd, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Etra Investigación y Desarrollo, SA (Valencia, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 27 November 2007 (Case R 334/2007-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Etra Investigación y Desarrollo, SA and Axis AB.

Operative part of the order

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 27 November 2007 (Case R 334/2007-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Etra Investigación y Desarrollo, SA and Axis AB; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 27 November 2007 (Case R 334/2007-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Etra Investigación y Desarrollo, SA and Axis AB;

| 2. | Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Axis AB. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Axis AB.

---

(1)  OJ C 107, 26.4.2008.

---
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION 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 Global Media Group Holdings, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2006 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Andrew H. Orgel, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to
my knowledge 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 result of operations of the
        Company.

/S/ ANDREW H. ORGEL
-----------------------
Andrew H. Orgel
Chief Executive Officer
May 15, 2006




                                       21
# C_2008313EN.01004801.xml

| 6.12.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 313/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 313/48

---

Action brought on 3 October 2008 — Tokita Management Service v OHIM — Eminent Food (TOMATOBERRY)

(Case T-435/08)

(2008/C 313/86)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Tokita Management Service Corp. (Saitama, Japan) (represented by: P. Brownlow and N. Jenkins, Solicitors and A. Bryson, Barrister)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Eminent Food BV (Bussum, Netherlands)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 18 July 2008 in case R 1219/2007-4; and |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 18 July 2008 in case R 1219/2007-4; and

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

—

Order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for the Community trade mark: The applicant

Applicant for the Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘TOMATOBERRY’ for goods in class 31 — application No 3 797 909

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited: Community trade mark registration No 3 344 711 of the figurative mark ‘Tomberry’ for goods and services in classes 31, 35 and 44

Mark or sign cited:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition in its entirety

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 40/94 as the Board of Appeal erred in its finding that the trade marks concerned are highly similar visually and conceptually; infringement of Article 8(1)(a) and/or Article 73 and/or Article 74(1) of Council Regulation No 40/94 as the Board of Appeal erred in its conclusion that the Opposition Division's finding that the opposition must be upheld on the ground of Article 8(1)(a) of Council Regulation No 40/94 was correct.

Pleas in law:

---
# C_2013156EN.01003201.xml

| 1.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 156/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 156/32

---

Judgment of the General Court of 12 April 2013 — LATGA-A v Commission

(Case T-419/08) (1)

1

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Copyright relating to public performance of musical works via the internet, satellite and cable retransmission - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Sharing of the geographic market - Bilateral agreements between national collecting societies - Concerted practices precluding the possibility of granting multi-territory and multi-repertoire licences - Proof - Presumption of innocence)

2013/C 156/55

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Lietuvos autorių teisių gynimo asociacijos agentūra (LATGA-A) (Vilnius, Lithuania) (represented by: M. Favart, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre and A. Biolan, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Interveners in support of the applicant: International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers (CISAC) (Neuilly-sur-Seine, France) (represented by J.-F. Bellis and K. Van Hove, lawyers); and European Broadcasting Union (EBU) (Grand-Saconnex, Switzerland) (represented by D. Slater, Solicitor, and D. Waelbroeck, lawyer)

Interveners in support of the applicant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment in part of Commission Decision C(2008) 3435 final of 16 July 2008 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/C2/38.698 — CISAC).

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls Article 3 of Commission Decision C(2008) 3435 final of 16 July 2008 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/C2/38.698 — CISAC), in so far as it concerns Lietuvos autorių teisių gynimo asociacijos agentūra (LATGA-A); |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls Article 3 of Commission Decision C(2008) 3435 final of 16 July 2008 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/C2/38.698 — CISAC), in so far as it concerns Lietuvos autorių teisių gynimo asociacijos agentūra (LATGA-A);

| 2. | Dismisses the remainder of the action; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the remainder of the action;

| 3. | Orders the European Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 313, 6.12.2008.

1

---
#### Belhara Associates Limited Partnership et al., Respondents, v Richard E. Hunt, Appellant.

— Order and judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Myriam Altman, J.), entered on or about April 23, 1990 and May 20, 1990, respectively, unanimously affirmed for the reasons *43stated by Myriam Altman, J., without costs. No opinion. Concur — Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.
UNITED S TATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY W A S HIN G TON , D .C. 20 460

J. R. Stroble Manager , National T R U Program U

. S. Department of Energy P .O. Box 309 0 Carlsbad , NM 88221-3090
Dear Mr. Stroble: 

## OCT 4 2012 OFFICE OF AIR AND RADIATION

On Augus t I , 2012 the U.S. Department of E nergy (DOE) , Carlsbad Fie ld Office (CBFO) requested the U.S. E nvironmental Protection Agency ' s (EPA) appr oval of a Tier I ( Tl ) change to add two types of debri s waste to appro ve d waste s tream AERHDM from th e Argonne national Laboratory (ANL). The two d ebri s types commonly known as F u e l Exam inat ion Wa s te include: ( 1 ) d ebris from R ed uc ed E nri chme nt Rese arc h and T est R ea ctor (RERTR) pro gram; and , (2) secon d bat c h of f ue l pins package d in 30-ga ll on containers. The Central Characterizati on Project (CCP) at ANL has characterized th ese waste types under the remote-handled ( RH ) waste characte ri zation p rog ram that EPA app roved in January 2007. Based on our review, EPA approves th e addition ofthe se two debri s types to Waste Stream AE RHDM , su pported by EPA's evaluation dis cussed in the e nc lose d report (See EPA Ai r D ocket for EPA Report No

. A-98-49; II-A4-167).
EPA requires, as a Tie r 2 change , the submis s ion of contro ll ed AK documents for which EPA r eceive d draft s of revised documents but not as offi cial reco rds

. (See Sec tion 6.1 of t he enclosed report. ) T h ese re v i sio n s were nec essary becau se source documents that were the bases for the radiological characterization were inadequatel y referenced in CCP documents. This hampe red EPA inspect ors' traceability and ver i fication efforts and de layed our approval. EPA approvals are base d on full y documented source materials that can be provided to EPA or public when requested. I wou ld like to emphasize th at we need proper l y referenced source documents to avoid future delays and to minimize review costs.

Internet Address ( U RL) • http ://www.e p a.gov R ec y c led/Recyc lab l e • Prin t ed with Vegetable 011 Based Inks on 1 00% Postconsumer , Process Chlorine Free Recycled PaperIf yo u have an y ques ti ons regarding t h is app rova l , p l ease contact Rajan i J ogle kar at (202) 343-9462 or Ed F eltcorn at (202) 343-9422.

Enclosure

cc: Electro ni c Dist r ibution Chri stine Gelles , DOE H Q A lto n H ar r is , D OE HQ Doug Tonkay, DOE H Q Joe Franco, C BF O E

d Z iemi ans ki , CB FO Marcus Pinzel, CBFO No rm a Casta n eda, CBFO To m Morgan, CBFO Court l and Fesmire, C B FO QA Dale D i etzel, DOE C H Ir

e ne Q uin t an a, WTS

- CCP Trais K il phuis, NMED Tim H all, NM E D Raymond Lee, EPA H Q Site Doc u ments Since re ly,



# ~p~ Tom Pea k e, Di re ctor Center for Waste Management and Reg ul ati on s
Exhibit 31.1



Certifications for Form 10-QSB



I, Curtis S. Reis, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this Form 10-QSB of Alliance Bancshares California;



2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;



3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4. The small business issuers other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:



(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer,
including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;



(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuers disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this
report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting that
occurred during the small business issuers most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting; and



5. The small business issuers other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuers auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuers board of directors:



(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuers ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting.



|Date: November 12, 2003 |  | Name:  |  | /s/    CURTIS S. REIS                
|----------------------- |  | ------ |  | -------------------------------------
|                        |  |        | 
|                        |  | Title: |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
#### F.W. Woolworth Co., Respondent, v Center Moriches Associates Limited Partnership, Doing Business as Center Moriches Associates, et al., Appellants.

— In an action for a judgment declaring that the defendants’ notices of default are null and void and for a permanent injunction barring the defendants from terminating the plaintiffs lease, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from stated portions of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cannavo, J.), dated January 17, 1991, which, *inter alia,*granted the plaintiffs motion to toll the period to cure a default in the payment of rent and to preliminarily enjoin the defendants from interfering with its use of the demised premises during the pendency of this action, and denied the defendants’ cross motion to dismiss the action.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The defendants have failed to submit sufficient proof to establish a presumption that the plaintiff received a letter dated August 21, 1990, notifying it that it was in default in the payment of the rent *(cf., Matter of Colonial Penn Ins. Co. v Ennab,*168 AD2d 494; *Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. [Patrylo],*144 AD2d 243; *Matter of Sea Ins. Co. v Hopkins,*91 AD2d 998). Thus, the Supreme Court correctly determined that the 30-day period of time provided by the lease within which to cure the default did not begin to run until a notice dated August 30, 1990, was received on September 5, 1990, and that the plain*199tiffs "Yellowstone” application was timely brought on October 4, 1990 *(see, First Natl. Stores v Yellowstone Shopping Center,*21 NY2d 630).

We also find that the Supreme Court had personal jurisdiction over the defendants, as the manner of service provided in the order to show cause was permissible and satisfied due process requirements *(see,*CPLR 2214 [d]; 6313 [b]; *Mullane v Central Hanover Trust Co.,*339 US 306). Bracken, J. P., Lawrence, Miller and O’Brien, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 117 (Thursday, August 2, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Page S5968]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                        TRIBUTE TO TOM SULLIVAN

  Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the 
exceptional leadership and dedication of my deputy chief of staff Tom 
Sullivan, who has been with me since my first days in the Senate and 
will soon be leaving to accept a senior adviser role at the U.S. State 
Department.
  To say that Tom will be missed would be an understatement. Over the 
last 6 years, he has distinguished himself as an invaluable member of 
my staff, rising through the ranks and filling many key roles along the 
way. He started out as a legislative assistant, but it wasn't long 
before he was serving as my deputy legislative director and, 
eventually, my deputy chief of staff.
  In many ways you could call Tom the nerve center of my office--the 
utility player who can step in and perform virtually any task that is 
asked of him, regardless of whether it is press strategy or scheduling 
or legislative analysis. No policy was ever too complex for him, no 
assignment too daunting, no challenge too thorny.
  Tom's versatility is especially apparent in his knowledge of policy, 
which spans the full spectrum of State and Federal issues. He came to 
my office with a background in foreign relations but quickly became an 
expert in everything from energy to technology to health care, 
mastering and remembering even the most minute of details without 
losing sight of the forest for the trees. That is a rare talent, and 
Tom has it in spades.
  Mr. President, as you know, Senate offices often become like their 
own little family units. In the last 6 years, Tom Sullivan has become 
an esteemed member of the Klobuchar family, and he will be sorely 
missed--not just for his skill and expertise but for his composure, 
kindness, and unflappable good nature. We wish Tom well in his new 
position at the State Department and know that we can expect to see 
great things from him as he begins a new and exciting journey in public 
service.

                          ____________________
```